"Wherever God erects a house of prayer, The devil always builds a chapel there, And't will be found, upon examination, The latter has the largest congregation" (Defoe, The True-Born Englishman. Part I. Line1). Daniel Defoe was a man of many beliefs, from political to spiritual he was complex in his values. He was roughly a merchant, soldier, factory owner, bankrupt, spy, pamphleteer, convict, journalist, editor, politically disruptive writer, and novelist. However to this day, his life and works are an interesting and remarkable topic for the curious to delve into.
Defoe's upbringing can be described as none other than humble. He was born to a butcher named James Foe in Stoke Newington, London, England. His family was that of Dissenters. Dissenters could be described as Protestants that did not adhere to the doctrine of the Church of England. Because of his family's refusal to pledge an oath of allegiance to the Church, he could not attend Oxford. However, Defoe still managed to receive a good education at Newington Green. He enjoyed the life of a merchant for many years, however after going bankrupt in 1692 the realm of politics seemed to intrigue him. His political interests were not always to his benefit because of his direct way of expressing himself. He wrote many significant political journals,however it was his 1702 pamphlet, "The Shortest Way with the Dissenters," that truly brought his audience into an uproar. He was pilloried and jailed because of this pamphlet, and during his stay in jail he wrote many other political pieces. Even after his release he continued to write politically for his newspaper, "The Review," from 1704 until1713. During his lifetime he had been associated with 26 periodicals. During this time...
... middle of paper ...
...mselves about human affairs, either such as had been their own, or what were belonging to other people" (Starr 437). In this chapter he talks humorously about the fact that if there were such things the world would be uninhabitable and that there would be more apparitions than people. To Starr it is not clear who wrote, "A Relation if the Apparition of Mrs. Veal," but he is sure that it was not Defoe.
Whether Daniel Defoe wrote about Mrs. Veal to sell Drelincourt's book, to entertain his audience, or even if he didn't write it at all, Defoe is still a literary icon. In the Cambridge History of English and American Literature it is said that Defoe was capable of writing almost anything, and that few pens have ever filled with greater facility a larger number of sheets. Even with all of his faults, he was probably the most liberal and versatile writer of his age.
The early modern novel had no definite divisions between fantasy and realism. Defoe's Robinson Crusoe, for instance, has universal appeal in that it deals with and develops real moral and psychological issues, but the narrative still depends upon extraordinary settings and events (Konigsberg 18). Also, Defoe used a fictional "editor," and preface, among other things, to make his work seem like an authentic document and therefore a worthwhile read. As the literary form evolved, novelists began to separate from fantasy, interested more in creating plausible characters and situations than asserting their "truth" with fictional documents. The more explicit devices of authenticity faded from use, and a new sense of self-awareness emerged as novelists argued for legitimacy within the narrative. In Henry Fielding's Tom Jones, the story is just as important as its construction. The narrator, at times barely distinguishable from the author, frequently intrudes, expounding on the tale but also explaining how and why the narrative works. The meticulous documentation of the "art" of the novel shows that writing novels (as well as reading them) is not idle work. By Jane Austen's time, the genre had a clear enough definition of itself that her narrators rarely occasioned to intrude like Fielding's. Her first novel, Northanger Abbey contains some intrusive passages, though, even as a novice, she was developing a far more subtle approach to commentary. Austen argues for the novel without lengthy interruption, but like Fielding, forgoes authenticity in the process. By exposing the author's process and methods, Northanger Abbey and Tom Jones both concede the inherent fictionality of their work, but more importantly, they ...
Comparing Notions of Piety in The Wakefield Mystery Plays, The Book of Margery Kempe, and Le Morte D'Arthur
De Vere’s education, travels and experience with court life all are contributions to the brilliance behind these plays and sonnets. Jumana Farouksy, makes a legitimate point in her article, The Mystery of Shakespeare's Identity. Her point is that this conspiracy will never cease to present itself within the educational and literary world. The mystery behind Shakespeare's writings is no longer a mystery. William Shakespeare does not possess the qualifications to be the genuine author of these renowned plays and sonnets, and De Vere is the prominent candidate. Charles Dickens once said, The life of Shakespeare is a fine mystery and I tremble every day lest something turn up.” Shakespeare’s life still remains unexplainable, but the fact that he is not the true author can be explained. The contrasting childhood upbringing between Shakespeare and de Vere is automatic evidence supporting the anti-stratfordian view. The strong opinions against Shakespeare’s authenticity, taken by historians, professors and writers draws even more attention to Edward de Vere. The anti-stratfordian view stands strong in the fact that Shakespeare is simply an instrument used to hide the true identity of Edward de
Have you ever given it a thought that the poem’s author you were reading wasn’t the true author? I believe that the author of Shakespeare’s work was truly Edward de Vere. Did you know that Shakespeare stole many lines from Edward de Vere’s bible? Edward de Vere’s works were published but instead of his name being put as the author, you guessed it, Shakespeare was that author. Of course, Shakespeare in known for his great, beautiful poems, so shouldn’t that mean that his name should be in the book of the greatest poets? Many may not believe in the idea that the famous Shakespeare was a false but the true author was Edward de Vere.
Although William Shakespeare is considered to be one of the most revered and well-renowned authors of all time, controversy surrounds the belief that he actually produced his own literary works. Some rumors even go so far as to question the reality of such a one, William Shakespeare, brought on by paralleling the quality of his pieces with his personal background and education. With such farfetched allegations, it persuaded others to peek into the person we all are taught to learn as “Shakespeare”, but who is actually the person behind these genius works of literary promise and enlightenment? To some, Shakespeare is as much accredited to his works as frequently as you see his name placed. To others, Shakespeare is a complex enigma into which we the people are supposed to unravel; the true author behind a falsely-given pseudonym. The debate pertaining to the true authorship of William Shakespeare’s works are still questioned in today’s society.
