Edgar Allen Poes The Tell-Tale Heart and the Symbolism of the Eye Essa

Edgar Allen Poe is the genius responsible for dark, twisting, and often uncomfortably wondrous gothic tales, and one of the best is 'The Tell-Tale Heart.' This is a classic tale of a confused man who is so incredibly bothered by his housemate's eye, that he (I am assuming this sexless character is male) thinks the only solution is to resort to cold-blooded murder. Poe incorporates the symbol of the old man's eye in 'The Tell-Tale Heart,' which has both physical and psychological meaning, it also helps to develop the plot and central conflicts in the story. The eye allows a better understanding of the narrator's mental state, represents an omniscient/fatherly figure, and helps illustrate the theme of good verses evil. The story?s conflict revolves around the narrator plotting, planning, and executing a man?s death, yet it is the eye that causes this man?s obsession with murder. Another important conflict in the story is that of the narrators struggle to prove he is sane, he does this by trying to make the eye seem evil, more evil than his own deeds. The only reason the narrator gives for his decision of murder is the man?s eye, and it is the eye the narrator must see before he can actually kill the man. In the end of the story, the disposing of the eye actually leads to the narrator?s downfall. As you can see, the eye is the story?s main conflict, which helps to develop the plot, and really allows for a deeper understanding of the story. The author uses the eye to provide clues as to why the narrator is so unreliable. ?I think it was his eye! Yes, it was this!? (Poe 721), the narrator uses the statement ?I think?, implying that he is obviously not very sure, and definitely unstable, since something he ?thinks? is a problem... ..., which is one reason why he?s trying to prove himself as sane. This theme can be tied into the fatherly figure, by showing his struggle to stay ?good? in the eyes of his father, yet we have already established that he really does understand that he is going insane, and since he comprehends this transition, he must kill the judging fatherly figure so he doesn?t see his turn to ?evil.? The eye helps to show the narrators spiral into insanity, the father/son relationship occurring between the narrator and old man, and the ever transient theme of good verses evil. ?The Tale-Tell Heart? uses such blatant symbolism that it?s almost easy to skip right over and not notice, but the understanding of the ?eye? is the key to this famous tale. Edgar Allan Poe is absolutely ingenious, and for obvious reasons his work will always be considered as distinguished ?classics?.

Just-in- Time in Kalamazoo Essay

A firm specializing in motor homes located in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Discusses changes in inventory and other cost since the recent expansion of its market from the local Midwest to a national one. The companies also have to deal with another major problem because it only manufactures a few of it components while the others are purchased form outside vendors. In an attempt to reduce component part expenses, the president of the company considers implementing the Just-in-time system in his firm. The just in time is a system developed by Toyota designed to control quality develop supplier and distributors’ relationship and minimize inventory. 1.What is the total annual cost of maintaining the components inventory under the present system? Under the present system the total cost to maintain the component per year is $1,292824.00 2.What would be the total annual cost of maintaining the components under the JIT system (Assuming no safety stocks)? The annual cost of maintaining the components under the JIT system would be 3. Should Ballenger take into account any other cost or benefits from JIT system? if so what are they? With the JIT system Ballenger would be less concern about maintaining a large inventory and they would less likely to experience shrinkage. The just-in-time system will also ensure that parts are available to manufacture products and will better serve customers more effectively and efficiently. 4. If the JIT system is adopted are there safety sticks of any item that should be maintained? If so which ones and how much If JIT system is adopted DVD players should be placed under capacity safety because they seem to be quite expensive. 5.If JIT system is adopted, what changes if any should occur in the relationships between Ballenger’s firm and his suppliers of components? Discuss They would need to be more alert keen and discipline in terms of delivery therefore the firm and the supplier would have to maintain good communication skills to avoid any defects. 6. Assume that Ballenger has switched to the JIT system and that he receives a surprise phone call from a competitor who is going out of business. The competitor wants to sell Ballenger 7,000 dome lights of the type listed in Exhibit 2-A. Should Ballenger buy them? If so, at what price? I don’t think that Ballenger should purchase these lights because according to the JIT system one of its aim is to instill discipline and this therefore will ruin such vision not only that but Ballenger would also have to consider storage for these light bulbs. 7. Carrying cost are 20 percent. Is there a level of carrying cost at which both Ballenger’s present system and a JIT system have similar cost what is that? There won’t be a level when the two systems have the same cost but if so it would be at a extremely high rate possible exceeding 100 percent.

