The works both titled “Why I Write” by Joan Didion and George Orwell each aim to inform an audience of an obvious topic, their reasons for writing. These essays are written 30 years apart so there is a difference in time period besides the contrast in each writers’ personalities that could affect their motives to write. Orwell wrote his essay first while Didion’s essay served as a response to Orwell’s ideas. Although these essays share a title, they are different in multiple ways. In addition, they do have many similarities as well. The first, and most important, way in which these essays differ is that each one gives a different motivation for writing. George Orwell states that every author has 4 motives for writing: sheer egoism, aesthetic …show more content…
The first similarity is that they use ethos when they talk about their past experiences. To clarify, the pair of them mention events in their lives which lead to their careers as writers in some form. Another way in which they use ethos is that they eachmention books they have written. For Orwell: Burmese Days, Animal Farm, and Homage to Catalonia. For Didion: Play It As It Lays and A Book of Common Prayer. A slightly less lofty similarity is that the 2 authors allude to the ten-book-long poem, Paradise Lost, a story of Adam and Eve from the bible. This could be a mere coincidence, but authors are rarely so lazy as to accidently reference the same book. They also continually used imagery when describing their natural ability for description. Orwell depicts how describing things around himself became a habit with an example of something he could have thought, such as, “A yellow beam of sunlight, filtering through the muslin curtains, slanted on to the table…” Didion also uses imagery when talking about her past but it is more scattered. She describes the buses she took to Berkeley and the events that inspired the books she mentions very vividly. This could show that despite being from different points in time, authors will still share many characteristics between
between the two authors, they share similarities towards the message they try to send out.
The similarities are prolific in their presence in certain parts of the novel, the very context of both stories shows similarities, both are dealing with an oppressed factor that is set free by an outsider who teaches and challenges the system in which the oppressed are caught.
“I write because I love. I write for the survival of self, my children, my family, my community and for the Earth. I write to help keep our stories, our truths, our language alive”. (qtd. in Anthology 396.)
Every person wants to become successful, or grow older, and admittedly, with those wants, your writings grow. In this composition, Orwell states that there are four great motives for writing, which are: sheer egoism, the desire to remembered; aesthetic enthusiasm, to gain pleasure; historical impulse, to find the hidden truth; and finally, political purpose, to persuade people's thoughts. These motives are proof of Orwell's wants in life, he indulges in swaying people's minds and getting them to think in a predetermined
When you look at the books closely together, you can see how alike they are. Both authors use many analogies to get their points across. For example, Eboo used the Martin Luther King Jr. and George Washington analogy. King knew Washington was a slaveholder, and a symbol of democracy, and it “Neither paralyzed him nor made him cynical.” Both the essays also use repetition with words and phrases such as, “What is the point?”
”The values, beliefs and attitudes of George Orwell’s can easily be seen in the novel 1984, as no text is neutral. These values attitudes and beliefs have shaped the novel to reflect socio-cultural context and by the use of certain discourses, ideologies, and historical influences support the idea that) “The explanation of a work is always sought in the man or women who produced it “Bathes Roland (1977).
Although the greater picture is that reading is fundamental, the two authors have a few different messages that they seek to communicate to their audiences. “The Joy of Reading and Writing” depicts how reading serves as a mechanism to escape the preconceived notions that constrain several groups of people from establishing themselves and achieving success in their lifetimes. “Reading to Write,” on the other hand, offers a valuable advice to aspiring writers. The author suggests that one has to read, read, and read before he or she can become a writer. Moreover, he holds an interesting opinion concerning mediocre writing. He says, “Every book you pick has its own lesson or lessons, and quite often the bad books have more to teach than the good ones” (p.221). Although these two essays differ in their contents and messages, the authors use the same rhetorical mode to write their essays. Both are process analyses, meaning that they develop their main argument and provide justification for it step by step. By employing this technique, the two authors create essays that are thoughtful, well supported, and easy to understand. In addition, Alexie and King both add a little personal touch to their writings as they include personal anecdotes. This has the effect of providing support for their arguments. Although the two essays have fairly different messages, the authors make use of anecdotes and structure their writing in a somewhat similar
Some similarities are obviously that they are both slaves who are trying to escape their misery. The characters also have a good relationship with their fathers because they taught them how to care for themselves and what to do when they need
The first similarity I would like to discuss is the different classes of people. In the Oceanic society Orwell explained that there were three classes of citizens: the Inner Party members like O?Brien, who had all the power, the Outer Party members like Winston and Julia, who worked for the government in one of the four Ministries and the ?proles? the so-called lower class people who did not actually qualify to belong to the Inner or Outer Party. These people were put on the same level with animals. The similarities that I see in our society are that we also have three different classes of people. We have the Upper Class which are Senators and Generals who can basically do as they please and get what they want, then we have the Middle Class which are people who work for other people or for the government, people who have to work hard to reach near the ...
Nothing lasts forever. This statement is a simple and commonly accepted fact. Naturally, one is led to question the fate of humanity. Will we be our own ruin, or will our downfall be imposed upon us? That question is what Huxley and Orwell set out to answer. Both came to different conclusions. Huxley envisions a world where we will rob ourselves of what it means to be human. Whereas, Orwell fears that our collective cultures will be forcibly taken from us. Neil Postman, contemporary social critic, has correctly made the assertion that Huxley’s vision is more likely to occur. His only necessary support, the human spirit and the desire for leisure.
...ce, although both writings are interesting in their own ways, the most interesting aspect of both writings together is that they both have a similar plot and theme. It is rare that two
Philosophy can be defined as the highest level of clarity and understanding human thought can aspire to. In some ways, Plato’s Republic can be compared to George Orwell’s book 1984. It may seem strange to compare the two, however they are quite similar. Plato writes from the Western philosophy, while Orwell tells of a totalitarian society where all free thought is banned. However, the two versions of government, one being a utopian government, and the other being horrific, contain certain connections that will be made clear over the course of this paper.
Based on the two essays, George Orwell is a vivid writer who uses a unique point of view and strong themes of pride and role playing to convey his messages. His writings are easy to pick out because of the strengths of these messages. Just like politicians in government, people with power turn corrupt to stay in power and keep their reputations. Anyone who takes on power must be prepared to live with the consequences of his actions. Orwell knows this challenge well and conveys this principle in his writing. After all, his narration is based on real life experiences and not fictional fantasies.
So to sum it all up, both of the novels are very typical of the Victorian Era. They both had the same theme of double personality and their way of writing was very harsh and describing. They were both affected by Darwin and his studies since they brought doubt to God’s creation of mankind. But there’s nothing unusual in being affected by the contemporary literature or science. Even nowadays we’re affected by new studies and ways of writing. If we weren’t influenced by the modern studies, we wouldn’t have any progress in our society.
These two authors are very similar. Both use dark, surrealistic language. Both men show different aspects of the descent into madness. Also both men use a descriptive, intelligent writing style. Instead of appealing to your emotions, or telling you what you should be feeling, they describe what is happening. Their descriptions may induce certain emotions, such as disgust, fear, or sadness, but they appeal first to the mind. They appeal first to the mind, and when the mind dictates to the heart that this is wrong, or strange, then the heart stirs and provides the appropriate emotion. Their writing styles may have their differences, but on the whole they are more alike than they are different.