5 Мар 2014 в 1:03|Это спам|Ответить

Ganya Starostin▼

William Somerset Maugham (25 January 1874 – 16 December 1965) was a British playwright, novelist and short story writer. He was among the most popular writers of his era and reputedly the highest paid author during the 1930s.

«The Escape» is a short story of the socio-psychological type. Stories of this type are common for S. Maugham, who depicts society through feelings and relationships of his characters. To stress this fact, the exact time and place of action are not indicated in the story, which gives it the impression of situation, that can happen at any time in any place.

The main characters of the text are the narrator, Roger Charing and Ruth Barlow. In the first person narration the narrator tells us the story of one of his friend. The plot of the story is quite common, but interesting. A young man – Roger Charing – fell in love with Ruth Barlow, an unfortunate woman who was “twice a widow”. They were very happy and were going to marry. Then suddenly Roger fell out of love with Ruth. But he found a way to make Ruth release him. He said they would marry the day they found the perfect house for both of them, however, Roger rejected all the orders of the agents offering a new house. At last Ruth lost her temper, left Roger and married another man.

Metaphor “house-hunting” , parallel construction “Sometimes they were too large and sometimes they were too small, sometimes they were too far from the centre of things and sometimes they were too close; sometimes they were too expensive and sometimes they wanted too many repairs; sometimes they were too stuffy and sometimes they were too airy; sometimes they were too dark and sometimes they were too bleak”, hyperbola “They looked at hundreds of houses; they climbed thousands of stairs; they inspected innumerable kitchens” emphasize the humor of the situation. And also they help us to understand Roger’s character.

With ironic air the author introduces Roger Charing. He is not at all young, and on most occasions careful with the opposite sex. But, meeting Ruth Barlow, he completely loses his head.

His name was Roger Charing. He was no longer young when he fell in love with Ruth Barlow and he had had sufficient experience to make him careful; but Ruth Barlow had a gift (or should I call it a quality?) that renders most men defenceless, and it was this that dispossessed Roger of his common sense, his prudence and his worldy wisdom. He went down like a row of ninepins.

Why would a wise and sensible man suddenly fall for woman's charm so mindlessly? Mrs. Barlow is a person who knows how to wring heart strings for her own advantage.

The author gives us direct method of characterization of Mrs Barlow. Firstly the narrator said that she was “a poor dear”, “little thing”. The author’s language is very intensive. He uses a lot of epithets (“splendid dark eyes”, “helpless little thing”) and metaphors (“I must stand between the hazards of life and this helpless little thing or how wonderful it would be to take the sadness out of those big and lovely eyes”, “patience of angel” ) in her description. From Roger’s words the narrator gathered that everyone treated Ruth badly. She was unfortunate person. And parallel construction proves it “ If she married a husband beat her, if she employed a broker he cheated her, if she engaged a cook she drank”. An allusion to the well-known nursery rhyme underlines her miseries (“She never had a little lamb but it was sure to die.”)

At first sight we should sorry for this poor woman, be in sympathy with her. But all those stylistic devices suggest are hyperbolized and the author uses them to make a humorous effect. And this humorous effect suggests to my mind that everything is not so sweet and sincere in this story.

Further the narrator told that Ruth was scheming and she was as hard as nails. And this simile describes her in a right way, using it the author wanted to say that this women will take what she wants. The chain of adverbs as in sentence “He took her here, there, and everywhere” shows the narrator’s negative a

Мне нравится

5 мар 2014 в 9:11|Это спам|Ответить

Pasha Atakova▼

Analysis of the story «The escape»

I would like to analyze the story «The escape» written by Somerset Maugham. He was a famous English novelist, playwright and short-story writer of the end of the nineteenth and of the twentieth centuries. Maugham wants the readers to draw their own conclusion about the characters and events described in his novels. The text under analysis is the story about women and men who has an unclear, complicated relationship. The plot of the story is quite interesting and exciting. «The escape» told by the first narration, the author tells us about his friend. The main characters of the story are Roger Charing and Ruth Barlaw. During the text we can see their infelicitous and quite strange relationship. From the very beginning the narrator convinces us that if a woman once made her mind to marry a man nothing but instant flight could save him. Also the author describes the main characters, especially he emphasize Ruth. She was twice a widow and the narrator gives us to readers to make understand that Ruth is poor, defenseless, but at the same time the narrator describes her as a strong women. At the beginning of the text we see how they are happy; Roger care for Ruth, gives to her some jewelry etc. By the way, he was rich.