Divine Command Theory Essay

Divine Command Theory is an ethical theory which claims that God’s will is the foundation of ethics. Based on Divine Command Theory, things are morally right or wrong, compulsory, allowed or disallowed if God or deities commands it. In Divine Command Theory, what makes an act moral or immoral is that God commands or prohibited it. Apart from being commanded by God to do certain thing, some other aspect of Divine Command Theory, also hold that an action is moral if Divine motivated. In this motivation aspect of Divine Command Theory, we can say that apart from the religious documents someone can be motivated to carry out moral. The Divine Command Theory is divided by some Scholars into three ethical sub frame work: (1) Religion communities, (2) Command as motivated (3) Created morality. These three sub frame work is in practice in all the major religion of the world today, like Christian, Islam and Judaism, but with slit difference. The Religion Communities Frame Work This type of Divine command Theory hold that only God commands is moral. And that only the true believers of God’s command or religion community members can explain and obey God’s command. For instance some Christian denomination claim that when you are in the Church auditorium and it compound one need to put off his shoe to follow what God instructed Moses in Media, thus seeing the auditorium to represent the holy place in that particular passage of the Bible, while other do not interpret the passage that way. The Religion Community Frame work views the Divine Command Theory meaningless to unbelievers. And that they (non believer) cannot abide with God command except they believed in God. The Command as Motivation Framework This frame work holds that some actions are morally right without Divine commands, but God’s commands empower or motivate people to act morally. In other words some actions are morally good even if God do not issue command, but the commands of God put people in proper shape to act in accordance with that morality The proponent of this frame work believed that only individual who truly believed in God can obey God’s command. They claim that if someone did not believe in God, he may want to be moral, but such person will act contrary to these moral when they are in difficult situation because of lack f motivation. For example if someone who does not believe in God, he may decide not to steal but when faced with challenges like; lacking or hunger he may revised his decision. But someone who believed in God will be motivated by the command to abide by the term. The Created Morality Frame Work Created morality hold that only God will and commands are moral. Any actions outside God are immoral. This framework tries to establish that only those who believed in God can do things which are moral. And that anything done without acknowledge to God’s will is immoral. In other words no action is good on its own, rather God determine what is good. For instance if someone refuse to steal in other not to put pains on ethers as a result of the loose of his property, the person is not moral because he is not refraining because God is against that act. The view of divine command theory is one that ties together morality and religion in a way that is very comfortable for most people, because it provides a solution to pesky arguments like relativism and objectivity of ethics. An action is morally acceptable if God commands such an action and morally wrong if God prohibit such an action. The theory has been criticized by numerous philosophers, including Plato, Kai Nielson, and J. L. Mackie. The theory also has many defenders, both classic and contemporary, such as Thomas Aquinas, Robert Adams, and Philip Quinn. Although the basic premise of the divine command theory is rather simple (what God commands is good, therefore do only that). Things get somewhat complicated once we start to consider why God’s commands are good. In the light of the foregoing, had it been that God commanded otherwise e. g. we should inflict suffering on others for fun, then doing so would be morally right. We would be obligated to do so, because God commanded it. If God commanded us to inflict such suffering, doing so would become the morally right thing to do. People would conclude by saying that the foundation of morality becomes arbitrary. The main fact is that, that God could have made a different decision does not make His decision arbitrary. What is in accordance with God’s command is moral and what is contrary to that command is immoral, period. It must be concluded that any independent views people have on what is moral and immoral are irrelevant and irreverent. As God will never change, so moral truth will never change. A major assumption of the divine command theory of ethics is that God is good (benevolent) and only wills good things (or issues good commands) for the sake of humanity. Any concern over the nature of God’s command merely indicates that such people do not have complete faith in God, and therefore, in His command. If they did, then they would be wholly unquestioning of, and obedient to Him. The criticisms over divine command theory would simply not arise, for people who have the genuine, and therefore complete, faith in Him. God created the universe and everything in it, including human being. If God created human beings, then God has an absolute claim on our obedience, if God has an absolute claim on our obedience, then we should always obey God’s commands. Therefore, the divine command theory is true. Criticism