Hemorrhoids Menstrual

DRACULA - Bram Stoker

Synopsis: Lawyer Jonathan Harker was called to the castle of Count Dracula in Transylvania, where he was staying. There he witnessed the horrific and discovered that his client was a vampire. Luckily, managed to escape the grim fortress and returned to England. Then with the help of Arthur Holmwood, Lord of Godalming, of Dr. John Seward and Professor Van Helsing, has embarked on a relentless battle against the creature of darkness. My review: I loved this book , one of the three great masterpieces of horror literature. However, among them prefer Frankenstein, Mary W. Shelley. Dracula is an exciting book, morose, with moments of action that tensãoe intertwine so well punctuated; epistolary narrative structure gives it a unique character, addressing different points of view. Are excerpts from the journals of meeting Jonathan Harker and Mina Harker, if I remember correctly also notes dr. Van Helsing, and even newspaper reports. But the work lacks a certain density - "scarcity" common in the books of the Romantic period - as well as a complexity / ambiguity psychological - that have Frankenstein. Dracula

brings good or bad characters, the writer of a coated work contents extremely Manichean - despite the temptation to address, sex, sin and guilt, symbolized by the figure of evil and demonic but enticing, sensual vampire. Perhaps the greatest "draft" of the novel is to represent the struggle between virtue and sin, good and evil, God and the Devil, through the "war" between the Christian characters and Dracula and his minions . Another caveat about my

Dracula is that the book was an outcome abrupt, poorly finished. The romantic aura surrounding the vampire was probably conceived in part by Stoker, and intensified in the movies. Stoker also popularized the figure of the vampire, in a way. Prior to his novel, the vampire legend had already existed and "coexist" in many cultures, and half that in contrast to the romantic conception and seductive vampire; beings were more bloodthirsty, evil more connected with the word "monster" and "far from God," represented the material clinging to life - symbolized by its status as the undead - as opposed to spirituality .. Even Vlad Tepes, the real Dracula, was far from being a lord, no more than a bloodthirsty, sadistic psychopath, despite bold and courageous. Today, vampires are even moving away from romantic cloak and becoming more highly erotic, only "carnal." The theme of vampirism, both in literature and cinema, is already pushed to the scope of scientific Ficca, stripped of its status as the undead, supernatural beings, and becoming the genetic mutations.

is an interesting description of Dracula as a being that has yet intimately faith in God. This is so obvious, and not think about it. This explains the fear religious symbols - see more fear than respect. And makes us reflect on human nature, the vampire is the "monster" incredulous that dwells within us - Following the conception of moral-religious Stoker - but that can be won by force of the Christian faith. Excluding the religious content, no mythical monster is a representation of the dark side, or amoral, the human being.
Dracula is certainly a religious figure, God-fearing, but would have no fear, the "Sacred." He just broke off relations with God, Lucifer as a human. The "Immaculate" and "Sacred" really always go together, like two plates of a scale. What I want to highlight here are the different conceptions of the vampire, and the Manichaean religious context and developed by Stoker - he was a staunch Christian. Someone far from religious beliefs can love. Anyone is capable of love. But perhaps the design of Bram Stoker's Dracula as a cursed being, the incarnation of evil, probably can not be touched by love, taken as a divine influence. Review written
on 06/03/2009.

Debate over the work.

Brothers Printer Status Offline

Frankenstein - Mary Shelley

Synopsis: Frankenstein, one of the greatest horror classics of literature of all time, is an authentic masterpiece. It was immortalized in the theater and film, in various adaptations. At first it was a short story about a young Swiss student who aspired to create an ideal, injecting life into a dead body. Later turned into a novel, became a landmark in the literature of the genre.

