The Quiet American by Graham Greene Essay Example for Free

The Quiet American by Graham Greene Essay The Quiet American, is more than a political statement about whether or not America or any other country for that matter should become involved in the affairs of another country; Greene makes the question human and personal. The novel can be read as a political and moral reflection on the opening stages of the United States’ involvement in Southeast Asia. Therefore, Greene’s novel becomes a commentary on the pointlessness of the United States’ later investment of men and material in a political action that could only end, as it did for the French, in defeat. The Quiet American is considered one of Graham Greene’s major achievements. The story is told with excellent characterization and sophisticated irony. The plot bears a resemblance to that of a mystery story. A crime has been committed. Who is the murderer? As in most mystery stories, as much needs to be learned about the victim as about the villain. Yet what is learned takes on political, moral, and religious significance. The story ends in mystery as well. Who exactly killed Pyle is not revealed, but the burden of the crime, like the burden of telling the story, is Fowler’s. The large-scale political thesis of the novel is that American interference in the internal affairs of another country can only result in suffering, death, and defeat, and is not morally justifiable because of abstract idealism. This is not the only meaning of consequence in the novel, and given the course of later events, its importance may be blown out of proportion. The lesson, however, is clearly explained by a French aviator with â€Å"orders to shoot anything in sight. Captain Trouin confides to Fowler that he detests napalm bombing: â€Å"We all get involved in a moment of emotion, and then we cannot get out,† he explains. Trouin understands that the French cannot win the war in Indochina: â€Å"But we are professionals; we have to go on fighting till the politicians tell us to stop,† he says with bitter resignation. â€Å"Probably they will get together and agree to the same peace that we could have had at the beginning, making nonsense of all these years. Greene’s political objective is clearly to make a mockery the notion of a â€Å"Third Force† in Asian politics, countering the threat of Communism and replacing the rationale of colonialism as an explanation for Western involvement. Because of Greene’s apparent anti-American bias, the novel was not popular in the United States. It is no wonder then that Greene’s warning about Vietnam was not taken seriously, even though later events tended to validate the wisdom f his political analysis. Thus Graham Greene summarizes the lesson of Vietnam fully ten years before the American government expanded its military commitm ent to fill the vacuum left by the defeated French. The Quiet American is a shocking novel of political prophecy. Its mystery story characteristics perhaps better define its interest to the average reader, as Greene’s unreliable narrator gradually provides the details leading up to Pyle’s death. The dramatic focus concerns the conflict between Fowler and Pyle over love and the politics of war, the contest between Fowler and Vigot, who knows that Fowler was responsible for Pyle’s death but cannot prove it, and, finally, Fowler’s internal conflict, his beliefs of noninvolvement transformed by circumstances and emotion to a position of murderous intervention. â€Å"Sooner or later,† the Communist Heng tells Fowler, â€Å"one has to take sides if one is to remain human. Perhaps Fowler finally â€Å"takes sides† because he understands how dangerous Pyle’s blind idealism can be, but his motives are not entirely clear because of his dependence on Phuong. Fowler does not idolize her, as does the more romantic Pyle, who sincerely cares for Phuong but is absolutely unfeeling about the rest of the native population. Pyle believes in the political theory of York Harding (a name that links a less-than-stunning American president with a patriotic war he ro) and the need for a â€Å"Third Force† (American intervention) in Vietnam. Yet Pyle’s naiveness is not entirely consistent with his intelligence, his training, and his Harvard degree. He is hopelessly innocent. In one of his strongest metaphors, Greene likens innocence to â€Å"a dumb leper who has lost his bell, wandering the world, meaning no harm,† but obviously bearing contamination and corruption with him. Fowler is a fascinating character and narrator because he simultaneously reveals and conceals so much about himself and his involvement in the story. On the one hand, he is openly contemptuous of Pyle. Like other Americans, Pyle is so obsessed with his mission to save the world that he does not register the reality around him. It is ridiculous for him to think that Phuong is an innocent he must rescue. She has stayed with Fowler because he offers her security. She leaves Fowler for Pyle because he offers her even more wealth and protection. Pyle is shocked because Fowler says he is merely using Phuong for his own pleasure and because of his need to have a woman beside him to stave off loneliness. It never occurs to Pyle that Phuong has acted just as selfishly or that Pyle imself is using people. On the other hand, Fowler is not entirely honest with himself. He claims to be disengaged, not only from politics but also from the sentiments of love Pyle professes. Yet Fowler’s passionate rejection of Pyle’s worldview and his defense of the Vietnamese, who he believes should be allowed to work out their own destiny, free of the French, the Americans, and any other intruding power, surely reveal anything but dishonesty. In this respect, Pyle is right to see good in a man who claims to be without sense of right and wrong. In fact, Pyle loses his life because of Fowler’s moral outrage. Fowler is so appalled by the bombing atrocity at the cafe that he determines to put a stop to Pyle’s activities. Fowler’s passion is hardly consistent with his habit of staying reserved. Actually, he cares deeply about Phuong and about the Vietnamese. He believes in self-determination, which ironically is the ideology that Americans claim to support. Americans think they are supporting freedom by allying themselves with the anticommunists. Thus, there are multiple ironies in The Quiet American. Fowler says he is a pessimist, but he acts like a wounded idealist. Pyle says he is an idealist, but his involvement with anticommunist thugs places him in disparaging and brutal situations. Phuong looks like a delicate, easily manipulated, and passive victim, and yet like many other Vietnamese she is a survivor who plays one side against the other and changes according to the current political issues. Fowler declares to Vigot that he is not guilty, then retells the story of his involvement with Fowler to clear his name, yet concludes by realizing that he is guilty. The novel’s title is also ironic. In one sense, Pyle is quiet—even unassuming. He patiently questions Fowler about his tie to Phuong and even declares his love for her to Fowler before he marries her. Pyle is the opposite of loud, vulgar Americans such as his boss Joe, or the noisy American journalist Granger. In another sense, however, Pyle is anything but quiet. He stirs up Saigon with explosions and he turns Fowler’s life into turmoil. An even greater irony is that for all their differences, Fowler and Pyle are alike in their moral earnestness. Fowler is the sophisticated European who has learned not to wear his heart on his sleeve. He denies any form of selfless behavior. Pyle is the naive American who is openhearted and believes he acts for the good of others. Yet both men cause great damage because they care about others. They are caught up in the evil that Fowler thinks he can avoid and that Pyle thinks he can remove. The political and moral divide between Fowler and Pyle is not as great as Fowler has supposed. His narrative ironically binds him to Pyle—a fate Fowler has consistently tried to avoid. The novel dramatizes Fowler’s fate in the scene where he refuses to call Pyle by his first name. He also refuses to let Pyle call him Tom and insists on being called Thomas. No formalities can really separate the two men however. Fowler’s own narrative shows them to strongly connected. The Quiet American is concerned with the effect the superpowers have when they intervene in the politics of the developing nations, in this case, Vietnam during the last days of French colonial rule. Greene himself is in an interesting position in that England, once a major colonial power, has increasingly surrendered that position to the United States since World War II. This weakened position makes Greene, like Fowler, something of an observer of the more active Americans. Fowler observes the covert actions of Pyle and finds them wrong. He thinks Americans are politically naive, dangerously idealistic, and too willing to hurt other people if they get in the way of their political goals. Greene has been accused of being anti-American but the novel and Fowlers judgment of Pyle were obviously very relevant. The novel was especially popular during the war in Vietnam, when many Americans came to share Fowlers opinions. Although the war and the controversies surrounding it still plague the memories of many Americans, the war and the novel itself are not quite so topical as they were in the 1960s and early 1970s. Still it might be worth stressing that the novel was written well before America became deeply involved in Vietnam. In fact, America is now involved as a â€Å"Third Force† in Iraq, where the political concerns of the novel are still quite applicable.