of Divine Command Theory: The Euthyphro dilemma Critics of Divine command theory have used the Euthyphro dilemma since the period of Plato who spoke through the mouth of Socrates to criticize the Divine command theory, that says morality should based on what God or gods commanded. The Euthyphro dilemma is named after Plato’s dialogue â€Å"The Euthyphro† in which Socrates posed a question â€Å"Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods? † In other words Socrates is asking, whether something is good because God or gods pronounced or commanded that we should do it, or something is good that made God or gods to pronounce or commanded it. Whichever way one support on this Euthyphro dilemma, it is still very controversial. For instance, if someone says something is good because God or gods pronounced or commanded that we should do it, such person will be met with two objections: the abhorrence objection and the emptiness objection. The Abhorrence Objection If an action is good only because God command such action, then what would happen if God or gods chose to issue an abhorrent command? What if instead of God command that we should not kill, He changes it to we should kill or commit other atrocities like robbery, raping, etc. Under Divine command theory or to support divine command theory, an abhorrent would be requiring. That is it a most that such atrocity is committed, in order to be moral. This may contradict a believer expectation of God or gods yet it would require abhorrent to the commandment because God or gods commanded such. In Divine command theory we say the mass killing of people including children by the Israelites recorded in the Holy Bible or the fanatic Muslim like â€Å"boko haram† who kills in the name of religion is moral. But does these really justifies morality? A deep look at this will continue to generate more problems. For instance some people will classify that some act that others do, that they do not subscribe to is not from God or gods. So how can we then know that which is from God or how can we identify those that God directed to carry out his will? This will be the next question that might be raised. The Emptiness Objection If any particular action is good because God commands such, then God serve as the ultimate arbiter of what is morally right and wrong. An issue will then arise, whether the statement â€Å"God is good† has any meaning where God determines what is good. Divine Command Theory proponent state â€Å"God is good†, while the Divine Command Theory itself claim that â€Å"good is whatever God commands†. The emptiness objection transposes these statements and claim that saying â€Å"God is good† is the same thing as â€Å"go Some said the multiple religions in the world which claim to have different command from the same od is whatever God commands†. The argument is then made that this statement is empty or meaningless. Because abhorrent of Divine Command Theory strongly believed that the concept â€Å"God is good† and â€Å"good is whatever God commands† are meaningful. The Irrelevance Objection Looking at the other aspect of the Euthyphro dilemma, that is, if someone says something is good that made God or gods pronounce or commanded it becomes more problematic. This is called the irrelevance objection which is totally against the divine command theory. This holds that something is moral or immoral independence of God’s will. So even God commanded it or not it is still morally alright. Other Criticism of Divine Command Theory Apart from the Euthyphro dilemma oppositionist of Divine command theory also try to argue in other form to render the Divine command theory uncalled for. Some said the multiple religions in the world which claim to have different command from the same God in which some of the commands are against each other. For example, Muslim and Christian even Judaism will have different view or notion on a particular issue and each will claim that God commands such. The question then is, how can the same God give out this kind different command to this people? The critics said if God is the one that gave this command it must be a universal command. Meanwhile other critics of Divine Command Theory asked an epistemological question, how can we know the will and command of God? They asked further, if the scripture can be used as guide to morality? Some proceed to asked, if the scripture is still the will of God to this present age or for the living then? They, the critics said if Divine Command is a motivator, how then can we use the scripture as guide to morality? They claim that obey the scripture should not be seen as obeying divine command. Because, God or the deities that gave this command is still alive and we continue to issue new commands, they added that as people heard the command many centuries ago, people must hear it now and will continue to hear until the deity or God does not exist again. Many Philosophers and Religious over many centuries have attempted to proof the objection raised by the Euthyphro Dilemma as unsound argument against the Divine Command Theory. These defenders of Divine Command Theory argue that the logical flow of the argument of Socrates is invalid. The Divine command Theorist claim that it is not necessary that the believer in this command of God or gods limit them self to either of the two point of the Euthyphro dilemma postulated by the Plato’s intellectual work. The Divine Command Theorist also tries to disagree with each of the objection raised by the Euthyphro dilemma. Some of the advocates of the Divine Command Theory