My review: Frankenstein is a genuine masterpiece of world literature, and one of the three great masterpieces of horror literature - the others are The Doctor and The Monster and Dracula. And in my opinion, is undoubtedly the best book of the three. There are two intriguing aspects and extremely current in the work: the character of techno - and how prophetic that - and the social. Both instill many questions. In the aspect

technoscientific

Frankenstein warns of the danger not subtle use of irresponsible and amoral science. Bearing in mind the time when the work was written over a period of great ferment scientific experiments being conducted with new (
emphasis on rational empiricism


empiricism in England who later served as the basis to scientism, as opposed to French rationalism), theses formulated and the emergence of new technologies, Mary Shelley's attention to the lapses related to science and technology, can bring disastrous consequences. It is an extraordinary story of continuity, since we live in an era of agility globalizaçãoe of scientific nature of medicine, war, energy and technology, in a nutshell general scope.
Frankenstein
depicts aberration created by the amoral and ambitious scientist who aspires to conquer death and the laws of nature (although there's a certain slant moralist / religious approach of Mary Shelley, since man appears as a being who, in opposing the nature and the "divine", is heavily punished). We refer mainly to the dangers of ethical and biological cloning and stem cell culture, in addition to biological weapons themselves. In the social sphere, the monster of dr. Frankenstein is the embodiment - and possibly belief by Shelley - a famous and widely debated thesis of the philosopher Rousseau, the "noble savage". He preached the idea that man is born "pure" but is corrupted by society vicious, violent and materialistic. If it was not created within that society, as in the jungle by animals, remain intact. The monster, actually receives the first spark of life is to be neat and "good", and ignorant of the society. Know the world through books and observation, it is alleged mistreatment and rejection, even benefiting people (the rejection is a reaction due to the appearance of the hideous monster, the true vision of the man who usually judges people solely by its exterior, and segregates for differences), thus, rebels and corrupts itself, be transmuted into a violent and mean. The actuality is the eternal debate about the essence of human nature, and the causes and motivations of violence.
Review written on 06/03/2009.
Debate over the work.

Church Welcome Visitors Note Sample

The Metamorphosis - Franz Kafka


Synopsis: The Metamorphosis
is the most celebrated novel by Franz Kafka and one of the most important in the history of literature. Unceremoniously, the text puts the reader in front of a traveling salesman - the famous Gregor Samsa - transformed into a monstrous insect. From there, the story is told with a realism that associates the unexpected and the unbelievable sense of humor to what is tragic, grotesque and cruel in the human condition - all in style transparent and perfect master of that unmistakable universal fiction. My review:

Some things to think about the work Metamorphosis: 1. Kafka exposes, through the description of labor relations referring to Gregor Samsa, the way the work "massification" undermines and degrades the individual's identity as a human being and full transforming agent of society in which it is inserted, reducing it to a condition of mere disposable gear capitalist machinery [sale]. It is therefore a incisive criticism, however subtly, against capitalism and passive submission - or inevitable - the man the rules of the aforementioned system. From a broader perspective, encompassing not only the operation, but the oppression of which man is subjected as a result of packaging and subjugation dictated by society (represented by the fam ; read) and his conventionalism / hypocritical moralism.
2.
The frigid and almost indifferent manner with which the relatives Gregor Samsa treated it may not necessarily lack of love, but a reflection of their own subsequent behavior "mischaracterized" it - as a response to his own imprisonment - or the direct result dehumanizing capitalism itself.


3.
There are multiple interpretations, also on my part, about the metamorphosis undergone by Gregor Samsa, the allegorical nature. Recalling that Kafka "translated" - or encrypted - so unique and dense, through metaphors, the complexity of modern man - or even any time, hence its timelessness - after falling into a chasm of unrelenting uncertainties, absurd, disturbances and questions of all kinds. 4.
Interpretation 1: The monstrous insect in which Gregor Samsa is transformed as a result of a metamorphosis, decodes as a physical or mental disability, making the individual incapable and / or discredited for compliance certain tasks, therefore regarded as useless for work and, consequently, to capitalism. It is also seen as a strange and inept in the eyes of family and society, isolating themselves gradually. In fact, I look to them for a detail that shows the intensely bizarre genius and sensibility peculiar Kafka's Gregor Samsa transforms into a bug. Now, what a sensation the insect in question immediately? Strangeness or repulsion. Exactly what causes a human being in these three conditions presented here. The interpretation that the insect is the physical manifestation of the state in which humans feel (= insect insignificance) is also great, but contradictory interpretations shown below (insect = difference, social awkwardness). However, Kafka, among other great authors, allows wide releases, "translations" of his literature. 5. Interpretation 2: The mutation of Gregor Samsa would be the transformation moral and psychological integrity of an individual who acquires new beliefs and / or ideology, not fitting the standards of the society they live in and being rebuffed.

