Significance of Narrative Voice & Perspective in Cormac McCarthy's 'The Road'

The Narrative voice used in ‘The Road’ is mostly from an omniscient perspective, focalised on the character of the man in the style of indirect discourse. It does, however, differentiate occasionally by switching to first person, we primarily see this occur on page 26 when the man says “where we used to have Christmas when I was a boy” – this shows a level of emotional attachment which is usually absent when the narrative voice is wholly omniscient.

Although it is possible to detect when the narrative has changed from completely omniscient, to indirect discourse – it seems that McCarthy never uses ‘direct discourse’ in the writing of ‘The Road’. This could be because direct discourse would require speech marks and a wider range of punctuation overall, McCarthy has decided to write without these normal traits of literature so as to emphasize the sparse nature of the landscape that the characters are in and implement a feeling of loss on to the reader.

It is significant that the narrative perspective is omniscient because it acts as more of a camera this way, only telling us what we can see through the focalised character. This means that there is a lack of emotional input from the narrator which I think, again emphasizes the feeling of loneliness that the two characters must feel.

As well as the use of indirect discourse, McCarthy also employs a free indirect style in the road which is mainly used in the form of analepsis. For example on page 26, the man says “we would sit at the fire” – creating a sense of memory and back story which is essential for making the character seem more realistic and believable.

It could be argued that McCarthy does not use a consistent style of narrative or perspective so as to accentuate the amount of undeniable confusion that a post apocalyptic world such as the one written in The Road would cause, this would then coincide with the way in which McCarthy uses punctuation to create barrenness, hence why the narrative voice and perspective are so significant. 

How are the Concepts of Power and Authority presented in 'My Last Duchess’?

The poem, ‘My Last Duchess’ by Robert Browning is a dramatic monologue told from the perspective of a narcissistic Duke. It is written in iambic pentameter, coupled with enjambment to emulate natural speech. It is also written in heroic couplets which are a sophisticated way of writing, thus imbuing the duke with the ideology of sophistication.

It tells the story of his recently deceased wife who is present in the form of a painting, by “Frá Pandolf’s hands”. The speaker is constantly referring to details about his material possessions throughout the poem that highlight his superiority to the people with whom he converses with so as to emphasize his noble status, thus reinforcing his sense of power and authority.

The Duke goes on to explain how the painting is covered by a curtain “[he] has drawn for [her]”, this insinuates that he possesses her now in death in a way that he could never had possessed her in life, showing a certain degree of obsession over his previous lover, which would be strange in the context of the poem as he is supposed to be impressing a potential new wife’s chaperone. The sense of power in this extract is even more significant because it suggests that only he has the power to display or hide the painting from view, further accentuating the sense of control.

It is quickly made apparent that his attitude is widely centred on being in control of the situation and it is suggested that it was his loss of control over his ex-wife that forced his hand to extinguish her life. This is connected to the evident theme of jealousy as he mentions “she liked whate’er she looked on, and her looks went everywhere”. The Duke felt that his wife was too appreciative of the attention that other men paid her when making simple gestures, such as giving her a “bough of cherries”. The Duke does not openly accuse her of adultery – rather, he condemns her thankful behaviour and labels it as ‘flirtatious’. This shows a certain level of paranoia and possession within the Duke and it continues the theme of jealousy. He claimed, "all and each would draw from her alike the approving speech, or blush, at least", This was unsatisfactory to the Duke as it seemed as if every man elicited the same level of gratitude from his wife that she showed him, thus bringing down his sense of authority due to the fact that he receives no ‘special treatment’. The Duke views this as almost disrespectful, as he has given her the ‘prestigious gift’ of his “nine-hundred-years-old name” which is hyphenated to emulate the effect of fast speech, implying that he is accustomed to repeating this phrase often, emphasizing his arrogant nature.

Although he receives no external reassurance of his superiority form his last duchess, there is a continuous root of self appreciation that runs throughout the poem. This is most significantly noticeable through his use of boasting over his material possessions and the fact that he says “I choose never to stoop”, when referring to social class – this makes it sound as if he does not want to interact with those of a lower class than himself, as it will make him less of a nobleman or authority figure.