said, the abhorrent objection is not correct because God is a loving God and can never or we never issue a command which is abhorrent. With this they rule out any possibility of God issue an abhorrent command. Meanwhile others proponent of Divine Command Theory hold that, God nature will prevent him from issuing abhorrent command. On the emptiness objection, defenders of Divine Command Theory argue that, it is never an empty statement to claim that God is good and that what God commands is good. They argued logically that if God is good, everything he does or says is good, therefore God command is good. The irrelevance objection was counter on the ground that, if something is good prior to the time God issue a commands such, God is the one that made it good then. And now that he issues a command to effect it can never be said to be irrelevance to the goodness of that. In other words things that are good are made so by no other person but by God. And if God decided that what is good before should now be made a command, it is to make people act in accordance to the nature of God which is good. New form of Divine Command Theory The critic argument against Divine command Theory and many other problems raised about it have made it difficult to be practice by religion in society of this world. This has also made advocates to put forth strong argument for Divine Command Theory. Philosopher like Robert Adams postulated a reform Divine Command Theory, where he substituted the word God with ‘loving god’, he argue that a loving God will never issue an abhorrent command. He therefore suggests that any command that tends to be abhorrent in nature is not from loving God. And that that must not be obey. In other words people that do things that are not moral, and tried to link it God’s command should be disregarded, because God cannot give abhorrent command. This reformed Divine Command Theory is now what must religions of the world practice which also go in line with normal ethical theory.

Frustrations With Japan Essays - United States, Free Essays

Frustrations With Japan Essays - United States, Free Essays Frustrations With Japan December 8, 1941 was a solemn day. The day after Japan dropped the bomb on Pearl Harbor, the people of the United States mourned. If ever there was a time when Americans wanted to enter World War II, it was then. The United Sates had been deceived by the Empire of Japan, with whom they thought they were at peace. Franklin Roosevelts speech to Congress, asking for permission to declare war on Japan, shows the resentment and despair of the American people. After the bombing of Pearl Harbor, many Americans felt a lot of resentment against Japan, and the Japanese. Much of this resentment arose because Japan gave the United States a false hope of peace between the two countries. Also, from the evidence, it appeared that the attack was premeditated. Because of the distance between Japan and Hawaii, it was found that the attack had been planned days, possibly weeks beforehand (Roosevelt, 170). During the time before the attack, the Japanese had deceived the United States into believing they were at peace with one another. Because of the bombing by Japan, the American people were mourning the loss of their soldiers lives. They also were angry with the destruction of the naval and military forces, along with the attacks on Hong Kong, Guam, the Philippine Islands, Wake Island, and Midway Island all within hours of each other. The American people, along with the government, wanted nothing more than to destroy Japan, and win the war. In the Monica Sone document, I belief that the frustrations that the Americans were feeling are expressed in their entirety. The American people were so angry with the Japanese people, and so afraid that the Japanese would attack again, that the Americans basically rejected anyone that looked Japanese. To the Americans, regardless of whether you were native born, if you looked Japanese you were the enemy. The American government did not want to take chances, so they gathered all the people of Japanese decent and made them live under military law. They even had to live in military camps. How horrible for all those innocent people to be assumed the enemy when they had lived as Americans their whole lives. In the Monica Sone document, it is evident that, at first, the government was looking to only interview the important people in the Japanese community to ensure none of them were spies. However, things got out of control and the United States government declared that all people of Japanese decent give up their property and move into assembly centers, in order to isolate them from the rest of the American people. This shows how terribly desperate the American people felt after the Pearl Harbor bombing. Looking at Franklin Roosevelts speech and Monica Sones document memoire, it is evident how desperate the American people were to save their country and destroy Japan. They would go to such extremes to save what they believed to be right and just. There are many similarities between the two documents, but they are showed in an opposite manner. In Roosevelts speech you see the American determination to defeat Japan and win the war. In the Monica Sone document you see the desperation of the American people to protect their country, and their resentment of the Japanese people. Both represent the feelings of the Americans, but unfortunately, the Monica Sone document shows what extreme measures the American people were willing to go to protect what they believed to be right.

