Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
the canterbury tales representations of women
canterbury tales the knight essay
the knight's tale the canterbury tales through a historical perspective
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: the canterbury tales representations of women
The Character of the Knight of the Wife of Bath
The knight from the "Wife of Bath's Tale" is not a very likable personality. His actions suggest he is just an abstract character, a receiver of the actions, who is used to give the tale's plot a meaning. Neither he nor other characters in the story are even mentioned by name. However, the traits of his character are very real and do exist in the real world. Brought together, they create an un-exciting personality of a man without a purpose in life.
The knight is not very smart; he does not think about the consequences of his actions. Raping the girl is one example. In this act, he is guided only by his desires, without considering how right they are. But he doesn't think about the punishment either. The knight lives only for the present moment.
Another example is the rash promise that he gives to the old hag. He agrees to do anything she wants in return for hearing the answer he is looking for. True, if he doesn't get an answer, he will lose his life. However, he doesn't think about the possibility that what the hag will want may turn out to be even worse, considering the fact that honor and personal integrity were valued more than life in those times. A thoughtful person, such as Sir Gawain from Morte Darthur, would have inquired more about the woman's wish, before making such an agreement.
The knight is also an ungrateful person. The hag saves him from a certain death and then requests that he marry her. In light of the events, the knight should be grateful to escape death, but instead he views the marriage to his savior as another form of the same punishment. He agrees only because he is bound by the promise, and the chivalric code forces him to keep it.
In addition, the knight's thoughts are easily influenced by other people. Apparently, he recognizes the fact that he is often wrong and listens to the opinions of others. But he adopts those opinions without thinking them through for himself. This happens when the old hag says she knows what women most want; the knight doesn't question that knowledge. However, by the time he meets the hag, he has listened to many other women who weren't very consistent in their suggestions.
The film 12 Angry Men depicts the challenge faced by a jury as they deliberate the charges brought against an 18-year-old boy for the first-degree murder of his father. Their task is to come to an impartial verdict, based on the testimony that was heard in court. The group went through the case over and over while personal prejudices, personality differences, and tension mounted as the process evolved. While the scorching hot weather conditions and personal affairs to tend to led the juror to make quick and rash decisions, one juror convinced them the fate of the 18 year old was more important than everyone’s problems an convinced them that they could not be sure he was guilty. Juror three took the most convincing. After fighting till he
Created for the first time in 1957 and published in the volume Going to Meet the Man (1965), this short story uses the blues to heal the rift between two brothers. Sonny, a jazz musician and heroin user fresh from prison, returns to the home of his older brother, the narrator of the story, a math teacher who rejects sonny’s music and perspective on life. The narrator searches for recovery after the death of his daughter and his failure to protect his brother as he promised his mother he would. In his “condition” he is not unlike the narrator in “Zaabalawi” who claims to have “A dise...
In the movie Twelve Angry Men, tells the story of an ongoing debate within a jury whether to find the defendant guilty or not for murdering his father. While watching the movie, I couldn’t help but realize that there was a lot of techniques used by the juries and lawyers to sway the vote in either directions. I was able analyze the movie using social psychology as my main tool. I could relate the movie to the topic of social psychology by comparing it to Asch’s experiment and the act of conformity and the act of persuasion.
Juror #1 originally thought that the boy was guilty. He was convinced that the evidence was concrete enough to convict the boy. He continued to think this until the jury voted the first time and saw that one of the jurors thought that the boy was innocent. Then throughout the movie, all of the jurors were slowly convinced that the boy was no guilty.
In the trial the jurors were asked to only consider the evidence presented to them, however individual biases do affect the decision making process. Juror no. 10 displayed strong socio-economic prejudice as he burst into a rage while referring to people from the slums. “Look you know how those people lie…they don’t know what the truth is…they don’t need any real big reason to kill someone either. You know, they get drunk, and bang, someone’s lying in the gutter. Nobody’s blaming them. That’s how they are. You know what I men? Violent!” (Act 3, pg. 27) Jurors 3 and 10 chose a ‘guilty’ verdict initially based on various assumptions that were linked to their preconceived prejudices, especially discriminating against the boy from the start of the trial because of his poverty-stricken background and dysfunctional upbringing. Rose implies that due to background evidence and the point that the accused boy grew up on the “wrong side of the tracks,” (which they assume is a “breeding ground for criminals”) they automatically accuse the boy of murder, based on their socio-economic prejudice. An examination of legal prejudice will show how prejudice affects
... beloved wife has made the decision for him. After going through this incredible journey of his, not only did he study women but he had to explain what women most desired to the queen. Otherwise he would have been beheaded, but was spared because of his looks. Was this justice? Indeed it would have been justice back in the 1300’s because if you were beautiful you could be spared and do a noble deed for the king/queen as they asked. If you did not complete it who knows what could have happened. But for the knight, he completed what he was told to do and in fact after he raped the woman and he was being prosecuted, the journey of his made him find the true knight inside of him. The old woman choice that was offer to the knight demonstrated that he learned his lesson through his sufficient punishment and redemption for his crime.