The climax of the poem occurs when the Duke finally, if ambiguously, admits to killing his wife. The fact that he says “I gave commands then all smiles stopped together” shows that the Duke is much more sinister than just the pompous, arrogant person that we thought he was at the beginning of the poem. It shows that he felt that he was too important to kill his wife himself, so he orders other people to do it for him, reinforcing his sense of authority. 

Browning's 'The Laboratory'

How does the poet suggest the presence of the chemist and how does he make the words seem like speech?

The poet suggests the presence of the chemist as the woman asks the person to “pliest thy trade in this devil’s-smithy” and because the woman is enquiring about poisons, we can assume that the “devil’s-smithy” is an alchemy laboratory; therefore we can also presuppose that the person who is using their trade is the chemist. The poet makes it seem like speech because the speaker asks the question “which is the poison to poison her, prithee?”

What more evidence is there for this throughout the rest of the poem?

“Grind away, moisten and mash up thy paste, pound at thy powder”

“You call it a gum?”

“Is that poison too?”

“Quick – is it finished?”

“Is it done? Take my mask off!”

“Now take all my jewels, gorge gold to your fill, you may kiss me, old man, on my mouth if you will!”

How does the poet set the scene in the first three lines?

“Now that I, tying thy glass mask tightly” – this shows that wherever the speaker may be, there is a sense of danger about it due to the fact that she has to protect her face in order to be there.

“May gaze thro’ these faint smokes curling whitely” – this sets the scene through the imagery of the fumes emitted from the various concoctions that the speaker can see in the laboratory.

“As thou pliest thy trade in this devil’s-smithy” – insinuates that the lab is used to create evil substances, sets the mood.

How does line 4 come as a surprise? How does the poet underline the directness of the question, and the woman’s intention?

Line 4, “which is the poison to poison her, prithee?” comes as a surprise as it is a very blunt question and we as a reader are almost caught off-guard due to the fact that there is no air of subtlety surrounding the statement. The poet makes the question direct through alliteration which makes the words seem more prominent which in turn helps the woman’s intentions become very clear – she wants someone dead, and she’s excited to be a part of it.

 

Who are the ‘he’ and ‘her’ of line 5? Is it important we are never completely sure of their relationship with the speaker?

We can estimate that ‘he’ is perhaps her partner or someone the speaker feels amorous towards and ‘her’ is  either the person ‘he’ cheated on the speaker with or ‘his’ actual partner that the speaker feels jealous towards. I don’t think it is important that we actually find out who these characters are as it adds to the sense of mystery that the overall poem has.

How many repetitions are there in verse II?

What does the speaker think the other two people think about her? Where does she think that they think she is? Where is she and why does she express it so emphatically?

·         The speaker believes that the two other people are ridiculing her because she knows about their relationship

·         They think she is at the church which is almost the antithesis of this “devil’s-smithy”

·         She says “I am here” so emphatically because she has the other woman’s death to motivate her being at the laboratory and the fact that neither of the other two people would expect her to be there might make the speaker feel more empowered.

Verse 3

Which are the words that identify what the chemist is doing? Is the speaker commanding or describing?

“Grind”, “mash”, “pound” – I think the speaker is describing what she is seeing because she knows the chemist will know what he is doing more than she will and she also says “I am not in haste” which implies that she is overseeing the creation rather than being a part of it.

What effect do the stressed words have on the woman’s voice?

The stressed beats fall upon the verbs which are almost of a violent nature; this suggests that the woman’s voice has violent undertones.

(Lines 15-16) What are the adjectives/adverbs? How do they contrast with ‘poison’? What does this tell you about the woman’s mind?

“soft”, “exquisite”, “sweetly” contrast with the word “poison” because the adjectives/adverb are all very positive whereas poison is generally seen as a very negative thing due to the fact that it’s primary use is to cause harm, this could suggest that the woman is slightly deranged as she takes pleasure in the thought of harming others.

