According to Wikipedia, “Joseph Rudyard Kipling was an English novelist, short-story writer, poet, and journalist. He was born in British India, which inspired much of his work. Kipling’s works of fiction include the Jungle Book duology, Kim, the Just So Stories and many short stories, including “The Man Who Would Be King”.” What is one of Kipling’s copybook headings that applies to recent public opinion? According to Poem Analysis, “‘The Gods of Copybook Headings’ by Rudyard Kipling was published in 1919. The speaker of this piece is interested in “copybook headings.” Now mostly unknown, copybook headings were short phrases written by teachers at the top of a piece of paper. These sentences were then copied by students, over and over, in order to improve their handwriting. Generally, these phrases were expressions of traditional wisdom about life. Things that teachers could easily convey to students and ideally, might inspire them to work harder or be better.” So what is one of these copybook headings that apply to recent public opinion? Honestly, it is very hard to understand these copybook headings. I would say that a lot of them refer to recent public opinion from what I’ve gathered, though, I just don’t know which.
The novel Robinson Crusoe was written by Daniel Defoe. It was written in 1719 and was first published on 25 April, 1719. The novel’s first edition credited the work’s protagonist Robinson Crusoe as the novel’s author. This lead many to believe that Robinson Crusoe was a real person and the book was a story of true events that happened in his life. This novel is very descriptive with every that happens in the book, so descriptive, in fact, that you can create a visual image in your brain of what is happening, it is like you are right there with him. I love that in a book, and I am sure that lots of people agree with me, maybe even you. (You can read my other paper on Robinson Crusoe called Robinson Crusoe, “How important for the narrative are the descriptions of the storms?”)
According to Wikipedia, “Daniel Defoe was an English writer, trader, journalist, pamphleteer and spy. He is most famous for his novel Robinson Crusoe, published in 1719, which is claimed to be second only to the Bible in its number of translations.” This is pretty impressive. Robinson Crusoe was Daniel Defoe’s greatest work, and many people believe it to be the second most translated book in the world. Apparently, he was a very good writer, and obviously people loved his book. It is also still widely read even today.
Now in the title, “Why did he take the coins off the ship?”, you may be asking yourself, “what coins?” Well, just in case you do not know what I am talking about, I am going to give a recap of what I have read.
In the beginning of the book, Robinson Crusoe leaves his home in search of adventure. Later, he is on a ship, sailing to a place where he can build a life, and a storm rolls in, and damages the ship, but does not sink it. Later, another storm comes in and sinks the ship, but Crusoe and some other people escape in lifeboats. Eventually they get rescued by another ship and this ship takes Crusoe and the crew to Brazil. Later into the book, Crusoe builds a plantation in Brazil and becomes very wealthy. Eventually, he listens to some people to go to Africa and get some slaves to bring back, and he says he would. On the course to Africa, another storm rolls in and maroons the ship a ways back from the shore of an island. Crusoe himself survives, everyone else dies. Crusoe then tries to empty the ship of everything useful so he can survive on the island, but he is worried when another storm comes and sinks the ship, along with everything on it. Crusoe then tries to empty the ship of everything useful before the next storm hits. About a little under a month later, he finally empties the ship of anything useful, and a storm comes that night, sinking the ship. Later in the book, the hull of the ship reappears, this time much closer to shore. He decides to explore the ship, and on it he finds some coins. He then decides not to take them because they would be useless on a deserted island, but then he had second thoughts, and takes the coins.
Why would he take useless coins to a deserted island? Maybe it was to melt them down to useful metal, or the help build something, or maybe even to barter a way off the island just in case a ship happens to find him. Whatever the reason, I do not know.
The novel Robinson Crusoe was written by Daniel Defoe. It was written in 1719 and was first published on 25 April, 1719. The novel’s first edition credited the work’s protagonist Robinson Crusoe as the novel’s author. This lead many to believe that Robinson Crusoe was a real person and the book was a story of true events that happened in his life. This novel is very descriptive with every that happens in the book, so descriptive, in fact, that you can create a visual image in your brain of what is happening, it is like you are right there with him. I love that in a book, and I am sure that lots of people agree with me, maybe even you.
