Gawain in Wace, Lazamon, and Alliterative Morte Arturo: A Cultural Comparison :: Essays Papers

Gawain in Wace, Lazamon, and Alliterative Morte Arturo: A Cultural Comparison Martin B. Shichtman, in his essay on Wace and Layamon, describes history as "the transcribing of the illusions of an age" (1987, 106). He states that for many scholars in the Middle Ages, translating histories was not so much a matter of setting down, word for word, what were considered to be "hard facts," but of expounding on the truths behind the material, as they were relevant to the time and audience for which they were written. This often involved the omission of some material from the primary source, the addition of new material to it, and the reinterpretation of events and attitudes expressed in the work. The figure of Gawain throughout Arthurian literature is an interesting one; he appears in more texts as a secondary character than any other knight named, and often gains glory even at the expense of the main hero (Busby 1980, 5). The first characteristic which separates him from the other knights is his relationship to Arthur: it is usually stated that he is Arthur's sister's son, a kinship that is found from William of Malmesbury's Gesta Regum Anglorum (c. 1125) and Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae (c. 1136) onward (Busby 1980, 31). However, it is notable that Gawain often seems more like a type than an individual; in Old French literature he is never the subject of a biographical romance, as are most of the other knights, he never has one particular lady's name associated with him, and he is frequently used as a constant against which other knights are judged, the perfect embodiment of good qualities, more a symbol of perfection than an actual person (Busby 1980, 7 ). Because of this, he makes an especially good study when looking at what an author considered to be "perfection" within his society. In the various ways in which Gawain is portrayed, he often serves as a focal point from which to observe some of the cultural changes and ulterior motives present in the legends of which he is a part. The basic story of Arthur (and Gawain) found in Geoffrey's Historia was later translated and reworked many times: by Wace in the Norman French Roman de Brut, in an Anglo-Norman fragment, by Layamon in the Early Middle English Brut, and in the Middle English Alliterative Revival piece the Morte Arthure (the AMA), among others.

Brutus and Antony

What can you do to be seen as an exceptional adequate speaker? Brutus and Antony are both noble people that are both fair speakers in William Shakespeare’s play, Julius Cesar. Both people spoke at Cesar’s funeral trying to persuade their audience about his death. Brutus, who killed Cesar, tries to explain to the audience why he did such a thing, and Antony explains why what Brutus did was wrong. Although Brutus was a good orator and uses rhetoric well, Antony had the more persuasive speech overall. Antony had better use of emotional appeals, loaded words, and tone. Emotional appeals are arguments that attempt to persuade by feelings.Since Antony can’t say that Brutus is a bad person, he starts off with an ethical appeal. â€Å"The noble Brutus† (5). However, he says that line sarcastically, and soon proves to his audience that Brutus is wrong about Cesar by using an emotional appeal. â€Å"Hath told you Cesar was ambitious If it were so, it was grievous f ault, And grievously hath Cesar answered it† (6-8). He’s great at getting the audience thinking about if Brutus is actually noble and is one reason why Antony is a better speaker than Brutus. Second, loaded words are words that have strong emotional tones beyond its meaning.Antony uses loaded words to sway the people into his thinking that Caesar was good. â€Å"For Brutus is an honorable man, So are they all, all honorable men†(11-12). â€Å"Yet Brutus says he was ambitious; And yet Brutus is an honorable man†(25-26). He repeats these lines often throughout his speech. Antony uses words like honorable and ambitious. This can be seen as a momentum that pushes his argument further. By the use of loaded words, Antony catches the attention of the of his audience and persuades them in a great manor. Lastly, tone, which is the speaker’s attitude toward the audience.Mark Antony uses a subtle and eloquent tone in his speech. This is in contrast to the rati onal tone of Brutus's speech. â€Å"Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;† (1). Whereas Brutus’ speech starts off more weak and and calmer which wouldn’t grab the audience’s attention as much as Antony’s beginning speech. Overall, Antony had a more persuasive speech and it probably made the audience feel more included. He used a lot of appeals that let his audience to be more persuaded by his speech. He had a more stronger connection towards the audience and used skilled rhetoric, iambic meter, and manipulation in his speech.

The United States As Powers Within The International System

Although the United States remains the world’s lone superpower, it is no longer a hyperpower that can bully potential contenders. The rest of the world is catching up. A change from unipolarity to multipolarity is one could facilitate a return nations struggling for power and prestige through war. While some might say a return to this system could destroy todays relative peace amongst great powers, they are incorrect. A return to multipolarity could show us that several emerging powers will emerge to join the United States as powers within the international system. It does not tell us how multipolarity will effect international governance. The question is whether emerging powers accept or resist the western order that will exist when they†¦show more content†¦History has shown us that dramatic changes to international power rarely unfold smoothly or peacefully. The danger of states undergoing rapid rises and declines in relative power, where one state seeks the status of a hegemon and another seeks to maintain it, is less valid than it once was. While the most destructive and influential conflicts in history have been situations where competing powers seek superiority over a rival power, the nuclear age makes power transition by means of war incredibly unlikely. As the cost of conflict between nuclear armed states would be unreasonably costly, the cycle of hegemonic-war has been broken. That leaves the question as to whether the existing international order will facilitate a smooth transition that incorporates emerging powers or one that excludes them and creates greater potential for conflict. The United States has shaped world politics with ideas such as capitalism is better than socialism and democracy is better than dictatorship. However, recently, emerging non-Western powers have let it be known that they do not share the United States views on these issues. Bruce Jentleson and Steven Weber argue, Outside the United States, people no lo nger believe that the alternative to Washington led order is chaos†¦. the rest of the world has no fear about experimenting with alternatives. Emerging powers such as China are willing to challenge the U.S., but largely within existing institutions rather than outside them.