Dead Poets Society Essays - Dead Poets Society, Films, John Keating

Dead Poets Society Essays - Dead Poets Society, Films, John Keating Dead Poets Society is a famous drama film shot in the USA in 1989. This film was directed by Peter Weir and the main role was played by Robin Williams. The action takes place in Welton Academy for aristocratic students in Vermont in 1959. Dead Poets Society is about English language and literature teacher John Keating who decided to inspire his students to change something in their boring everyday lives and encouraged their fascination with poetry and literature. John Keating is a new teacher in a conservative academy. Everyday life and activity of students is controlled strictly by the officials of this academy. He decided to help his students develop their spiritual side and he conducted his lessons in the original manner. The motto of this film is carpe diem or seize the day. Mr. Keating stated that students should start changing their lives at this very day, because it is useless to delay your happiness and dreams until a later time. When he was young, he was a member of an unsanctioned Dead Poets Society, a group of students who enjoyed poetry. The main characters of the film, Neil Perry and his classmates, decided to revive this society and got involved into poetry. Neil was the most promising student of the academy and he dreamt of playing at the theatre, though his father opposed him to do it. Neil committed suicide under the pressure of his father who did not understand the real dreams of his son. The film teaches to work hard if you want to achieve your goal. Moreover, it teaches to respect your family and make a compromise for the solution of any important problem. Dead Poets Society is an interesting and thought provoking film that can be useful to every student who is involved into social work or pedagogy. It is useful to watch this film and learn something new about perception of life. When you need to analyze Dead Poets Society in detail, you should watch it attentively, take notes and learn about every main character of the film. Then one should focus on the main idea of this film, observe its motto and say something about its hidden ideas. Finally, you are able to observe Dead Poets Society from technical side and evaluate the directors work, performance of the camera operator and actors play. Students always have troubles with term paper writing, because this assignment consumes time and efforts. Luckily, every student is able to improve his writing skills and prepare a successful paper if he reads a free college term paper sample on Dead Poets Society analysis composed by a multitasking and intelligent writer.

How to Write Dialogue That Captivates Your Reader

How to Write Dialogue That Captivates Your Reader How to Write Dialogue That Captivates Your Reader And unfortunately, your first reader will be an agent or an editor. You can’t slip anything boring past them. Your job is to make every word count. That’s the way to keep your reader riveted until the final page- no small task. Making every word count is how to write compelling dialogue. Readers love dialogue because: It breaks up intimidating blocks of narrative summary. It differentiates (through dialect and word choice) and reveals characters. Done well, it can move the story without author intrusion. But, as you have likely discovered, writing great dialogue is hard. If yours is bloated or obvious or telling or is in any other way uninteresting, readers won’t stay with you long. So how about we leave them no choice? Need help writing your novel?  Click here to download my ultimate 12-step guide. How to Write Dialogue in 6 Steps Cut to the Bone Reveal Backstory Reveal Character Be Subtle Read Your Dialogue Out Loud Create a Make My Day Moment Step 1. Cut to the Bone Unless you need to reveal a character as a brainiac or a blowhard pretending to be one, omit needless words. Obviously, you wouldn’t render a conversation the way a court transcript includes repetition and even um, ah, uh, etc. But even beyond that, see how much you can chop without losing the point. Like this: â€Å"What do you want to do this  Sunday?  I thought wWe could go to the amusement park.† â€Å"I was thinking about renting a rowboat,† Vladimir said.  on one of the lakes.† â€Å"Oh, Vladimir, that sounds wonderful! I’ve never gone rowing  before.† That doesn’t mean all your dialogue has to be short and choppy- just that you’ll cut the dead wood to keep to the point. You’ll be surprised by how much power it adds to your prose. Step 2. Reveal Backstory Layering in backstory through dialogue is another way to keep your reader turning pages. Hinting at some incident for the first time is an automatic setup that demands a payoff. Example: As they headed toward the house, Janet whispered, â€Å"Can we not have a repeat of Cincinnati?