So, we can see the people, Roger and Ruth as the future family, and this is idea of this portion of the story. The narrator describes the first part of their relations which were rather standard. As all people they met, fell in love and decided to be together. But, suddenly, one of them, its Roger, fell out of love. And it was the next part of their relations. He became acutely conscious that Ruth had a mind to marry him. Roger gave a solemn oath that nothing could include him to marry Ruth. The epithets «acutely conscious», «solemn oath» stress the importance, significance of his decisions. So, who is to blame that Roger fall out of love? In my mind, it doesn’t depend on him, ‘cause we can’t control our heart, and who we love. Of course Ruth was narrow- minded women and she has a flaws, also she really didn’t love Roger. It’s obvious that the relationship like this can’t be no longer. But probably if she loved him in real, they can be together for whole life. Roger kept his own counsel, he remained attentive to all her wishes. It was decided that they would be married as soon as they found a suitable house. It was very hard to find a satisfactory one.

Roger’s behavior was not fair, it was even disgraceful, but unfortunately such conduct is not uncommon, the men trick the women often, ‘cause their attitude towards the relations differ.

At the end of the story, the author shows us the letters, which were send by Ruth. Having read the letters we see that Ruth is finally going to get married. And like a gentlemen, Roger wish her happiness. So, I think that Roger is just coward. Why I think so? He had to admit to Ruth that he fall out of love. Instead, he waited for all collapse. Initially, the relationship between Roger and Ruth were not real, not sincere, infelicitous and complicated. Of course, in real life we have the same. The author has revealed this problem. In my point of view, this short story written by Somerset Maugham is quite interesting and true to life. The authors’ language is easy to understand. Also the author makes us the readers to understand the situation of the text.

________

Айсена Александрова▼

Analysis

One stair up by Campbell Nairne

Aleksandrova Aysena

The book “One stair up” was written by a Scottish novelist Campbell Nairne in 1934 and describes the life of a working-class family from Edinburgh. The great advantage of this novel is that it shows the life with great realism, fine style and good sense of humor.

The extract under analysis tells of the 2 people in love, where the man is in love but the woman is not. The action takes place in the luxury cinema theatre. The main characters are 2 youngsters - Andrew and Rosa. They went to the cinema. The author describes in details the whole luxury the hall of cinema. We can see their relationships in the cinema center where they went, through Andrews thoughts about Rosas feelings, he was worried about will Rosa like this movie or not, despite that in the end Rosa disliked the film but Andrew liked. Outcome was different tastes, both of them has different feelings, attitude to things and different word vision. That’s why came misunderstanding between them and Rosas cold attitude to Andrew. I think the main theme is nonreciprocal relationships between 2 youngsters, where Rosa uses young, childish, harmless, poor Andrew to go one stair up to better life or in less to see luxury life. It’s need note that the title speaking about it.

The story is told by the 3rd person narration, the language of the extract is rather simple, and the author uses lot of colloquialisms, also we can see plenty of movie lexica and setting in a cinema, but it’s quite understandable for the reader to feel the atmosphere in the cinema. The extract can be divided into 5 parts: 1- Rosa and Andrew coming to the cinema and description of a cinema luxury, 2- Andrews inner monologue, 3- description beginning of the film and preparing to the film, 4- description of the film, 5- viewpoint of Rosa. The culminating point of this story is the moment when Andrew says in excitement, “Good, isn't it?”, but receives the answer, “I don't see anything funny in that”. In this scene we can see how different Rosa and Andrew are. Andrew supposed some comedy, not a big film. And all the fun was when somebody appeared in any foolish situation, for example, had an egg broken on his head or was all covered with custards. Andrew really enjoyed this comedy, but Rosa was very unsatisfied. In order not to hurt Andrew she just said that she had another sense of humor. I think that the moral of the story can be very well illustrated with two proverbs “Tastes differ”.