What does the word ‘pleasures’ reveal about the woman’s nature? How does the poet convey her excitement?

The fact that the speaker uses the word ‘pleasures’ when talking about causing someone else pain, shows that she has a very twisted nature, the poet conveys her excitement by making the speaker go on to talk about how great it would be to be able to carry poison on her person everywhere she goes in “an earring, a casket, a signet, a fan mount, a filigree-basket!” showing that she might like to poison more than one person. The list, also shows her growing enthusiasm and the fact that it is concluded with an exclamation mark shows that the prospect of poisoning lots of people is very exciting indeed.

Verse VI

What does the woman imagine herself doing in this verse?

In this verse, the speaker imagines herself killing off two other people that have wronged her in two different methods; she almost revels in the variety of ways that she is able to kill.

‘He’ and ‘her’ are identified as the objects of poisoning – but who are ‘Pauline’ and ‘Elise’?

Pauline and Elise could just be two other women who have wronged the speaker at some point, perhaps even one of them is the aforementioned ‘her’. The fact that the speaker is so willing to kill anyone who does her wrong shows that she has a very violent (yet subtle?) temperament.

The speaker lists Elise’s head/breast/arms/hands, why does she do this? What does it reveal about her?

The speaker does this because it’s as if she wants to experience every single part of Elise’s death, as if she is not happy enough knowing that Elise is dead, she wants to acknowledge that every single part of Elise is dead, this shows that the speaker relished in the fine details of her kill, showing almost psychopathic tendencies.

How is the story told in Chapter 2 of the Great Gatsby?

Chapter two of ‘The Great Gatsby’ by F. Scott Fitzgerald is told through the various aspects of narrative, for instance – the aristocratic setting of East Egg is a juxtaposition to the 'valley of ashes', which is created from the superficial lives of the people living in both East and West egg, as well as New York. It is somewhat of a wasteland and the dire condition of this setting is widely overlooked by the people in the Eggs and the city.

 The valley of ashes is home to the only poor characters in the story, and yet the destruction that surrounds them is a by-product of the upper class lifestyle. The ashes, which are a main feature of the wasteland, are described as to some extent as organic - “ashes grow like wheat”. This gives the idea that the ashes are integrated into the lives of the inhabitants of the valley. The setting has no colour except 'grey' which is used to describe the men and the cars (as well as the ashes), this contrasts the whiteness in Tom and Daisy’s house - where previously everything was described as clean and white as if it were pure, everything in the valley of ashes seems dirty and tainted. The only other colour mentioned are the eyes of Dr Eckleburg, “blue and gigantic” but also  “dimmed a little by many paintless days”, which could represent the loss of morality, or perhaps the loss of hope for the valley of ashes if we perceive the eyes to symbolize the gaze of God. Nick states how they are constantly under the 'stare' of Eckleburg, as if the figure is judging the characters, and the fact that Nick notices or at least feels the pressure of the stare shows that he could be feeling guilty.  

In this chapter, we also gain a better understanding of the character of Tom as he ‘shows off’ Myrtle, his mistress, as if his marriage to Daisy is obsolete – even in front of Nick, who is Daisy’s cousin. The fact he shows Myrtle off, almost as a ‘Trophy’ shows his character as arrogant and someone who prides himself on his possession of women, relating to his suggested violence towards Daisy with her “bruised finger” and confirming our suspicions of his violence by breaking Myrtle’s nose at the end of chapter 2.

In this chapter, we are also introduced to the character of Myrtle and her husband, George. We quickly come to realise that Myrtle wants to be better than she is in terms of social status whereas her husband is decidedly working class. The fact that she “[walks] through her husband as if he were a ghost” implies that she feels that her husband is dead to her, as later on she makes it very clear that she finds him unworthy of her. Nick's description of Myrtle states that she “holds her flesh sensuously”; although it is made very clear that she is not particularly ‘pretty’.  His description of her is very judgemental, as he critically describes her as having, “rather wide hips”, compared to Daisy's delicate description.