† Jeanie shot her a double take. â€Å"Believe me, I don’t want that any more than you do.† â€Å"Good,† Janet said. â€Å"I mean- † â€Å"Can we not talk about it, please?† What normal reader wouldn’t assume they will talk about it at some point and stay with the story until they do? As the story progresses, you can reveal more and more about your protagonist’s past and have your story come full circle. This accomplishes two things: it offers a setup that should intrigue the reader, and it helps you avoid flashbacks. Need help writing your novel?  Click here to download my ultimate 12-step guide. Step 3. Reveal Character Your reader learns a lot about your characters through dialogue. You don’t have to TELL us they’re sarcastic, witty, narcissistic, kind, or anything else. You can SHOW us by how they interact and by what they say. Step 4. Be Subtle Dialogue can accomplish a number of tasks. Here are three: 1. Subtext- where people say other than what they mean. This can be fun. Example: My friend sold a short story to a general-market magazine years ago about a girl named Cindy who falls in love with the slightly older boy next door, who sees her as just a little sister type. When they get to high school, Tommy is the big man on campus, captain of the football team, dating the head cheerleader, and pretty much ignoring Cindy. She’s just his younger neighbor and friend. Tommy leaves for college and word soon gets back to Cindy during her senior year of high school that he and his girlfriend have broken up. So when he comes home after his freshman year of college and is changing a tire on his car, Cindy just happens to walk outside. She strikes up a conversation with Tommy, and he looks up, stunned. Who is this beautylittle Cindy from next door? She says, â€Å"Making a change, are you?† Tommy looks at the tire and back at her and says, â€Å"Yeah, I actually I am making a change.† Cindy says, â€Å"Well, I’ve heard that rotating can be a good thing.† And he says, â€Å"Yeah, I’ve heard that too.† That’s subtext. They’re not saying what they really mean. They’re not really talking about changing the tire, are they? 2. Sidestepping- when a character responds to a question without answering it. Instead, what the character says is so profound and unexpected that it offers a whole new understanding of what’s going on. Example: In the movie Patch Adams, the late Robin Williams played a brilliant young doctor who believes the Old Testament adage that â€Å"laughter is the best medicine.† He goes into the children’s cancer ward of a hospital wearing an inflated surgical glove on his head, making him look like a rooster. He wears bedpans for shoes and stomps about, flapping his arms and squawking. The children find it hilarious, but hospital directors consider it undignified and demand he stop. Patch Adams is trying to make one girl in particular- a hospital volunteer- laugh. But while everyone else thinks he’s funny, she never cracks a smile. Finally, Patch leaves the hospital to open a clinic in the country. Imagine his surprise when that humorless young lady appears to help him set up. At one point, she goes outside to rest, so Patch follows and sits opposite her. He says, â€Å"I’ve got to ask. Everybody thinks I’m hysterical, but you. I’ve tried everything. What is it with you? Why don’t you ever think anything I say is funny?† After several seconds of silence, she says, â€Å"Men have liked me all my lifeall my life† And we realize by the way she says it, she was abused as a child. Suddenly, we understand what this girl is all about. She doesn’t trust men, and she doesn’t laugh, because life isn’t funny. The way she responded did not answer his question. Her problem had nothing to do with him or his humor. Finally, Patch realizes that some things aren’t funny. Some things you just don’t make fun of. Sometimes, you need to quit cracking jokes and just listen. It’s a great turnaround in the story. And an example of sidestep dialogue. 3. Silence The old truism that silence can be golden rings true for our last technique. Many, including Abraham Lincoln, have been credited with the line: â€Å"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.† One of the toughest things to learn as a writer is to avoid filling silent gaps. Just like we shouldn’t tell what’s not happening in a story, neither do we need to write that someone didn’t respond or didn’t answer. If you don’t say they did, the reader will know they didn’t. Example: â€Å"Well John,† Linda said, â€Å"what do you have to say for yourself?† John set his jaw and stared out the window. â€Å"I’m waiting,† she said. He lit a cigarette. Linda shook her head. â€Å"I swear, John, honestly.