Ralph, Piggy, Samneric meet after the terrible incidents of the last night, Jack’s dance and Simon’s murder. They all deny their involvement in those events other than Ralph who insists it was murder. Jack’s tribe believe that they have killed the beast. What’s left of Ralph’s group fall asleep but are awoken in the night by Jack and a couple of his hunters. The hunters of Jack’s tribe attack the few biguns left on Ralph’s side, they are unsure of why the attack happened but figure it out when they see that Piggy’s glasses have disappeared. Jack has stolen the fire.
Robinson Crusoe is a book about a sailors travels across the world despite his father’s discouragement. Upon a voyage, his ship is seized by pirates and he is enslaved until he escapes on a fishing expedition with a slave boy. He sells the slave boy to a Portuguese man who can take him to Brazil and becomes a slave owner on a plantation himself in Brazil. Then, he embarks upon a journey to pick up slaves in Africa. The trip doesn’t go to plan and he is shipwrecked on a desert island. The book follows his adventures on the island and his encounters with the local people. These local people are rumoured to be cannibals so there is a certain tension to any meeting with a person or a persons tracks upon the island. As he befriends people and saves others, his faith is tested and finally he gets to journey home upon a ship returning to England.
This book has few similarities with Lord of the Flies; the main and obvious one being the setting. A large difference in this book is the age of the characters and the interaction with new people on the island. In Lord of the Flies, it is only the boys who find themselves there in the first instance and they don’t encounter anybody new. Without reading the rest of Lord of the Flies, I cannot draw too many similarities between the plots of the books however, I will assume that in the way there is a test of moral compass in Lord of the Flies, there is a test of faith in Robinson Crusoe. Furthermore, another more obscure similarity is that Robinson Crusoe struggles with the morals of the world he used to know on the island when he meets Man Friday. This is the kind of man he is accustomed to enslaving but he takes to him and decides to teach him. There is this detachment from the people’s old lives in Lord of the Flies with the hunters and the masks; escaping from themselves to find a more brutal, heartless, survival driven character.
Coral Island is written retrospectively in the first person, about three young men deserted on an uninhabited island. They scavenge for food and using their own brains and the resources available to them on the island they learn to survive via the correct steps. Later, they encounter pirates and have to fight for their lives. Then, Ralph is captured by English pirates and learns a life of savagery that is rather unsettling for the fifteen year old main character. After war is waged between the local inhabitants and the pirates, the boys all escape to another island. As if it couldn’t get any worse, they are then taken prisoner on the new island. Finally, released, they set sail for home as adults.
This desert island story has more similarities with Lord of the Flies however, it is less of an emotional journey and is more built around events within the story. From the synopsis, it doesn’t seem to so closely explore the emotions attached to the situation and the character interaction as it is driven by lots of different major incidents Despite this, the book is similar in the way that is written from the perspective of boys and is initially about how they cope with surviving with little resources. The setting is again a commonality but in Coral Island, the boys do venture forth from the first island they find themselves on. A major difference is found in the way that the characters deal with their situation. As the boys are older in Coral Island, they are constructive and do the correct things to stay alive. Whereas, in Lord of the Flies, there is much more confusion associated with the situation and less of a sense of direction for the characters.
Ralph seemingly has a strong personality and this is shown in the way he is described as having wide and heavy shoulders. This causes me to imagine him with a strong posture making him look fairly influential. Also, his actions are described in a manner that causes him to appear rather extemporaneous. The way that he spins on his head, he jumps and scoops up sand causes him to seem very in the moment. It is also clear that Ralph is excitable, imaginative and vivid from his ‘bright and excited eyes’ despite the severity of the situation. This also shows us that he is definitely young, he is rather blissfully unaware of the awful predicament that he is in. His youth also causes him to be fairly naive; his first thoughts aren’t of survival and safety but are of excitement.