Furthermore, we may also compare colours and clothes associated with both Daisy and Myrtle, as Daisy is presented as ‘fluttery and girlish’ in her white clothes that give an overall vacuous effect, whereas Myrtle is a lot more diverse. She changes her clothes a lot throughout the chapter and each time she does so, her personality changes with them. Her clothes are not at all similar to the white purity of Daisy’s, more bright and “earthy”, although when she changes into a ‘cream dress’, she becomes a lot more obnoxious and judgemental.

George Wilson is described as “anaemic”, “faintly handsome”, as well as “spiritless” and most definitely “naïve”. Although his house is described as being “bare”, when Tom asks him how he is doing he replies that “he cannot complain”, which shows that Wilson may be acceptant of his bare minimalistic living, although he may not be happy with it - whereas Myrtle has trouble even accepting that she lives in the valley of ashes and so she decorates her apartment lavishly, almost to the extent of it being inappropriate.

The story then moves on to Myrtle shopping, she buys a dog on a whim – because she wants to “get one for the apartment” which again emphasizes how materialistic and perhaps naïve Myrtle’s character might be. When they finish shopping, Myrtle and Tom insist Nick comes back to the apartment with them, even though Nick obviously doesn’t want to. The flat is crowded with extravagant furniture which reflects Myrtle’s own characteristics - compared to Wilson's “bare” home. This highlights Myrtle's desire to become part of the upper classes. It is at this point within the chapter that we are introduced to three more characters; Myrtle’s neighbours, Mr. and Mrs McKee and Catherine, Myrtle’s sister. Each of these characters emits a certain sense of artifice, the McKee’s for their clearly fractured marriage, and Catherine for her over-the-top makeup and her gossipy nature.

"I have been drunk just twice in my life" demonstrates the naivety of Nick as he is trying to re tell the events that occurred, even when he has no real depth of experience in them. This is also an example of his unreliability. Although it was stated quite clearly at the beginning of chapter one that Nick does not reserve judgements on people, his opinionated nature is exposed by his descriptions of the each character as he meets them, describing Mrs McKee as “shrill, languid, handsome and horrible” while he notices that her husband has forgotten to entirely rid his face of shaving cream. Surely a completely neutral person would not pick up on such superficial attributes of people, once again proving Nick’s unreliability and lies.

Near to the end of the evening, Fitzgerald drops a substantial hint at Nick being a homosexual, “… I was standing beside his bed and he was sitting up between the sheets, clad in his underwear”. Nick’s homosexuality has no concrete evidence and it is only hinted; this could be because Fitzgerald did not want to focus on this aspect of Nick or it could be argued that Fitzgerald did think that this was an important aspect of Nick; however he only hinted at it because homoeroticism was still taboo in the 1920’s.

Stress Related Illness and the Immune System

It is widely thought that stress has a negative effect on the general health of anyone suffering both acute and chronic stress - Cohen et al (1993) carried out investigations to into measuring the effects of the immune system against the level of stress his volunteers reported.

Cohen carried out his investigation by undertaking a ‘natural experiment’ or ‘quasi-experiment’.  He took 394 participants and asked them to complete a questionnaire which recorded the number of stressful situations they had encountered during the past year and also recorded how they felt emotionally during these times i.e. feelings of depression and hostility.  Once collated, the scores were entered into a stress index.

Each of the participants were then exposed to the common cold virus – it was found that 82% of the subjects developed cold symptoms – the people that scored highest on the stress index were found to have suffered most from the cold virus – the conclusion of Cohen’s experiment indicates that high levels of stress and negative emotions have a significantly negative effect on the immune system.

It could be argued that the experiment is unethical due to the fact that the participants suffered the effects of the cold virus for the cause of the experiment, although it does have some ecological validity as the test was carried out in an uncontrolled environment and therefore a similar situation would be likely to arise in real life. The experiment does have some limitations, for instance – its reliability may be questioned due to the fact that each individual’s ability to recall stress levels accurately may differ.

