In Anton Chekov’s story Gooseberries, two men are caught in a rainstorm and seek shelter at a friend’s home nearby. While at the home, one of the men, Ivan Ivanich, tells a story about the immoral acts his brother committed to become a landowner. After Ivan’s brother achieved his career goal, he lived life blissfully. Ivan finds his brother’s happiness selfish as he believes a happy man “neither sees nor hears others.” Chekov’s story suggests that happy people are indifferent towards the suffering of others. This human position of suffering is also explored in W.H. Auden’s poem “Musee des Beaux Arts” and Scott Carney’s article Cash on Delivery. The respective texts and Chekhov’s quote are bound by their mentioning of individuals as self-interested beings concerned solely about personal happiness. Nevertheless, there is more to life than happiness and one must be aware of the suffering of his/her fellow human-beings. While the desire for happiness is merely human nature, Chekhov’s quote demonstrates that once a man does reside in happiness he “should have …show more content…
The surrogates at Akanksha must undergo physical discomforts and isolation “to receive a sum that’s quite substantial by their meager standards” which “the clinic’s customers understand is a steal” (Carney par 6). It is evident that these foreign customers are so absorbed in their own pursuit for a baby that they neglect the harsh reality for the surrogates. For little money, Indian women use their own wombs as labor in very poor conditions. The founder of Akanksha, Doctor Nayna Patel, behaves in the same manner as that of her customers. She exploits her own surrogates in meager living conditions in exchange for money and medical fame. Doctor Patel and the customers share a common quest for personal happiness; yet, they abandon their morality and cause harm to others as a
Therefore, happiness is “what provokes us, incites us, need not come from our own time. Indeed, our own time may be and probably is so d
No matter the state of mind, everyone has the ability to be happy if they allow themselves the opportunity. As expressed throughout this passage, I do not agree with Thomas Szasz’s idea that “ Happiness is and imaginary condition,” as facts in science indicate happiness is a real and natural feeling every human will experience. If one allows themselves and their
It is then, when Gatsby emerged from F. Scott Fitzgerald. A true character of 1920’s America, the parties, the young-money, the helplessly in love, the pursuit of happiness. Darrin McMahon’s “In Pursuit of Unhappiness” explores the topic of seeking felicity and encountering barriers that we would not preoccupy ourselves with if we existed in an otherwise empathetic society. “Secular culture since the 17th century made "happiness," in the form of pleasure or good feeling, not only morally acceptable but commendable in and of itself.” (para. 4). As this quote exemplifies, there is a cultural notion of happiness being expected to be our default state of being. Due to this ingrown conception, we are riddled with the demand of forcing our path to contentment, as Gatsby, a character dumbfounded by a love he thought unmatched with a young debutante,
Anton Chekhov denied that any of his stories were autobiographical fiction, yet much of his work clearly grew out of his own experiences. From “An Attack of Nerves” to “Three Years,” different aspects of his life were incorporated throughout his stories. Each stage of Chekhov’s life made an impact in the tales he told.
Upon reading more closely, the story is revealed to present a tragic journey of a man who has lost his sanity but seeks solace in the materialistic comforts of his old life. The story succeeds in making a number of statements about human nature: that wealth is the most powerful measure of social status and anyone without it will face ostracization; that denial of one 's mistakes and unfortunate circumstances only leads to more pain; that even the most optimistic people can hold dark secrets and emotional turmoil inside them. All of these themes compel the reader to ponder their real-life implications long after the story is
In contrast to Aristotle, Roko Belic’s documentary “Happy” provides a fresh perspective that takes place far more recently. The film sets out to similar goals of Aristotle in defining the nature of happiness and exploring what makes different people happy in general. Unlike Aristotle, however, the film’s main argument refers to makes people happier. In this case, the film argues that merely “doing what you love” is what leads to happiness (Belic). The argument itself appears oddly self-serving, considering that message is what underlines the foundation of happiness, yet there is a subliminal message that a simpler lifestyle is what leads to what the film is trying to convince you of. The message itself is obviously addressed to Americans, considering
William James once said that “Action may not bring happiness but there is no happiness without action." Everyone living in a society we live in today are putting in efforts to obtain happiness. Many individuals will pursue that happiness while others will compromise it. To achieve happiness, everyone has their own methods, but sometimes it will not work, when you realize you can’t always have what you want. In the text To Kill A Mockingbird and the Shakespearean play Romeo and Juliet, Harper Lee and Shakespeare developed the idea that every individual pursue or compromise happiness differently because we have different beliefs and values that shapes our identities. Compromise can seem like a negative thing, but in some situations it is crucial to happiness. It is not possible to always everything you want in life but the desire of pursuing happiness provide individuals with more satisfaction than compromising happiness.