6. Interpretation 3: This transmutation of a grotesque man in insect symbolizes specifically conversion to Marxism, the political-economic ideology in vogue at the time, thus condemning capitalism and refusing to work. Consequently, it is rejected by his too and had a "laid off" in the family.
Other interpretations are equally acceptable and consistent. The literature is always loaded with metaphor and subjectivity. Review written on 05/03/2009.

Debate over the work.

Lime Green Scooter Weels

The Process - Franz Kafka


Synopsis:

The Process is a novel written by Czech author Franz Kafka, and tells the story of Josef K., a character who wakes up one morning and without known reasons, was arrested and subjected to long and incomprehensible process for an undisclosed crime. According to Max Brod, personal friend of Kafka, the book remained unfinished as it was when he gave Kafka's writings in 1920. After his death, Brod edited
The Process by which he judged a coherent novel and published it in 1925.

My review: As
Metamorphosis
, another wonderful masterpiece of Kafka's The Trial also distinguishes itself in metaphors, allegories, symbols: all this has to do with the great writer apparently absurd, that proves to be perfectly consistent.

I read this book the year before, and through him I became a fan of Kafka. He is considered alongside Joyce and Proust, as one of the greatest writers of the century. XX, and one can even claim that it was one of the greatest authors of all time. No other writer of contemporary literature [we are to understand: the century. XX] could be as forceful and embrace so completely - but subtle - the feelings, questions and conflicts of man in all forms, mainly due to the chaotic world in which we suffer positions War the consequences today. Through its excellent and complex allegories, seemingly absurd, he builds all these uncertainties and insecurities that plague us constantly. The atypical process in which Joseph K., the potagonista, is the victim, without knowing the reason for his accusation, it is a symbolization of the human environment in the modern world . The metaphors of Kafka are wide and allow a range of interpretations, but all with a common core, and hide content completely realistic, since they are the more stark reality. This process can be interpreted in the following perspective: an exhibition incompetence and cluttered nature of injustices and distortions of the Judiciary and the bureaucratic state in general, subduing the man so cruel, corrupt. But there is also the interpretation most comprehensive and complex, a world stunned punctuated by uncertainties in profusion of all sorts, in the forms of political ideologies, religious beliefs, current artistic and philosophical, moral and existential questions, etc..

modern man lost in a maelstrom ideas and information, and even more depressed and upset by the lack of truth or of truth in these ideas, even knowing what to hold on to some of them. Kafka displays these universal human dilemmas not only with unique originality, but also density, and these dilemmas are present in humans of any age. So for me, Kafka is not only extremely interesting, but uniquely timeless.

Another aspect of Kafka's work that impresses me is naturalism in their descriptions, both environments and emotions of the characters and the situations they find themselves, however they are raw or surreal. It's kind of ironic deadpan realist but occasionally exposing a dose of black humor. And specifically when dealing with environments
Process
, Kafka always describes them accurately, without "descriptivism" and using that same kind of deadpan, but providing such a description dark atmosphere, using noir and / or perceptually surreal. There times when Process
is suffocating the atmosphere itself descriptive, or one of those dreams that seems despite absurd develop with perfect visibility and realism in our subconscious to the point where we believe we are experiencing it genuinely. Review written on 06/03/2009.
Debate over the work. This

Tiffany Towers And Friens

HAMLET - William Shakespeare

my old post
I served as the basis for this review.
Synopsis:
Hamlet is a tragedy by William Shakespeare, written between 1599 and 1601. The play, set in Denmark, recounts the story how Prince Hamlet exacts revenge the death of his father Hamlet, King, running his uncle Claudius, who poisoned him and then took the throne by marrying Hamlet's mother. The play draws a map of the course of life in the real madness and feigned madness - from overwhelming grief to anger earnest - and explores themes of betrayal, revenge, incest, corruption Aoe morality.


My review:

Shakespeare is one of my favorite authors. His plays are the best of all times and ranks among the most dense and monumental masterpieces of world literature as well as being timeless and universal. Shake created some of the most complex and contradictory characters of literature, all too human, full of qualities and defects, certainties and doubts, anxieties and passions - indeed, he portrayed intensely overlap the passions over reason. Hamlet, his most complex and debated character, is a unique psychological character of amplitude and raised heated debates about the eternal and his madness (really simulated or real?), their limits of transient anti-hero hero (which makes the man simply and multiply, etc.).