There have been numerous medical and psychological studies investigating the effects of stress on the immune system. These show that the immune system is a collection of cells that travel through the blood stream that move between the tissues and organs fighting off infection and antigens such as bacteria, viruses and cancerous cells.  There are two types of lymphocytes, B cells - which release antibodies into the bodily fluids and fight off invading viruses and bacteria, and T cells – if the invader gets inside a cell the T cells lock onto the infected cell, multiply and destroy it.  When we are stressed the body’s natural ability to produce B and T cells becomes reduced and therefore we become less able to fight off infection and consequently more susceptible to contamination.

Phineas Gage

Phineas Gage suffered a traumatic brain injury when an iron rod was driven through his entire skull, causing substantial damage to his frontal lobe. He is referred to as one of the most famous patients of neuroscience due to the unlikely fact that he survived the incident.

Damage to the frontal lobe will affect the awareness of what we are doing in our environment, shown through Gage’s difficulty in estimating the size and amounts of money one month on from the accident – this is still phenomenal due to the amount of damage that the accident caused.

One year on from the disaster, Gage had lost vision in his eye, suggesting that there was also some damage of the occipital lobe as well as the frontal lobe. There is also some evidence to show that the cerebral cortex was damaged due to the fact that people would describe Gage as a hard working, pleasant man prior to the accident, and yet post-accident people would describe him as surly, aggressive and unable to hold down a job – this shows a great change in his personality.

Due to the fact that the frontal lobe, the occipital lobe, the limbic system and the cerebral cortex were all affected, it would be a good estimation that the iron rod mainly damaged the cerebral hemisphere in the forebrain which would account for his personality changes, loss of vision and learning as well as emotional difficulties.

Outline and evaluate at least one type of Biological Therapy

Electro-convulsive Therapy (ECT) is considered to be an extreme therapy to treat clinical depression. It is only used in cases where patients are severely depressed or even suicidal and for whom medication has proven to be ineffective.

It was developed in the 1950s and it is when electrodes are placed on the centre and non-dominant side of the brain before a general anesthesia is given which is followed by a muscle relaxant so as to prevent any external, unnecessary damage such as bone breakages during the seizure. The patient will then be given oxygen to decrease the risk of asphyxiation which may ultimately lead to brain damage or a fatality. A small electric current is then passed through the aforementioned electrodes for approximately 0.5 seconds to induce a seizure which can reportedly last up to one minute. This treatment is given up to three times a week for as long as is needed.

Abrams (1997) concluded that “after 50 years, we are no closer to knowing why it works”, although most researchers agree that it changes the way in which the brain works somehow – depression makes the brain malfunction and so ECT alters neurotransmitter activity which then aids overall recovery and it has proven to be potentially lifesaving.

Although the end effects have been shown to be somewhat positive, the side effects of memory loss, confusion and occasional bone fractures perhaps are not outweighed by the positive effects of the treatment - furthermore, the DOH Report (1999) showed that 30% of all ECT patients are left with permanent fear and anxiety after the treatment. Even if it could be argued that the positive effects of the treatment make it worthwhile, Sackeim (2001) found that 84% of patients relapse within 6 months and Comer (2002) found that 30-40% of patients show no signs of improvement whatsoever, making the therapy appear relatively inane, or at least very unreliable and short term.

The treatment also raises many ethical issues, one being the validity of patient consent – patients of ECT are classified as mentally unstable, so are they truly in a position to be giving consent for this kind of therapy? The patient’s next of kin may also provide consent, however – this also lacks validity because it should really be the actual patient’s fully conscious decision.

The therapy also suffers from an extreme methodological flaw, as we are unable to determine how and why it works; it is seen negatively because it is unknown whether or not the treatment may cause long term or permanent negative damage, aside from what was found in the DOH Report (1999).

Overall, ECT can be viewed as a good thing if no other treatments such as chemotherapy are effective, as it may prevent a patient from committing suicide – however, due to the brutality of the therapy and its lack of reliability, it is clear to see why it is considered to be the complete last option in therapy choices.