Printable View
what does that means? and what does it means "defining moments"?
can someone please explain those two questions to me, and help me by using a character as an example in "the count of monte cristo"?
[mercedes] etc... fate of the character and defining moments???
thanks in advance!
Well the fate of a character would be what eventually happens to them. A defining moment is a moment or situation that causes a character to show who they truly are.
Please help! :)
Help with what?
To what extent do you think the Count was justified in his quest?
I don't know. I love the idea of revenge. I think that he suffered a lot for the ambition of others. In the end, what did he get out of it? He still lost Mercedes. He was never the captain of the Pheron(sp). He gave most of his treasure to Max.
Well, justified... I think for his peace if mind it was necessary at first, although apparently he couldn't forget, not even after his vengeance...
He himself didn't win really... Mercédès had already left and his father was dead. He gets true peace of mind when he forgives Danglars in Italy.
The giving away of his treasure I think aludes to the story of the rich man in the bible... He needs to sell all his riches and give the money to the poor in order to go into the kingdom of heaven. Of course it is in the 19th century way: making another rich.
Morcerf's, Danglars' and Villefort's fortune all went to the poor and Monte Cristo's fortune was 'washed white' by giving it to the 'victims' of society, Valentine and Maximilien Morrel (they would never have been allowed to marry if Villefort hadn't gone mad, besides, there were plans for her to marry Franz d'Epinay until it was revealed that Villeforts father killed Baron d'Epinay (Franz' grandfather I think, who was a royalist) in a duel).
So, justified... I don't know. At first it seemed to be justified, but when this small boy gets sucked into it as well, you start to have doubts about it...
The bad people get what they deserve but nobody has a good feeling about it. Maybe that's the theme of the book, though. 'Attendre et espérer', 'wait and hope', is what we need to do and not take our destiny in our own hands, life will take its course and people will be punished... To a certain extent it's an examination about good and evil... Like so many 19th century books.
Waw, how deep it goes... I didn't mean to be too religiously inspired, so don't kill me for this... :blush: I was just trying to replace myself into the 19th century...
Thank you kiki1982! That really helps.
Well, you're welcome!
Ask more if you want to know more!
okay, i am writing this major essay over Dawn and The Count of Monte Cristo, and i have no clue how to start it! have you read Dawn, by Elie Weisel before? i am suppose to answer and write in what extent are these characters truly justified in behaving as they do? you explained to me already, but how should i start my essay?
I haven't read Dawn, but I've taken a look at it and it would actually really interest me!! :)
But on topic: Elie Wiesel wrote his book Dawn as a kind of autobiographical work about how his future could have been if he had taken another path after his liberation from Buchenwald. (After his liberation of 1945, he vowed not to speak about his experience for 10 years. In 1979, he wrote: ‘So heavy was my anguish that I made a vow: not to speak, not to touch upon the essential for at least ten years. Long enough to see clearly. Long enough to learn to listen to the voices crying inside my own. Long enough to regain possession of my memory. Long enough to unite the language of man with the silence of the dead.’ After those 10 years he wrote his story down in Yiddisch. It was published in 1955 in Buenos Aires. After a meeting with French writer and Nobel Prize winner Mauriac, he was persuaded to write it for a bigger public, and it became Night.)
He made a trilogy of which Dawn is the second book. Going from Dark to Light, like the Jews count the days (according to Genesis 1:5), nightfall being the end of a day and the beginning of the next. In Night, Wiesel describes his experiences in Auschwitz and Buchenwald (both concentration camps). He sees the Nazi time as a darkness where there was no God. The End, as it were of all (man, literature, history etc) and the Beginning of a new age for mankind and Jewish people of course. The world never looked the same after that.
I think the initial situations in both stories are extremely unfair. Elisha is put in the camp because he is a Jew, of course this not a reason to want anybody dead. Edmond was arrested because there were some ‘friends’ that were jealous of him. This not being true he is still put in prison because Villefort fears for his career if it is discovered that his father is trying to help Bonaparte escape Elba. It is understandable that both main characters want to commit revenge. After all they are human. But will they feel better afterwards?
Wiesel began the Yiddish version of Night with: ‘In the beginning was belief, foolish belief, and faith, empty faith, and illusion, the terrible illusion. ... We believed in God, had faith in man, and lived with the illusion that in each one of us is a sacred spark from the fire of the shekinah, that each one carried in his eyes and in his soul the sign of God. This was the source — if not the cause — of all our misfortune.’ (Wiesel, Elie. ... un di velt hot geshvign, Buenos Aires, 1956, cited in Franklin 2006).
He blamed the Jews themselves for what happened to them. Being the chosen people. They didn’t believe that anything could happen to them. They were naïve. They would never be naïve again. This is quite similar to Edmond: Edmond is young, doesn’t know about politics, and the last thing he thinks is that his ‘friends’ would deceive him. Like many he probably had also faith in the justice system. After his time in prison he would never be so naïve again… Both are forced to ask questions about their God and both start to doubt their faith. Both have to learn to hate. But is hate the solution? Is taking your fate into your own hands and killing another person the solution? I don’t think Wiesel sees it like that. I feel that he understands why people want to take revenge but he still believes that that is not the answer. ‘To hate would be to reduce myself’ (Elie Wiesel in an interview). We must see that the Holocaust was part of God’s plan and that we must keep asking questions to God as to why he intended this to happen. Even if he answers in silence, we must accept that He is silent. Killing and bloodshed only creates more sorrow, but the phenomenon of taking revenge is still a stage in the way to true acceptance of God.
Of course, maybe Elisha was more justified in his revenge, as the Holocaust was worse (a genocide) than what Edmond underwent because of his enemies, but is it worth killing more people to actually make up for the injustice that was done to the Jews? I guess it’s a very difficult issue. Edmond was pardoned by God because he pardoned Danglars, but what do the Jews have to do? Pardon the Nazis for killing 6 million people? Should we kill 6 million of them in stead? Is it possible to forgive anyone who has done such monstrocities? What can we do in order to come to terms with this? I think that is the big question you face after reading that book. (if I’m right) I don’t think there is an answer to it as Elie Wiesel admits in his later book Legends: ‘Answers: I say there are none.’
This being said, I think that you first have to tell a little bit about the story of the writer, because that's actually the same as Edmond's time in prison, the reason for the revenge. I think the similarity of both stories lies in the way the character sees God initially. Maybe it is worth to look at the character of Faria in the Count, as he is a believer. Of course I can’t go really deep, because I didn’t read the book, but I put some ideas on paper for you. If some are not right, don’t shoot me, because I got my info on the internet. I hope this reply has helped you.Anyway I would really like to read Night, Dawn and The Accident now, so Thank you for bringing the existence of those books to my attention!
I went to wikipedia,
http://www-int.stsci.edu/~rdouglas/p...suff/suff.html and
www.planetpapers.com/Assets/4476.php
I did just find this pretty good sequel called The Sultan of Monte Cristo on the amazon kindle store. It's a pretty good read actually.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/tag...p_cust_edpp_sa
One could argue that the question itself is far more important than the answer. Especially when it comes to revenge. Wonderful, you've done some great brainstorming.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982