Bob Dylan is an important icon whose music continues to influence rock music even six decades later, despite after several top forty hits, not one being a number one hit. His music has inspired many iconic musicians like Johnny Cash and The Grateful Dead (nj101.com) . What Bob Dylan brought to rock music back in the sixties can be heard in today’s music.
Cathy is scared. Her fear drives her to be evil, or at least do some horrible things. People may argue Cathy is a dynamic character that deserves more sympathy as the story progresses but her motivation is consistently controlling and preserving that sense of control. From her introduction to her untimely self fulfilled demise, she was trying to call the shots. Whether people decide to forgive Cathy is another decision, but understanding her motivations, or the motivations of anyone, is important before one passes judgment on them.
The movie “12 Angry Men” examines the dynamics at play in a United States jury room in the 1950’s. It revolves around the opinions and mindsets of twelve diverse characters that are tasked with pronouncing the guilt or innocence of a young man accused of patricide. The extraordinary element is that their finding will determine his life or death. This play was made into a movie in 1957, produced by Henry Fonda who played the lead role, Juror #8, and Reginald Rose who wrote the original screenplay. This essay will explore some of the critical thinking elements found within the context of this movie, and will show that rational reason and logic when used effectively can overcome the mostly ineffective rush to judgment that can be prevalent in a population. The juror that seemed interesting is Juror #8, who was played by Henry Fonda. Juror #8, or Davis, is an architect, the first dissenter and protagonist in the film. He was the first one to declare that the young man was innocent and he managed to convince the other jurors to see his point of view. Durkheim states that when we respond to deviance, it brings people together (Macionis, 2013, p. 159). We affirm the moral ties that bind us together, which was seen in the movie. At first, almost all of the jurors were so bent on convicting the young man based on their feelings, but they then started to analyze the facts and they came together to make their final decision.
These two jurors are almost the plain opposite of each other. Juror 3 appears to be a very intolerant man accustomed of forcing his wishes and views upon others. On the other hand, Juror 8 is an honest man who keeps an open mind for both evidence and reasonable doubt. Since these two people are indeed very different, they both have singular thoughts relating to the murder case. Juror 8 is a man who is loyal to justice. In the beginning of the play, he was the only one to vote ‘not guilty’ the first time the twelve men called a vote. Although his personality is reflected on being a quiet, thoughtful, gentle man, he is still a very persistent person who will fight for justice to be done. Juror 8 is a convincing man who presents his arguments well, but can also be seen as manipulative. An example would be when he kept provoking Juror 3 until he finally said “I’m going to kill you" to Juror 8. He did this because he wanted to prove that saying "I’ll kill you" doesn’t necessarily mean that Juror 3 was actually going to kill him. Juror 3 is a totally different character. He is a stubborn man who can be detected with a streak of sad...
The first vote ended with eleven men voting guilty and one man not guilty. We soon learn that several of the men voted guilty since the boy had a rough background not because of the facts they were presented with. Although numerous jurors did make racist or prejudice comments, juror ten and juror three seemed to be especially judgmental of certain types of people. Juror three happened to be intolerant of young men and stereotyped them due to an incident that happened to his son. In addition, the third juror began to become somewhat emotional talking about his son, showing his past experience may cloud his judgment. Juror ten who considered all people from the slums “those people” was clearly prejudiced against people from a different social background. Also, Juror ten stated in the beginning of the play “You 're not going to tell us that we 're supposed to believe that kid, knowing what he is. Listen, I 've lived among 'em all my life. You can 't believe a word they say. I mean, they 're born liars.” Juror ten did not respect people from the slums and believed them to all act the same. As a result, Juror ten believed that listening to the facts of the case were pointless. For this reason, the tenth juror already knew how “those people” acted and knew for sure the boy was not innocent. Even juror four mentioned just how the slums are a “breeding ground
Guilty or not guilty? This the key question during the murder trial of a young man accused of fatally stabbing his father. The play 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, introduces to the audience twelve members of a jury made up of contrasting men from various backgrounds. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty. Three of the most influential members include juror #3, juror #10, and juror #11. Their past experiences and personal bias determine their thoughts and opinions on the case. Therefore, how a person feels inside is reflected in his/her thoughts, opinions, and behavior.
Juror#3 you could tell from the start that he wasn't a very happy man. He tells of how he has three kids, but one of them got in a fight with him and left his house, never really forgave him for that. He was the first to say that the boy was guilty. Shown as a very angry, visual, prideful man. As things heat up, he gets head to head with guy#8 and threatens...
The consequences for the knight are disastrous, as he’s caught in the snare of her beauty and wiles, blinding him to the warnings of the changes in nature that surround him. This is exactly the case of conflict in Wuthering Heights, where Heathcliff is entranced by Catherine and her beauty in the early stages of his life. This is disastrous, as he is fuelled by jealousy of others close to Catherine resulting in the majority of conflict present in the latter stages of the novel.
The storm is the main metaphor in this story; it is seen as the lust that stomps through their lives like the storm rages through a single d...