Golding’s use of punctuation emphasizes Ralph’s youth, using clauses to show his pride in exact age, ‘twelve years and a few months’, and his imagination, ‘forced at last to believe in the reality’. The complexity of the sentences, created by the semi colons and subordinate clauses used, greatly accentuates the vividness of Ralph’s personality and his impromptu character.
Piggy is described as a far more timid character than Ralph, he backs out of the undergrowth and searches out safe lodgements for his feet. His ‘greasy windbreaker’ makes him sound more simple but possibly more calculated. The latter is definitely more accurate based upon the fact that he ‘removes the thorns (from his legs) carefully ‘ and from evidence revealed later in the book. The less action more thought attitude that seems to be displayed throughout the extract is affirmed in the way that he ‘looks up through thick spectacles’. He isn’t jumping about, excited, he is far more cautious.
The use of punctuation to describe Piggy is far more simple; mainly simple sentences are used. This shows us a more calculated, clear thought process in the manner of his description. It makes it clear he is less naive and highlights a wisdom about his character. He is also definitely not the vivid, all action, main character that Ralph is.
Yetis and unicorns are creatures rumored to have existed for generation upon generation but whether they might actually be around somewhere on the planet is unlikely. The passage we looked at presented the evidence to support the existence of these creatures and evaluated the likelihood of such evidence being true. The passage therefore, forms a lot of doubt in regards to both creatures existence and the author seems to air on the side of skepticism.
The author uses many different words and phrases to place doubt in the readers mind. Firstly, at the very beginning of the passage, compares the unicorn to ‘actual animals’ which suggests that the author doesn’t believe that the unicorn is real. This opinion is then backed up with evidence, ‘Thorough research into contemporary wildlife has not supported the possibility of creatures with the characteristics of the unicorn’. Then, the passage suggestively uses words to indicate the fictitious nature of the unicorn by stating that it is a ‘mythical beast’ and calling Robert Vavra’s diary, which presented photos completing a claim that he had finally tracked down the creature, ‘sensational’.
Secondly, the author also uses similar techniques to show that they do not believe in the existence of the yeti. It is called ‘mysterious’ and ‘mythical’ creature, it also calls the story of the yeti a ‘legend’. Again, supporting evidence is provided, ‘Conclusive evidence of the creature’s existence has proved elusive’. It also dispels the evidence presented by Sir Edmund Hilary as proof of the existence of yetis as false, ‘The picture of a large, wide footprint, taken by Sir Edmund Hilary in 1951 while climbing Mount Everest, proves nothing’. A hand that was also provided as the proof of the stories being true is also referenced in the passage, ‘…The hand could have, of course, come from anywhere’. Rumors about mummified yetis were also circulated and the passage calls them fakes, ‘These turned out to be fakes, or were no longer where they were supposed to be’.
Finally, to only further throw doubt of the existence of the yeti into the readers mind, dramatic words are used in regards to Reinhold Messner’s search for the yeti. ‘A terrifying night’, ‘haunted by the strange whistling cries of a creature’ and ‘the large, hairy, ape-like man’ are all used to dramatize the experience and to make it seem more and more fictitious. The whole paragraph referencing Messner’s experience is written in a very fictional manner and reads like a fascinating ghost story.
In an everyday informal conversation it is common for sarcasm to be used. From studying two transcripts of relaxed conversations between similar aged teenagers, I can see that sarcasm has been used by all parties to the conversations. Using sarcasm when speaking to another person often establishes that what is being said is meant as a joke and that the opinion or statement that is made is not the actual considered opinion of the person.
There are multiple interesting linguistic features that can be picked out from George Galloway’s interview with Jeremy Paxman. A feature of spoken language that is used throughout the interview, mainly by Jeremy Paxman, is a sardonic tone. At times it feels like Paxman is mocking Galloway. ‘You’re not answering that one?’ Paxman says this after repeatedly forcing a rhetorical question that Galloway clearly isn’t going to answer. Paxman uses rhetorical questions to embarrass Galloway and to put him on the spot. ‘Are you proud of having got rid of one of the very few black women in Parliament?’ This is a question that answers itself and is also difficult for Galloway to answer.