I think, in this text author uses short sentences, including in dialogues, also we can see grotesque which lead to irony, humor of words and repetitions «seems to…». The author uses different stylistic devices. Such as different epithets: «shadowy faces», «looped curtain», «hardest hearts», «rapid-fire drama», «hot darkness», «a trim girl», «a heart searing tale», «big hulking kid». Epithets make the speech more artistic and interesting; what is more, they help the reader to imagine everything in details. Also there are similes: «the carpet yielded like springing turf», «a hard-worked dog, for you saw it, or another like it, in dozens of these comic films». Metaphors: «a shower of stars, a shaft of white light», «dim region of luxury», «thrill-thirsty young blood». Metonymy: «young blood». And here also we come across colloquialisms «Gee baby, you are a swell kid», «cos», «hulking», «och». I think it was made to characterize the personages, their low class of people.

But the main device that the author uses is irony and humor of words: “The film seemed to have smashed all records. It drew tears from the hardest hearts. It sent thrills down the spine” and others. It is described even with some kind of sarcasm as a sample of bad taste. Also there is an oxymoron: the main part in the “mightiest drama of Broadway” has a “bewitching” actress named Minnie Haha.

Overall, I liked this extract, for me it was interesting, if there were given the opportunity I would like to read the entire book. Also, I felt pity for Andrew and I am sur

Мне нравится

1 фев 2014 в 20:13|Это спам|Ответить

Online

Оля Оркин▼

Analysis “One Stair Up”

The text I am going to analyze is written by famous Scottish novelist Campbell Nairne, called “One Stair Up”.

It is a short fragment taken from book “One Stair Up” tells us about two persons – male and female, who went to the cinema theater, and their relationship. First paragraph depicts us location were action takes place. In the first part of the story we can see that their relationships are not as good as they seem to be. Before the “big picture” starts they see the end of previous picture and movie trailer. Then main film starts and author describes us this movie from two different points of view – Rosa’s and Andrew’s. Also story includes descriptions of movie trailer and big picture.

This story shows a pretty life-like situation, it can happen with anyone anywhere. The story is told in the third person narration – “They went up a short marble staircase”, “His hands dropped: all the joy died”. Action takes place in cinema theater, most likely in Britain. Main characters of the story are Andrew and Rosa, couple that went there to watch movies. As I already said, in the very beginning we can notice that they seem to be having been seeing each other for not so long. Also we can see that Rosa kind of feel embarrassed to go out with Andrew -“It pleased her to be seen in dress circle, even with Andrew”. And Andrew is a bit naive person, he cares about Rosa, making sure if she can see everything and tries not to annoy her while watching film - “He risked no further inquires, knowing how often she had forbidden him to talk to her in a cinema”.

Author describes them in an indirect way of characterization, giving to readers an opportunity to make our own conclusion about characters and their actions. But at the same time he shows us two points of view at the same things, it makes us feel like we are in heads of our characters and we know what do they feel about movie and each other - “The fat man with the beard – you had to laugh!”, “What a baby he is, Rosa was thinking”.

We can divide this text on three parts – exposition, complication and climax. As I already mention this text is just a fragment so there is no denouement. Exposition – the very first paragraph recital of cinema and how Andrew and Rosa came there. Complication - second paragraph and including conversation of Andrew and Rosa about movie. Climax - the last sentence of the text – “I haven’t your sense of humor, that’s all”. Maybe if we had complete story we would divide it differently. It is pretty bad that we do not know full exposition and true end of the story.

Language of the author is very rich but simple at the same time. Text is full of various stylistic devices (especially in parts about trailer and movie) but still understandable. There are a lot of epithets like “hardest hearts”, “million-dollar prize fights”, “rapid-fire drama”; metaphors such as “heart strings”, “thrill-thirsty blood”, hyperboles – “smashed all records”, “mightiest drama”. All of these devices combined give us grotesque and irony.

In conclusion I would like to say that I liked this story more than previous ones. I loved the way how author describes main character’s relationship, how he let reader to know what they feel. I pity Andrew he have been trying hard for Rosa. And at first she seems to be cold and selfish but I can understand her too. They just don’t get together very well. It happens.

Мне нравится

4 фев 2014 в 16:58|Это спам|Ответить

Александр Чудиновских▼

Analysis “One Stair Up”

Alex Chudinovskih ED-512

The text under analysis is an extract from the novel “One stair up” by the Scottish novelist С. Nairne.

Campbell Nairne who was born in Edinburg and became popular due to her two books “One stair up” and “Stony Ground”.