According to Wikipedia, “Daniel Defoe was an English writer, trader, journalist, pamphleteer and spy. He is most famous for his novel Robinson Crusoe, published in 1719, which is claimed to be second only to the Bible in its number of translations.” This is pretty impressive. Robinson Crusoe was Daniel Defoe’s greatest work, and many people believe it to be the second most translated book in the world. Apparently, he was a very good writer, and obviously people loved his book. It is also still widely read even today.
Now, in the title “How important for the narrative are the descriptions of the storms?”, what do I mean when I say storms? Now, you may have read Robinson Crusoe, and if you did you may know what I am talking about, but in case that you do not know what I am talking about, I will give a brief recap of the storms in the book I have read so far.
Now, so far, in what I have read there are four storms. First, Crusoe leaves his home in search of adventure in the beginning of the novel. He is on a ship, sailing to a place where he can build a life, and a storm rolls in, and damages the ship, but does not sink it. Later, another storm comes in and sinks the ship, but Crusoe and some other people escape in lifeboats. Later into the book, Crusoe builds a plantation in Brazil and becomes very wealthy. Eventually, he listens to some people to go to Africa and get some slaves to bring back, and he says he would. On the course to Africa, another storm rolls in and maroons the ship on a reef next to an island. Crusoe himself survives, everyone else dies. Crusoe then tries to empty the ship of everything useful so he can survive on the island, but he is worried when another storm comes and sinks the ship, along with everything on it. Crusoe then tries to empty the ship of everything useful before the next storm hits. About a little under a month later, he finally empties the ship of anything useful, and a storm comes that night, sinking the ship.
Robinson Crusoe, How important for the narrative are the descriptions of the storms? Well, a narrative is basically just a story, and Defoe writes this book as if Crusoe is the author. It is written in first and third person. So how important for the narrative are the descriptions of the storms? Crusoe describes the storms with much detail, and these descriptions are very important for the narrative, because it helps give readers a visual about what the storms look like, what would happen next, things like that, and that is good for any good story.
In what way did Mandeville lay the foundation for Darwinism? Like I do with all my papers, let’s break down this topic into smaller pieces. First, who was Mandeville? According to Wikipedia, “Bernard Mandeville, or Bernard de Mandeville, was an Anglo-Dutch philosopher, political economist and satirist. Born in Rotterdam, he lived most of his life in England and used English for most of his published works. He became famous for The Fable of the Bees.” Mandeville was born November 15, 1670, and died January 21, 1733. His work The Fable of the Bees was written in 1714. The Fable of the Bees was Mandeville’s most notable work. According to Wikipedia, the main message of The Fable of the Bees is “As they abandon their desire for personal gain, the economy of their hive collapses, and they go on to live simple, “virtuous” lives in a hollow tree. Mandeville’s implication—that private vices create social benefits—caused a scandal when public attention turned to the work, especially after its 1723 edition.” Mandeville’s book The Fable of the Bees triggered immense public criticism during his time. Mandeville is mainly remembered for his impact on discussions of morality and economic theory in the early eighteenth century.
What is Darwinism? Darwinism is just basically just the study of the theory of evolution as proposed by Charles Darwin. According to Wikipedia, “Charles Robert Darwin FRS FRGS FLS FZS JP was an English naturalist, geologist, and biologist, widely known for his contributions to evolutionary biology. His proposition that all species of life have descended from a common ancestor is now generally accepted and considered a fundamental concept in science.” According to Britannica, “Charles Darwin, in full Charles Robert Darwin, (born February 12, 1809, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, England—died April 19, 1882, Downe, Kent), English naturalist whose scientific theory of evolution by natural selection became the foundation of modern evolutionary studies.” Now, I do not believe in evolution or Darwinism, but nevertheless, Darwin was a very influential guy in his time, and his works on evolution are still widely accepted today.
In what way did Mandeville lay the foundation for Darwinism? Well, Mandeville has been thought to lay the foundation for Darwinism through his own ideas concerning social order. This talk of social order blended rather nicely with Darwin’s ideas and understanding of natural selection (According to Wikipedia, natural selection is “the differential survival and reproduction of individuals due to differences in phenotype. It is a key mechanism of evolution, the change in the heritable traits characteristic of a population over generations.”). Mandeville strongly believed that every single man acted only to serve himself and pursue his own interests. But he also believed that every man acting only for his own interests was crucial to the economy and to the society. Darwin’s view on this is that people acting only to serve themselves and only pursuing their own interests will eventually lead to a survival of the best type of economy and society. That is my full and complete answer to the question “In what way did Mandeville lay the foundation for Darwinism?”