Who was the real Shakespeare? The son of a Stratford glovemaker? Or was he a forgotten nobleman, the 17th Earl of Oxford? It is the greatest detective story there ever was. As more clues are being found, more and more people are doubting the fact that he ever wrote all his plays or even existed. The big question people are asking is why the man who told so much about who we are tell us so little about himself? That is one of the many reasons why I think he never existed or even wrote all those plays. How could a ‘nobody’ have thought a man who could barely sign his name was the greatest writer in the English language? In this essay I will tell you about why I don’t think he wrote the plays, why Edward de Vere was the real Shakepeare, and other things like why it’s impotrant to see who the real Skaespeare is.
William Shakespeare’s works being just that is a notion most accept; however, there has been a lot of evidence and arguments by historians, who opt to challenge this notion, arguing that Shakespeare was the pen name of Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford had to conceal his authorship for social and political reasons. After careful examination of historian’s evidence this theory doesn’t measure up and it was indeed Shakespeare, who was the genuine author.
Definitive criteria for judging the success or failure of a work of fiction are not easily agreed upon; individuals almost necessarily introduce bias into any such attempt. Only those who affect an exorbitantly refined artistic taste, however, would deny the importance of poignancy in literary pieces. To be sure, writings of dubious and fleeting merit frequently enchant the public, but there is too the occasional author who garners widespread acclaim and whose works remain deeply affecting despite the passage of time. The continued eminence of the fiction of Emily Bronte attests to her placement into such a category of authors: it is a recognition of her propensity to create poignant and, indeed, successful literature.
...ife. Jack London wrote many things in his life span. He wrote novels, short stories, plays, essays, and much more, according to London.Sonoma.edu. Even though he died relativity young his writing ability and he known existence mad a huge impact on writings even to this point. Many people still read his novels to this day, some have even become movies.
This paper is an attempt to examine the seeming opposition of religion vs. self-interest with respect to the character of Robinson Crusoe. I will venture to demonstrate that in the novel, Defoe illustrates the contradictions with which Crusoe must contend as he strives to please God while ensuring his own survival in the world. In part, I will endeavor to show that a distorted sense of Puritanism as well as the existing colonial mindset exacerbated this opposition, and resulted in what I propose to be Defoe's (possibly retroactive) imposition of a religious justification for Crusoe's actions.
The Eighteenth-century literature is popular for its peculiar style of writing that gives the readers an insider’s view in the novel. By combining the two aspects such as Psychological and Presentational Realism, authors have created works of pure masterpiece such as Moll Flanders by Daniel Defoe. Defoe illustrates Moll, the protagonist’s psyche by writing the narrative in the first person to imply it as an autobiography. This allows psychological realism to work at its finest since the readers can feel a personal relationship to the character. The two important instances that occur with this type of realism are when Moll realizes that she is married to her own brother and her meeting with Humphrey, her son. In addition, Defoe also uses Presentational Realism to describe Moll’s initial career as thief with her first episode at the apothecary’s shop and later stealing a gold necklace from a child. The manner in which the setting is described gives the readers a sense of feeling of being there and at the same time experiencing her escape from the scene.
"Daniel Defoe achieved literary immortality when, in April 1719, he published Robinson Crusoe" (Stockton 2321). It dared to challenge the political, social, and economic status quo of his time. By depicting the utopian environment in which was created in the absence of society, Defoe criticizes the political and economic aspect of England's society, but is also able to show the narrator's relationship with nature in a vivid account of the personal growth and development that took place while stranded in solitude. Crusoe becomes "the universal representative, the person, for whom every reader could substitute himself" (Coleridge 2318). "Thus, Defoe persuades us to see remote islands and the solitude of the human soul. By believing fixedly in the solidity of the plot and its earthiness, he has subdued every other element to his design and has roped a whole universe into harmony" (Woolf 2303).
The roots of the novel extend as far back as the beginning of communication and language because the novel is a compilation of various elements that have evolved over the centuries. The birth of the English novel, however, can be centered on the work of three writers of the 18th century: Daniel Defoe (1660-1731), Samuel Richardson (1689-1761) and Henry Fielding (1707-1754). Various critics have deemed both Defoe and Richardson the father of the English novel, and Fielding is never discussed without comparison to Richardson. The choice of these three authors is not arbitrary; it is based on central elements of the novel that these authors contributed which brought the novel itself into place. Of course, Defoe, Richardson and Fielding added onto styles of the past and writing styles of the period, including moralistic instruction and picaresque stories. Using writing of the time and the literary tradition of the past, Defoe first crafted the English novel while Richardson and Fielding completed its inception.
In his time, Shakespeare was the most popular playwright of London. As time passed, his smartness covers all others of his age; Jonson, Marlowe, Kyd, Greene, Dekker, Heywood—none had the craft or the kindness of character. He was the master of poetry writing and he did it well. He created the most vivid characters of the Elizabethan stage. His usage of language, both high and low, shows a remarkable fun and insight. His themes fit all generation even to this day.
Daniel Defoe has frequently been considered the father of realism in regards to his novel, Robinson Crusoe. In the preface of the novel, the events are described as being “just history of fact” (Defoe and Richetti ). This sets the tone for the story to be presented as factual, while it is in of itself truly fiction. This is the first time that a narrative fictional novel has been written in a way that the story is represented as the truth. Realistic elements and precise details are presented unprecedented; the events that unfold in the novel resonate with readers of the middle-class in such a way that it seems as if the stories could be written about themselves. Defoe did not write his novel for the learned, he wrote it for the large public of tradesmen, apprentices and shopkeepers (Häusermann 439-456).