A feature of the way that Galloway speaks is his assertive tone, ‘… move onto your next question.’ Galloway is very commanding and wants to be in control of the interview. He also voices his opinion very clearly, ‘Oh well there’s no doubt about that that one.’ Forming his opinion in this manor eradicates any room for discussion on the given subject.
Another thing that features a few times throughout the interview is the deliberate reversal of pronouns. ‘… but wouldn’t you be better starting by congratulating me for one of the most sensational election results in modern history.’ This reversal of the pronouns is quite accentuated in this case and it is a continuation of the assertive tone, Galloway is taking control of the interview and the direction it is taking. Paxman then does the same thing later in the interview, ‘Absolutely, because you then went on to say…’ Paxman has reversed the pronoun again here but in this case it is not used to be assertive or to take control; it is used here to heap pressure upon Galloway. He heaps this pressure upon him by clearly showing a contradiction that Galloway has made.
Finally, another thing I noticed from the interview was the accusatory tone that Galloway uses at times. ‘You’re the one who is trying to badger me.’ This is when Galloway is uncomfortable with the way Paxman is conducting the interview and he is reduced to this rather childish, ‘He started it!’, tone.
Jamal: So yeah, I’ve been watching this erm, I’ve been watching this video on schizophrenia and er – See, I’m only doing this for, er, personal research.
Jack: Yeah sure, no, it’s not like you’re worried that you might have schizophrenia or anything.
Jamal: No, it’s not that type of personal research.
Jamal: It’s for, erm, book wise research.
Jack: Yeah, yeah, no, I totally believe you man.
Jamal: Yeah, I don’t have schizophrenia.
Jack: You sure now?
Jamal: I might have double personality disorder or er –
Jack: And, like, mild insanity.
Jamal: Sociopathicness possibly.
Jamal: I do not have, er, schizophrenia.
Jack: Yeah ok, yeah, you probably don’t have schizophrenia but you probably do have all manor of other things.
Jamal: Ok, I’m gonna, I’m gonna sh- I’m gonna tell you the list of, er, of things that you, like, schizophrenic people have. It’s just coming up in a minute… Three… Oh! There we go, loss of contact with reality. So that basically means that I, you know, hallucinating things, I’m forgetting things, I know not where I am, I’m in a different place.
Jack: Yeah I think –
Jamal: Psychotic symptoms.
Jack: Yeah, yeah, I think that matches you pretty well.
Jamal: Erm, Disor, er, blugh! Disorganized think and speech so, you know, slurred speech, I might say random words in random times for no apparent reason –
Jack: Oh my God, Elliott! GG.
Elliott: Ok, well yeah, ok. We should agree to a point where our transcripts match up at the starts.
Jack: No – We should – He said to do it at other times so we both have different ones.
Elliott: Fair enough. Which portals – Which test chambers are you gonna record then?
Jack: I don’t know, I don’t have that much time because I’ve got to do Spanish homework as well.
Elliott: Wow, wow, you got – you, you really – I’ve got, like, tonnes of English homework. I’ve not started yet but myah.
Jack: How have you got tonnes of English?
Jack: How have you got tonnes of English? You just have to transcribe stuff.
Elliott: Galloway and Paxman. I’ve not finished that yet.
Jack: Oh shit, I forgot about that.
Elliott: Yeah, we’ll keep that in, haha! Sorry.
Jack: Yes, we should keep that in.
Elliott: Right, skip this cut scene… Oh, you can’t skip it.
Jack: Oh, God damn it!
Elliott: Argh! Do Spanish in the morning. Just wake up earlier.
Jack: Oh, but that Spanish is long as well.
Elliott: I think I’m the, er, fat blue one. You’re the tall and skinny one.
Jack: Well, I hope so. I mean, orange tall and skinny, kind of, you know.