So, for this week in my school, I have been assigned to read the book Paradise Lost, by John Milton. According to Wikipedia, “John Milton was an English poet and intellectual. His 1667 epic poem Paradise Lost, written in blank verse and including over ten chapters, was written in a time of immense religious flux and political upheaval.” He was born on December 9, 1608, and died on November 8, 1674. John Milton is known for his epic poetry, one of which, is Paradise Lost.
Paradise Lost was an epic poetry written by John Milton. According to the British Library, “Paradise Lost is an epic poem (12 books, totaling more than 10,500 lines) written in blank verse, telling the biblical tale of the Fall of Mankind – the moment when Adam and Eve were tempted by Satan to eat the forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowledge, and God banished them from the Garden of Eden forever.” OK, so you can see here that John Milton believed God was real, but he kind of twisted what the Bible says about the Fall of Adam and Eve in order to get an epic poem. The theme of Paradise Lost is then religious and has three parts: 1: disobedience, 2: Eternal Providence, and 3: justification of God to men. According to Britannica, “Many scholars consider Paradise Lost to be one of the greatest poems in the English language. It tells the biblical story of the fall from grace of Adam and Eve (and, by extension, all humanity) in language that is a supreme achievement of rhythm and sound.” The style in which this book was written was clearly influenced by the epic Greek poetry.
After Satan’s rebellion, Satan was motivated more by his envy of God than his jealousy of God: true or false? Well, first we have to look at the definition of jealousy and envy. Jealousy means “fiercely protective or vigilant of one’s rights or possessions”, and envy means “desire to have a quality, possession, or other desirable attribute belonging to (someone else).” By the definition of jealousy, we can see that jealousy is fueled by the fear of losing something, and envy, as we see in the definition, means you want something somebody else has. So, we can see that Satan was, in fact, envious of God and God’s position and power over him. Satan wanted that power and position that God has for himself. He thought that if he had the kind of power God has, then he could overthrow God and rid himself of God’s power over him forever. This lust for power and control is what got Satan cast out of heaven in the first place. He was envious of God’s power. He was envious and rebellious and that is what got him thrown out of heaven. But even when he was cast out of heaven, he still made plans to try to get back at God and take his power. He wanted to get revenge. So, he made Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit, even after they were warned by God not to, which got them kicked out of the garden. After that, Satan and his followers were turned to snakes after going back to hell after there mission.
So, after Satan’s rebellion, Satan was motivated more by his envy of God than his jealousy of God: true or false? My answer, is true.
Would In some cases, people can better understand what the author is trying to convey to the reader if the author uses experiences of his or her life. It works better for me. Anyway, this method is very effective in conveying the message of the book to the reader. Some authors do this, but others just leave out examples of their life. Francis Bacon was one of these people. He did not give any experiences of his own life in his essays.
According to Wikipedia, “Francis Bacon, 1st Viscount St Alban PC, QC, also known as Lord Verulam, was an English philosopher and statesman who served as Attorney General and Lord Chancellor of England.” He was born on January 22, 1561 and died on April 9, 1626. He wrote several well known essays. According to Wikipedia, “Essayes: Religious Meditations. Places of Perswasion and Disswasion. Seene and Allowed was the first published book by the philosopher, statesman and jurist Francis Bacon. The Essays are written in a wide range of styles, from the plain and unadorned to the epigrammatic.” His essays were originally published in 1597. There are lots and lots of themes in Bacon’s essays, for example: adversity and prosperity, married life and single life, parents and children, love, envy, revenge, nobility, unity in religion, goodness, superstition, traveling, atheism, truth, death, simulation and dissimulation, etc. Bacon said he had three goals with these essays, to serve his church, to serve his country, and to uncover truth. According to www.literaturemini.com, “Bacon’s essays are reflective and philosophical. The essay is a series of counsels, It is not an elaborate or discursive development of a particular subject. It is neatly direct and frankly didactic. He is moralist and his essays are meant for men of ambition in the Renaissance, which desired self-realisation.” Bacon also put some moral teachings into his essay. According to www.josbd.com, “His essays suggest us not to seek morality only by leaving practical idea. There is nothing wrong with the mixture of morality and the practical idea together. Just as no ornament is possible with pure gold, some crude metal should be added with it so only morality without practical concept of a thing cannot do.”