Aborting a Child isnt the Right Choice :: essays research papers

Abortion to the Webster dictionary is the term used to describe the premature expulsion of the fetus from the womb, or the operation to cause this. It is when a pregnant woman intentionally gets rid of her child before it is fully developed.Why do people do it? Is it killing a human life? What are the benefits for having an abortion? Should it be made illegal? I tell you my side how I feel about it. Abortion is the killing of a child before the birth. They usually take a needle and put it into the mothers womb, and kill it.It comes out of the womb half way, then they kill it. To me that is just sick. I think that it is in humane to kill a live child.Just think, it is alive. It needs oxygen to breath. It needs food to live. And if you don't take care of the baby, it wouldn't come out. Abortion should be illegal.There are certain exceptions where it may be acceptable to perform abortions.For example,if a woman’s life is threatened by her giving birth,then an abortion should be performed to save her life.Another example is if a woman is raped and she becomes pregnant as a consequence of that rape,then it is understandable that she would not want to give birth and care for that child,because it will always bring back memories of the horrible incident.Other than those two exceptions, I don’t see how anybody can do abortion.I think women who want to have abortion s imply don’t understand the circumstances or haven’t been told what it does.When they find out what abortion really does and what it’s all about, I think that they will be few who would want to do it.Just think you come home from work one day, and all of the sudden your kid gives you a great big hug. That shows love. And after a long days work, wouldn't anybody want some love from a child. Offcourse when they are little they scream, and kick, but they also give love, and affection, and can be the cutest thing. And if you abort a it, you won’t get those affections,you won’t even get the chance to see she or he. I think people also just want to make apology for what they have done.