Incidentally, the phrase most comprehensive of world literature may be "To be or not to be: that is the question," a sentence that includes in itself all the contradictions es, choices and human complexity. A peculiar feature in the Shakespearean works - I've read Hamlet, King Lear and

Othello - is probing the overwhelming influence of persuasive communication in the process of handling a human being by another, urging him to error and thus earning bounties, deeply desired goals. A psychological process that involves using up weaknesses, desires and more visceral suspicion of the same. The ghost of Hamlet's father instigated him to revenge, Iago encourages Othello to kill his wife, Desdemona, in order to ruin his life.

But here the doubt on the veracity of the madness of Hamlet is the fact that the ghost may be a delusional projection of visceral desire for revenge from him, and not really a ghost in the literal sense and embracing the supernatural. Hence, the question arises: he knew that Claudius was the murderer - or strongly suspected - and just "created" the father figure alémtúmulo to confirm himself the right to avenge there? This study focuses entãoa honor relationship father-son and, consequently, a child who is haunted by the father figure (Hamlet could have relations conflicting with his father, and served as an opportunity to revenge their honor unsullied, resolved with the figure of the father, etc.). Nor can we forget the fact that Hamlet is in doubt clash cruel to avenge his father's death or not, if suicide is preferable to having to face a fate destined to kill - or die. So enters the delicate relationship Oedipal - or better to say essentially Shakespearean? Hamlet loves his mother more than you should, and feel guilty about it. Kill the usurper uncle, who committed a "crime" that he would commit, in order to marry the wife of another, would be a way to greatly surrender himself, or deny the aspirations "vis" his mind "unpolluted" - certain mistake! It's all so complex in Shakespeare, to elicit much debate. Revenge is the core part, the facts revolving around them, but say that number is only about vengeance is contradictory and even paradoxical, bearing in mind the unique complexity of the work Shakespeare.


Hamlet speaks not only of revenge, but also other aspects of timeless nature, some inherent to humanity: parent-child relationships, parent-child, involving the rights and responsibilities that entails, and honor their delicate implications; suicide; real madness madness simulated x, x predestinaçãoe fatalism resulting consequences of our actions, life alémtú mule; power relationships and seduction he holds, because x paixãoe instincts - including the overlap of the passions to reason, so common in the human psyche, which leads man to the tragedy . Moreover, it is easy to foresee that a major key to understanding - and to interpret and infer - the work of Shakespeare, particularly Hamlet , is the duality / ambiguity. It is to be or not, my dear!
And as Horace would say ominously (or was it Hamlet said that?) "There are more things in céuea land than our vain philosophy supposes." It was the favorite Shakespearean quote of Machadinho.
In the works of Shakespeare, the characters are constantly manipulated and manipulative, especially within the affective and familiar relationships. Occasionally these two "functions", manipulator and manipulated, confused. Prince Hamlet is driven by the ghost of his father's revenge on behalf of her murder, culminating not only in the murder of Claudius - the killer of his father and Danish usurper of the throne - but in other deaths, instigated by Iago is Othello to kill his wife Desdemona, the villain handled mainly through its insanely jealous, Lady Macbeth urges her husband to commit regicide, etc.. It is intriguing to note that this peculiarity of Shakespeare assigns to them a character metadramático: scenarios are inside a big show, the play within the play , tragic or tragicomic stage of life - and this is intensified in nuance
Hamlet, which is actually staged a number of Prince Hamlet in order to "curtail" the spirits and self confidence , that of Claudius, making him feel cornered and about to be discovered. Yet the circle of this tragedy in such works, fatalistic content, reinforce the interpretation of many critics and readers who imagine Shakespeare as a firm believer in the theory of divine character prederteminismo , in predestination. But then, in such plays as Hamlet himself

, there is dense and caught up debating monologues and dialogues about the veracity of astrological influences and / or divine? There are still many unknowns about Shakespeare, his views and beliefs, and especially about its most celebrated and enigmatic character, Hamlet.

Review written on 19/03/2009.