Would any of Bacon’s essays have been more persuasive if he had talked about his own experiences? Well, I were to say that if Bacon put his own experiences into his essays, the essays would definitely be more persuasive. The essays would be more persuasive if Bacon put his own experiences of himself into the essays. Like if Bacon had experiences in his life where he used what he wrote about in his essays, and then put that into his essays, the essays would be a lot more persuasive than without his experiences. If he did that, then we could know more about what he meant because he gave us an example of himself using what he wrote about in his essay, and we could understand it better.
Overall, my answer to the topic question is yes, they would.
William Shakespeare was an English playwright, actor, and poet. According to Wikipedia, “He is widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language and the world’s pre-eminent dramatist. He is often called England’s national poet and the “Bard of Avon”.” He was born April 1564 and died April 1616. He wrote several plays and works. Some of the more famous ones are Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, Hamlet, and The Tempest. He wrote much more plays than this, but these are some of the more well known ones. Shakespeare was a great writer and his works were very well known by the people back then. He wrote plays, tragedies, poems, and sonnets. He is widely considered the greatest writer in the English language.
The King James Bible was an early modern translation of the Bible for the church of England. The publishing of this book was commissioned in 1604 and it was published in 1611. It was sponsored by King James IV and I, hence the name, King James Bible. This book seems too be written by one person, but it was not. In fact, this book was a committee project. It was written by so much more people. This book was written by forty-seven people and six committees. This was a very poetic book. The King James Bible has been described as one of the most important books in English culture. It was also a driving force in the shaping of the English-speaking world. Originally, the King James Bible had thirty-nine Old Testament books, twenty- seven New Testament books, and an intertestamental section between the two Testaments containing 14 books of what most Protestants consider the Apocrypha.
In this essay, I have to find out if Shakespeare plays or the King James Bible is easier to read and understand. So, I have read many of Shakespeare’s plays for my school, and in my opinion, it took me a while to understand Shakespeare’s plays, but once I have gotten used to reading it, I could understand it a lot better. These plays were written in a kind of “form” of writing that most people do not use anymore, so it was really hard for me to follow along with the plays, and I usually need help to understand it.
When I was reading the King James Bible, there were a lot of words that I did not know the meaning to, so it was kind of hard for me to understand it. But I kept reading it and compared the chapters to the same chapter from a different version of the Bible, and I have gotten used to the writing. Now I can understand it a lot easier.
In my opinion, I think the King James Bible is easier to read than Shakespeare’s plays. Shakespeare used a form of writing style that I was not used to, so it was kind of difficult to understand, whereas the King James Bible was also hard to understand, but it was quick and easy to learn to understand the writing, and I was used to the Bible so I knew a lot about what it was talking about.
How important is the idea of covenant sanctions in the week’s readings? Well, I have recently began to read the King James Bible, and I must say, this is the most interesting version of the Bible I have ever heard of or read. The King James Bible was an early modern translation of the Bible for the church of England. The publishing of this book was commissioned in 1604 and it was published in 1611. It was sponsored by King James IV and I, hence the name, King James Bible. This book seems too be written by one person, but it was not. In fact, this book was a committee project. It was written by so much more people. This book was written by forty-seven people and six committees. This was a very poetic book.
Here is an exert from Deuteronomy 28:20 KJV: “The Lord shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke, in all that thou settest thine hand unto for to do, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly; because of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken me.
And here is that same exert from the ESV Bible: “The Lord will send on you curses, confusion, and frustration in all that you undertake to do, until you are destroyed and perish quickly on account of the evil of your deeds, because you have forsaken me.“
Here is another exert from the KJV, Matthew 5:13-16: 13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. 14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. 15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. 16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.
And here it is again in the ESV: 13 “You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people’s feet. 14 “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, so thata] they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.
Which translation do you think sounds more poetic? I think the KJV Bible sounds better.
How important is the idea of covenant sanctions in the week’s readings? This past week I read Deuteronomy 28-34, Ruth, Lamentations, and Matthew 5-7. In all of these readings, I found out that a broken covenant brings negative implications, and a kept oath promises inheritance in the future.
Don Quixote is the main character of a novel written in 1605 by Spanish novelist Miguel de Cervantes. According to Wikipedia, “Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra was an Early Modern Spanish writer widely regarded as the greatest writer in the Spanish language and one of the world’s pre-eminent novelists. He is best known for his novel Don Quixote, a work often cited as both the first modern novel and “the first great novel of world literature”.” Don Quixote was a widely read literary classic. Don Quixote was very popular novel for a long time, but it is not really read today, many people probably would not even read the whole thing unless instructed to.