Chris Evans launching of “The Terry and Gaby Show” on Five in 2003

Chris Evans launched â€Å"The Terry and Gaby Show† on Five in 2003, in an attempt to compete with ITV's â€Å"This Morning†. In less than a year it had been axed. Looking in detail at an episode from each show, identify the codes and conventions of the daytime TV genre, and suggest why â€Å"The Terry and Gaby Show† failed to dent the popularity of â€Å"This Morning†. After looking at each of the episodes I found that the presenters in each one were quite the same. In both of the shows they have a man and a woman presenter and in both of the shows they seem very chatty and friendly. I think that in TAGS the presenters (Terry and Gaby) are better known and also have been in lots of different shows working together in the past. I think this shows that they should be able to work together very well and this should help the show, but as they know each other well it could make them more relaxed and so this could spoil it slightly as they talk to each other rather than the audience. In both of the shows the presenters are smiley and happy which is good because this should help people be more relaxed watching the show. It also makes it more personal to the people watching. For TAGS I think the presenters are more well known and more famous they are well known for some of the shows they have been in and this could make people more likely to watch it. In TM the presenters talk to the audience more rather than talking to each other, which will definitely help the show but the presenters of TM (Fern and Philip) are not as well known and not as famous so people might rather see TAGS. I think that the presenters have nothing to do with TAGS being axed. I feel that the conventions for daytime TV presenters are that they have to be chatty, happy and friendly. Terry and Gaby are well known for being in lots of shows but most of the shows they are in are similar. In all of the shows they are in they are smiley happy and chatty which is the same in TAGS. This is probably why they were chosen for the show in the first place. You haven't really differentiated the presenters in terms of their brand image†¦ they are not identical! PH There are lots of different types of items featured on daytime TV the conventions for daytime TV are Celebrity news and interviews, real life stories, Gossip/News and competitions. In TAGS they had all of this stuff but their celebrities were not as famous as in TM. I think this is mainly because TM had been Going for much longer and so was more known in the celeb world this means more famous celebrities are more likely to agree to be on TM because it was more well known. In the episode of TAGS we watched the celeb they interviewed was mostly just on the show so he could advertise another show which was coming on channel5. In the episode of TM we watched they had a different variety of celeb's interviewed which could be another reason it was more popular than TAGS. In TAGS the competition prize was just a DVD player and the competition was very easy to answer they probably did this so that more people would ring with the answer witch would give them more money and as it was easy it would attract more viewers. This obviously didn't work which is probably because the prize was not as good either. In TM the competition was harder to get but the prize was a holiday, which is much better than TAGS and could have helped them get more viewers. I think that the competitions didn't have much to do with TAGS getting axed. For both of the shows They had someone on who spoke about celeb news and gossip and a bit of normal news. I think that in TM it was much more informative and detailed and in TAGS it was much more comedy rather than real news and information. I think they mainly did this because they were trying to target a younger audience by making it more up beat and new. They tried to do this by putting in things to encourage young student viewers as well as the older generation. TM is more targeted at an older generation because they have things In to appeal to older people. I think that TAGS made a mistake by doing this because it is more likely that people who are older are going to be watching a daytime TV show so this could have been one of the main reasons TAGS got axed. The conventions for the title sequence for a daytime TV show are loud cheery music, colourful and light settings and just some thing happy and jolly. The title sequences for both of the shows are very different; in TAGS it shows Terry and Gaby on their way to work and shows the way they are travelling. It shows that Terry is on a bike and is cycling to work and Gaby is being driven to work in a posh car she goes in the back of the television centre and Terry goes through the back. In TM it has different coloured squares running along the screen some of these have different clips from the show, some have different relaxing objects in them and some just have colour. Both of these are very colourful and bright and both have very happy cheery music in but they both are very different. For TM I think that it has a better title sequence because firstly it has better more catchy music that everybody likes but in TAGS the music is cheery but a bit boring and only some audiences would have liked it. I think that this could have been one of the reasons that TAGS got axed because people might have seen the title sequence and then thought that the show was not for them. I think that the set in TM is much more calm and relaxing which is good because in daytime TV it should be relaxing so they can relax from whatever job they are doing and sit down and not have to watch anything to bright and confusing. For TAGS the set is very bright and up beat and much more colourful. I think it is the convention of daytime TV to have a very bright set and to have it set up like someone's living room with a sofa to make it look more homely. I think that the set for TM is much more relaxing and homely and that in Tags it is a bit too bright and colourful. This could have defiantly put people of watching the show. In TAGS They have a studio audience unlike TM who haven't. I think that TAGS having an audience is good because it includes the viewer more because there are normal everyday people on the TV too but it is also good for TM not to have an audience because it means their wont be any background noises or laughs at the wrong time which could annoy people. Rather vague, little use of media terminology (Mise-en-scene etc). PH By Sam Iles Sam, you have not properly addressed the points I raised from your first draft. Detailed examples are lacking (no mention of specific guests), nor do you make much reference to media concepts or theory (celebrity brands, mise-en-scene). You do identify some of the codes and conventions of the genre and engage in some limited analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each text.