† Now, too many writers feel the need to write here, â€Å"But he refused to say anything,† or â€Å"But he never responded.† Don’t! We know, we get it- and it’s loud, effective, silent dialogue. The reader knows because John is saying nothing, and yet saying everything. Silence is golden. Step 5. Read Your Dialogue Out Loud One way to be certain your dialogue flows is to read it aloud or even act it out. Anything that doesn’t sound right won’t read right either, so rewrite it until it does. Step 6. Create a â€Å"Make My Day† Moment Certain iconic lines of dialogue have become as legendary as the films and books they originate from: â€Å"Frankly my dear† â€Å"There’s no place like home.† â€Å"We’re not in Kansas anymore.† â€Å"To my big brother George, the richest man in town.† â€Å"What we have here is failure to communicate.† â€Å"Go ahead, make my day.† â€Å"May the force be with you.† â€Å"Houston, we have a problem.† â€Å"Run, Forrest, run!† â€Å"You had me at hello.† Most writers - even bestselling novelists - never create such an unforgettable line of dialogue. But striving to create one is a worthy effort. Ironically, it should fit so seamlessly it doesn’t draw attention to itself until fans begin quoting it. How to Use Dialogue Tags to Identify Speakers Dialogue attribution tags- he said, she said, etc.- indicate who is speaking. Resist the urge to get creative here. Said is almost always your best choice. Teachers who urge you to find alternatives are usually unpublished and believe agents and editors will be impressed. Trust me, they won’t be. Avoid mannerisms of attribution. People say things. They don’t wheeze, gasp, sigh, laugh, grunt or snort them. They might do any of those things while saying them, which might be worth mentioning, but the emphasis should be on what is said, and readers just need to know who is saying it. Keep it simple. All those other descriptors turn the spotlight on an intrusive writer. Sometimes people whisper or shout or mumble, but let their choice of words indicate they’re grumbling, etc. If it’s important that they sigh or laugh, separate that action from the dialogue. Jim sighed. â€Å"I can’t take this anymore.† Not: Jim sighed, â€Å"I can’t take this anymore.† Though you read them in school readers and classic fiction, attribution tags such as use of reply, retort, exclaim, and declare have become clicheÃŒ d and archaic. You’ll still see them occasionally, but I suggest not using them. Often no attribution is needed. Use dialogue tags only when the reader wouldn’t otherwise know who’s speaking. I once wrote an entire novel, The Last Operative, without attributing a single line of dialogue. Not a said, an asked, anything. I made clear through action who was speaking, and not one reader, even my editor, noticed. A common error is characters addressing each other by name too often. Real people rarely do this, and it often seems planted only to avoid a dialogue tag. Fictional dialogue should sound real. Don’t start your dialogue attribution tag with said. Rather, end with said. said Joe or said Mary, reads like a children’s book. Substitute he and she for the names and that will make it obvious. said he or said she just doesn’t sound right. Use said after the name for the best sound. Joe said or Mary said. Resist the urge to explain, and give the reader credit. The amateur writer often writes something like this: â€Å"I’m beat,† exclaimed John tiredly. Besides telling and not showing - violating a cardinal rule of writing - it uses the archaic exclaimed for said, misplaces that before the name rather than after, and adds the redundant tiredly. The pro would write: John dropped onto the couch. â€Å"I’m beat.† That shows rather than tells, and because John’s action has been described, we don’t need an attribution tag to know he’s speaking. How to Punctuate Dialogue Few things expose a beginner like incorrect punctuation, especially in dialogue. Agents and editors justifiably wonder if you read dialogue, let alone whether you can write it, if you write something like: â€Å"I don’t know.† she said. Or, â€Å"What do you think?† He said. To avoid common mistakes: Start a new paragraph for each speaker When one character’s dialogue extends to more than one paragraph, start each subsequent paragraph with a double quotation mark, and place your closing double quotation mark only at the end of the final paragraph. Place punctuation inside the quotation marks, the dialogue tag outside: â€Å"John was just here asking about you,† Jim said. The attribution tag goes after the first clause of a compound sentence: â€Å"Not tonight,† he said, â€Å"not in this weather.† When dialogue ends with a question or exclamation mark, the dialogue tag following the quotation marks should be lowercase:   Ã¢â‚¬Å"I’m glad you’re here!