Here is my short summary of the book:
So basically, this old man named Don Quixote loves to read and he reads a whole lot about knights, and the knighthood, and castles, pretty much a lot about what I like to call the “medieval age”, you may have heard of it or not. Anyway, this man eventually loses his mind and declares that he wants to be a knight just like the ones in his books. So he grabs some old armor that has been in his family for a long time, polishes it up, cleans up a sword, he takes an oath of knighthood, and declares that he is a knight. Throughout most of the rest of the book, he travels the land, looking for trouble that he can fix in a “knightly” way, and since knights and the knighthood are “dead”, people laugh at him, they make fun of him. In many cases, Don Quixote gets himself into trouble. In this one case, he is on his old horse, walking along the road when he comes across these people that he mistakes for magicians. So he charges them, his horse falls trapping him under his horse, and he gets beat up and his sword gets smashed. So this goes on for a long time, until he decides to return home and become a shepherd for a year. People encourage him thinking that he will return to his senses. A little while after he gets home when he wakes up in bed, he says he does not feel good, so a doctor is brought in and tells people that Don Quixote is dying. While on his deathbed, he comes to his senses and takes another oath, an oath of repentance. He dies a few days later.
The two oaths that Don Quixote takes completely contradict each other. In his oath of knighthood, he swears to protect the weak and uphold justice, but he does a lot of questionable things because he lost his sanity. In many cases, he does the opposite of what he swore to do, and becomes, in many cases, dangerous and violent.
In Don Quixote’s oath of repentance, he is on his deathbed, and he comes to his senses. In his oath, he realizes his sins, he repents of his sins, and he dies a very happy, new man.
Was Lady Macbeth correct? ‘What’s done is done.’ This phrase was taken from the tragic play titled Macbeth written by William Shakespeare. According to Wikipedia, “William Shakespeare was an English playwright, poet and actor, widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language and the world’s pre-eminent dramatist. He is often called England’s national poet and the “Bard of Avon”.” He was a very famous playwright and he wrote several plays, including Macbeth. According to Google books, “Macbeth is one of Shakespeare’s finest plays, and presents a man’s conscience and the effect of guilt on his mind. A dark and bloody play, Macbeth explores reality and illusion; witchcraft and the supernatural; ambition and kingship; the natural order; light and life, darkness and death; blood and dead babies.” This play featured Macbeth being entranced by three witches. They prophesied to Macbeth that he will be king of Scotland, but only if he kills the current king. Macbeth is then encouraged by his wife to kill the king, and Macbeth does so, and kills the king. Then Macbeth becomes the new king. After becoming king, Macbeth then kills even more people out of paranoia. Civil war then ensues in hope to overthrow Macbeth, but this just leads to more death. Eventually, Macbeth was defeated in battle and killed by Malcolm (son of the king of Scotland) at the Battle of Lumphanan with the assistance of the English. This play is one of Shakespeare’s best works, but what makes it so famous? According to Study.com, “Macbeth is still very relevant today as it tells us about the role of jealousy, greed and overarching ambition in the downfall of men and women. Many students read this drama to realize how self-defeating it is to be led by these emotions.” So, people read this play to figure out how to avoid the “emotions” that brought about the downfall of the characters in this play.
The phrase ‘What’s done is done’ said by Lady Macbeth, is located in the second scene of the third act. What happened, was Macbeth was feeling guilty about killing both the king and his friend, and Lady Macbeth was feeling a little guilty herself because of her role in the king’s death. She says ‘What’s done is done’ in act three, scene two, but still her guilt torments her, finally leading up to her suicidal death.
‘What’s done is done.’ Was Lady Macbeth correct in saying this? Well, I think she was correct in saying ‘What’s done is done.’ In other words, ‘What’s done cannot be undone.’ Basically she is saying, you cannot change the past, so deal with the present. She was correct in saying this, but wrong in conspiring to kill the king. She helped conspire to kill the king, and later regretted it. In fact, she felt so much guilt in conspiring to kill the king, that she eventually committed suicide. She felt so much guilt in conspiring to kill the king, that she killed herself. So basically, do not do anything now that you will later regret.