The Good Doctor

The Good Doctor is a full-length play that exposes the ridiculous, tender, outlandish, ludicrous, innocent, and weird frailties of human beings. Each scene tells its own story, but the behavior of the characters and the resolutions of their stories are not typical or predictable. In this play, Neil Simon dramatizes short stories written by Russian author and playwright Anton Chekhov. Simon even gives Chekhov a role without specifically naming him; it is commonly accepted that the character of The Writer in the play is a quirky version of Chekov himself. Format The Good Doctor is not a play with a unified plot and sub-plot. Instead, it is a series of scenes that, when experienced one after another, give you a strong sense of Chekhov’s take on the human condition embellished by Simon’s wit and pithy dialogue. The Writer is the one unifying element in the scenes, introducing them, commenting on them, and occasionally playing a role in them. Other than that, each scene can (and often does) stand alone as its own story with its own characters. Cast Size When this play done in its entirety—11  scenes—appeared on Broadway, five actors played all 28 roles. Nine roles are female and 19 are male roles, but in a few scenes, a female could play a character designated in the script as male. The scene breakdown below will give you a sense of all the roles in all the scenes. Many productions eliminate a scene or two because the action in one scene is unrelated to the action in another. Ensemble There are no ensemble moments in this play—no â€Å"crowd† scenes. Each scene is character-driven by the small number of characters (2 – 5) in each. Set The set needs for this play are simple, even though the action occurs in a variety of locales: seats in a theatre, a bedroom, a hearing room, a study, a dentist’s office, a park bench, a public garden, a pier, an audition space, and a bank office. Furniture can easily be added, struck, or rearranged; some big pieces—like a desk—can be used in several different scenes. Costumes While the character names and some of the language seem to insist that the action occurs in 19th century Russia, the themes and conflicts in these scenes are timeless and could work in a variety of locales and eras. Music This play is billed as â€Å"A Comedy with Music,† but except for the scene called â€Å"Too Late for Happiness† in which lyrics that the characters sing are printed in the text of the script, music is not imperative to the performance. In one script—copyright 1974—the publishers offer a â€Å"tape recording of the special music for this play.† Directors can check to see whether such a tape or CD or electronic file of music is still offered, but the scenes can stand on their own without the specific music. Content Issues The scene called â€Å"The Seduction† scenes deal with the possibility of infidelity in marriage, although the infidelity is unrealized. In â€Å"The Arrangement,† a father purchases the services of a woman for his son’s first sexual experience, but that too goes unrealized. There is no profanity in this script. The Scenes and Roles Act I â€Å"The Writer† The play’s narrator, the Chekhov character, welcomes the interruption of an audience for his stories in a two-page monologue. 1 male â€Å"The Sneeze† A man in a theatre audience lets loose a monstrous sneeze that sprays the neck and head of the man seated in front of him—a man who just happens to be his superior at work. It’s not the sneeze, but the man’s reparations that cause his eventual demise. 3 males,  2 females â€Å"The Governess† An officious employer unfairly subtracts and subtracts money from her meek governess’s wages. 2 females â€Å"Surgery† An eager inexperienced medical student wrestles with a man to yank his painful tooth out. 2 males â€Å"Too Late for Happiness† An older man and woman engage in small talk on a park bench, but their song reveals their inner thoughts and wishes. 1 male,  1 female â€Å"The Seduction† A bachelor shares his foolproof method of seducing other men’s wives with no direct contact until she is on her way into his arms. 2 males,  1 female Act II â€Å"The Drowned Man† A man finds himself agreeing to pay a sailor for the entertainment of watching the sailor jump in the water to drown himself. 3 males â€Å"The Audition† A young inexperienced actress annoys and then enchants the Voice in the darkness of the theatre when she auditions. 1 male,  1 female â€Å"A Defenseless Creature† A woman dumps her considerable woes on a bank manager with such vehemence and histrionics that he gives her money just to get rid of her. (To view a video of this scene, click here.) 2 males,  1 female â€Å"The Arrangement† A father negotiates a price with a woman to give his son his first sexual experience as a 19th birthday gift. Then he has second thoughts. 2 males,  1 female â€Å"The Writer† The play’s narrator thanks the audience for visiting and listening to his stories. 1 male â€Å"A Quiet War† (This scene was added following the first printing and production of the play.) Two retired military officers hold their weekly park bench meeting to continue discussing their disagreements. This week’s topic of conflict is the perfect lunch. 2 males YouTube offers  videos of a stage production of scenes from the play.