The given extract is a description of the attendance of the cinema by two youngsters Rosa and Andrew. They are representatives of the working class? And they have different aims of visiting cinema that was the reason of developing of the conflict between them.

The theme of this extract is the problem of misunderstanding between Rosa and Andrew. The main idea is a different attitude to things, different word vision and different motivation. The story is told by the third person narration, but also we can find the first person narration. The language of the extract is rather simple, the author used a lot of compound sentences and a lot of colloquial words that help the reader to feel the atmosphere in the cinema and the thoughts and inner condition of the main heroes.

The whole story can be divided into four logical parts:

1) coming to the cinema,

2) Rosa and Andrew begin to watch the comedy,

3) the comedy itself,

4) Rosa’s and Andrew’s dialog.

The plot structure of the extract is closed, because there are all elements. The exposition when the heroes come to the cinema, and their first impression from the atmosphere of the luxury. The story itself begins with talking of their sits and Rosa’s question about the film, there author uses a lot of details and descriptions, in order to show the atmosphere in show-room and Rosa’s and Andrew behavior and aims. Also there we can see Rosa’s attitude to Andrew, due to the phrase “… to be seen in the dress circle, even with Andrew”.

The climax of the extract and the tensest moments we distinguish when we understand Rosa’s thoughts about Andrew. The most tense moment we can see when Andrew captures by the emotions, tries to share his impressions with Rosa but she is irritated by him, and she does not want to understand him.

The denouement of the story is the ferine answer of Rosa.

The author in general successfully conveys the characteristic features of the main character, she makes it with a help of inner monologues of the main characters, she doesn’t use actions a lot, and it’s story very unusual. The author uses a lot of stylistic devices in order to show the complicated atmosphere of the relations between Rosa and Andrew and the atmosphere in the “Circle” such as: epithets (rapid-fire drama, hot darkness), metaphors (a shower of stars, a shaft of white light). metonymy (young blood), simile (a carpet that yielded like).

In the language of main character we can find simple sentences, this colloquial language is an evidence of the low education level of the heroes.

We should pay attention on the title of the story. It helps us to understand the reason of the conflict between Rosa and Andrew. It tells us what people have the different aims in their life, not only to reach success in some activity or to develop yourself and be ahead of the rest or one stair up but also respect other people.

Мне нравится

8 фев 2014 в 16:55|Это спам|Ответить

Olga Dmitrievna▼

Campbell Nairne is a Scottish novelist, the author of two books ”One stair up” in 1932 and ”Stone Ground” in 1934. He described the life of a working-class family from Edinburgh. And is characterized by realism, a fine style and a sense of humour.

This text about two young people Andrew and Rosa, they decided to watch some film. Andrew thought that film is great comedy and very fun. Andrew really enjoyed this comedy, but Rosa does not like it. Andrew did not understood why, and Rosa said that they have another sense of humour.

The author show us difference a sense of humour of this people. After watching film began a main moment in this text, it is when Andrew asked Rose “Good, isn’t“, and she answered that “I don't see anything funny in that”. This part show us, how different Rosa and Andrew are. We can think that Rosa does not like some comedy, may be she likes other

genres or may be she does not perceive him in seriousness. We can think that after reading this sentences: “What a baby he is … He doesn’t seem to have grown up at all … He’s just a big hulking kid … Is he really so stupid, she wondered. Yes, I suppose he is” .

The author used different stylistic devices and using them he described heroes, film, emotions, it help for reader imagine to details. For examples, epithets: “shadowy faces”, “looped curtain”, “hardest hearts”. Also the author used similies, for examples, “yielded like springing turf”, “a hard-worked dog, for you saw it, or another like it, in dozens of these comic films”.

The important thing I this text, it is irony and parody. We can saw it when the author described the main part about ‘mightiest drama of Broadway’, has a bewitching actress named Minnie Haha.

As for me, I like this story, it is interesting. The author show us, two opposite points of view, how different Andrew and Rosa are. I feel pity to Andrew. And I don’t like how Rose think about him “What a baby he is … He doesn’t seem to have grown up at all … He’s just a big hulking kid … Talk about Peter Pan. Is he really so stupid, she wondered. Yes, I suppose he is” . I think, she is not right. She would not say like that.

Мне нравится