† she said. Action before dialogue takes a separate sentence: Anna shook her head. â€Å"I can’t believe she’s gone!† Quoting within a quote requires single quotation marks: â€Å"Lucy, Mom specifically said, ‘Do not cut your bangs,’ and you did it anyway!† When action or attribution interrupts dialogue, use lowercase as dialogue resumes: â€Å"That,† she said, â€Å"hurt bad.† Dialogue Examples If you’re old enough to remember the original Twilight Zone (hosted by Rod Serling) or Dragnet (starring and narrated by Jack Webb), you know how dialogue set the tone for their shows. Serling was sometimes whimsical, sometimes mysterious, but always provocative. â€Å"Consider one middle-aged adult, lost in space and time†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Jack Webb, as L.A. police detective Sergeant Joe Friday, was always deadly serious and monotone. â€Å"Just the facts, ma’am.† Contrast those with the dialogue between Tom and his Aunt Polly in Tom Sawyer. If you’re anything like me, you were laughing from page 1. There! I mighta thought of that closet. What you been doing in there? Nothing. Nothing! Look at your hands. And look at your mouth. What IS that truck? I dont know, aunt. Well, I know. Its jam- thats what it is. Forty times Ive said if you didnt let that jam alone Id skin you. Hand me that switch. The switch hovered in the air- the peril was desperate- My! Look behind you, aunt! The old lady whirled round and snatched her skirts out of danger. The lad fled on the instant, scrambled up the highboard fence, and disappeared over it. Great dialogue can set the tone for your entire story and also differentiate characters, as we discussed earlier. In Huckleberry Finn,  Mark Twain delineates between Huck the Southern white boy and Jim the runaway slave by just hinting at their respective accents. Twain doesn’t use tags to tell who’s speaking, yet the reader never confuses the two. Huck says, â€Å"Jim, did y’all ever see a king?† Y’all is the only word in that sentence that implies a Southern accent, but it’s enough. Jim says, â€Å"I sho enough did.† Huck says, â€Å"You liar, Jim. You never seen no king.† Jim says, â€Å"I seen foh kings in a deck of cards.† Huck’s bad grammar and Jim’s sho and foh are the only hints of their dialects. Contrived phonetic spelling would slow the reading, but look what Twain accomplished with simple choices. The Cardinal Sin of Dialogue The last thing you want is to produce on-the-nose dialogue. Apply to your own work those principles and the tools I’ve outlined here, and I believe you’ll immediately see a huge difference. So will your reader. In the Comments, ask me any questions regarding how to write dialogue. Need help writing your novel?  Click here to download my ultimate 12-step guide.

The Abyss of Love Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

The Abyss of Love - Essay Example But there was just one problem, the younger sister of Princess Kali, Princess Viviana also loved the prince and wished to marry him in order to become queen of the united kingdoms. Though Viviana was a thousand times more beautiful than her older sister, she was gifted with a black heart. Her jealousy caused her to do many evil things to Kali that could have killed her if Kali were not only highly intelligent and able to get herself out of the predicaments that Viviana conjured through the use of Black Magic. Viviana knew that the prince was arriving in two days and the wedding was to take place on his fifth day in the kingdom. So devised her most devious plan yet in order to win the heart of the prince. Using her black powers, she created an army of black soldiers to do her bidding. They ambushed the prince in the Rosewood Forest as he was making his way to their kingdom. His soldiers were outnumbered and easily overcome by the devil army of Viviana. They took him prisoner and placed him deep inside the The Abyss of Love where an imprisoned person would easily fall for the charms of the dark arts, turning the persons heart black and allowing the masters of black magic to steal the loving hearts for their own. Disguising herself as her sister, Viviana came to the prince and asked him to drink a magic potion. One that would make him see Kali each time he saw Viviana while he would see his despised Viviana each time he saw Kali. After making sure that the potion had worked. She allowed the prince to continue on his trek, his memory of the ambush erased forever. He arrived at the palace all aglow with love. But instead of calling out for Kali, Prince Gabriel called out for Viviana, causing much embarrassment for Kali who was waiting for him with open arms at the top of the palace steps. Viviana brushed her sister aside and allowed the prince