Elliott: Hey! I’m orange too! It just so happens I’m cyan in this. Actually, that’s kind of more suitable.
Jack: Yeah, I think blue fits you.
Elliott: It is a lot more suitable for me. I should dye my hair blue. Dye my hair a nice fluorescent blue.
Statistics show that your accent strongly affects your chances of employment. Some accents are considered unfriendly and unintelligent compared to others. For example, someone with a Liverpudlian accent might not find it as easy to get the same job as someone from Yorkshire because one third of people find the Liverpudlian accent to be unfriendly and unintelligent. Whereas, the Yorkshire accent is considered to be warm, friendly and intelligent. Therefore, there is a higher possibility that the applicant from Yorkshire will get the job. Some people are paying to change their accents through elocution lessons because of the effect it’s having.
That ‘old hag’ has the comfort of concrete to sleep on. Her only way of eating before returning to her home, a street corner, is to beg. Empathy is clearly not your forte. Frankly, your article is based upon stereotypes, nostalgic rubbish and hyperbolic right wing drivel.
I am treating your article as entirely serious in my response. Although provocative, I believe your article does voice your opinion. Therefore, I would like to begin with asking if you know how people become homeless. Have you any idea how people find themselves on the street? Down on their luck with no hope but to beg for spare change from passers by in London. You think you do. ‘Their position is their own fault. Drug addicts and alcoholics. Too lazy to get up off their fannies.’ The person with the perfect life doesn’t turn to alcohol or drugs Mr Parsons, but then again, nobody has a perfect life do they? Some people hail their past as a better time, some don’t have enough money, some have family troubles, some simply don’t have family, some can’t bear to live with themselves, some have a destructive mind. Nobody has the perfect life. However, some people’s struggles are somewhat worse than others. Life, life can be a struggle in itself. In hard times people look for a way out, an escape. Drugs and alcohol are two such things; abused for an escape from a place where someone isn’t happy. They become addicted, life becomes more and more difficult. The escape can be all that one lives for, the escape from their very own being or mind. The drug, the thing that brought them down, the thing that placed them on the street, whatever it may be, is not the problem Parsons. The problem is, in fact, the difficulties that the person is going through. For whatever reason, maybe they weren’t getting enough support from others when they needed it, they turned to drink or drugs. These things are the side effect, the side effect of unhappiness, loneliness or a person going through rough times. They advance to something more than a side effect in the finality of being homeless but they only begin as that escape, the side effect. It is not their fault that they are on the street Mr Parsons, it is however, where they are now.
But you don’t have anything against homeless people do you? It’s begging that you dislike. Well, one must assume that you dislike the homeless in general because it is difficult for one to survive as a homeless person without begging. It is the thing that buys them their evening meal, possibly their only meal. It is that few coins that one might drop in the cup, or the hat, or whatever it may be, that keeps that person going. Now, you would argue, as would I, that that isn’t everyone. Correct, that isn’t everyone there are some people who use the money they gain from begging to purchase that escape that they’ve been longing for. Those drugs or that can of beer. Consider what I said earlier, those things that this type of beggar is buying is their escape. It has become an addiction but it is their way of temporarily leaving their troubles behind them. This is why there shouldn’t be homeless people because those people wouldn’t need that can of beer or those drugs if they weren’t having to sleep on a street corner every night.
The problem is not that these people are begging, the problem is that we have homeless people. People in such a financially desolate situation that they have to beg for passers by spare change. The problem is that the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. Anyway, I won’t bore you with my political opinion.
Next time you walk past a beggar, it is your choice entirely whether you rifle through your pockets and find some spare change from that coffee earlier and drop it in their cup. Whether you do or don’t doesn’t bother me at all. What does bother me, is you slating this group of people, as a dignified journalist. Discriminating against any group of people, no matter who they are is wrong. Also, please leave out all abuse and scatological language next time you’re trying to formulate a good argument to convince people you are right. And if you weren’t trying to convince people you were right, keep the rant to yourself.