The addition of a child into a family’s home is a happy occasion. Unfortunately, some families are unable to have a child due to unforeseen problems, and they must pursue other means than natural pregnancy. Some couples adopt and other couples follow a different path; they utilize in vitro fertilization or surrogate motherhood. The process is complicated, unreliable, but ultimately can give the parents the gift of a child they otherwise could not have had. At the same time, as the process becomes more and more advanced and scientists are able to predict the outcome of the technique, the choice of what child is born is placed in the hands of the parents. Instead of waiting to see if the child had the mother’s eyes, the father’s hair or Grandma’s heart problem, the parents and doctors can select the best eggs and the best sperm to create the perfect child. Many see the rise of in vitro fertilization as the second coming of the Eugenics movement of the 19th and early 20th century. A process that is able to bring joy to so many parents is also seen as deciding who is able to reproduce and what child is worthy of birthing.
All in all, Chris McCandless is a contradictory idealist. He was motivated by his charity but so cruel to his parents and friends. He redefined the implication of life, but ended his life in a lonely bus because of starvation, which he was always fighting against. Nevertheless, Chris and the readers all understand that “happiness only real when shared.” (129; chap.18) Maybe it’s paramount to the people who are now alive.
Happiness plays an important and necessary role in the lives of people around the world. In America, happiness has been engrained in our national consciousness since Thomas Jefferson penned these famous words in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (Jefferson). Since then, Americans have been engaged in that act: pursuing happiness. The problem however, as Ray Bradbury demonstrates in his novel Fahrenheit 451, is that those things which make us happy initially may eventually lead to our downfall. By examining Guy Montag, the protagonist in Fahrenheit 451, and the world he lives in we can gain valuable insights to direct us in our own pursuit of happiness. From Montag and other characters we will learn how physical, emotional, and spiritual happiness can drastically affect our lives. We must ask ourselves what our lives, words, and actions are worth. We should hope that our words are not meaningless, “as wind in dried grass” (Eliot).
The philosopher Aristotle once wrote, “Happiness is the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence.” This famous quote compels people to question the significance of their joy, and whether it truly represents purposeful lives they want to live. Ray Bradbury, a contemporary author, also tackles this question in his book, Fahrenheit 451, which deals heavily with society's view of happiness in the future. Through several main characters, Bradbury portrays the two branches of happiness: one as a lifeless path, heading nowhere, seeking no worry, while the other embraces pure human experience intertwined together to reveal truth and knowledge.
The story of In "The Death of Ivan Ilych", was written by Leo Tolstoy around who examines the life of a man, Ivan Ilyich, who would seem to have lived an exemplary life with moderate wealth, high station, and family. By story's end, however, Ivan's life will be shown to be devoid of passion -- a life of duties, responsibilities, respect, work, and cold objectivity to everything and everyone around Ivan. It is not until Ivan is on his death bed in his final moments that he realizes that materialism had brought to his life only envy, possessiveness, and non-generosity and that the personal relationships we forge are more important than who we are or what we own.
In the short story “The Lady with the Pet Dog”, Anton Chekhov demonstrated a great ability in mood shift and presenting some of the most dynamic characters. One could argue both of the main characters undergo metamorphosis, but it seems clear that the male character undergoes the most radical transformation. In fact, Charles Stanion argues “One of the story's most impressive aspects is Dmitry Gurov's gradual metamorphosis” (402). Throughout the story, the reader witnesses the transformation of Gurov from treating Anna as a mere conquest to developing a true love for her. Chekhov’s short story is one characterized by many details that support this transformation. In this essay, I will prove how Gurov’s radical change parallels the complexity and precariousness human
In society, the line between happiness and pleasure has been blurred for ages. It can be difficult for one to determine the difference between true happiness and pleasure. Although pleasure is a key component in determining one’s happiness, pleasure provides one with short-term satisfaction, which almost always seems to fade, leaving emptiness within. Happiness, on the other hand, provides one with long-lasting satisfaction that seems to endure through the good as well as the bad. In effect, pleasure’s deception can lead one astray from the achievement of true happiness. F. Scott Fitzgerald realized this concept, which he emphasized it in his novel, The Great Gatsby.
Arthur Ashe once said, “From what we get, we can make a living; what we give, however makes a life.” Such is the case in Nikolai Gogol’s short story The Overcoat. Gogol takes a man without a friend in the world and gives him a new overcoat. The new overcoat represents a new life and a new identity for the man and instantaneously he is much happier. The man, Akaky Akakievich, basis his “new life” upon the love that he gives to his overcoat, and what he feels it gives him in return. Before long, Akaky begins to care more about his beautiful coat and less about the people around him. Thus is the theme of the story. Often material things are more important in our lives than people, resulting in the emptiness of one’s heart and soul. One cannot be truly happy with his possessions alone. He needs more than that. He needs people his life, whom he can call friends.