Literary Devices Essay

While attending my course on contend and Literature, and listening to the conversation, I found myself struck by an rational enquire presented by an separate schoolchild. This student aimed, When does enigma manufacture untruth? straightway aft(prenominal) state of state of warfareds I wrote the reaction, A just war is a war that teaches its mistakes without 1 having to last with them. At set shoot I didnt know if I had truly responded to the question. I analyzed two the question and result carefully by the literary devices and found myself satisfied with the resolutions standing. When analyzing the repartee I first had to return to the question.When does paradox become hypocrisy? Referring to this question I had to ask if my response held a paradox. A goodly war is a war that teaches its mistakes without hotshot having to digest with them. Considering that a paradox is a tale that seems self- contradictory, and that a good war is the introduction to th e response, suggested that a good war is a paradox. However, wherefore is it that a good war is a paradox? War shtup crush be defined as a work(p) hostility. Good can also be best defined as creation well be check intod. Considering these definitions and the response, a good war would certainly be a paradoxbecause active hostility is contradictory to cosmos well be collectd.However, most would assume that a good war was the responses paradox, and to assume other(a)wise would be insulting to some atomic number 53s in separateect. So then one has to ask how it is so commonly understood that a good war is a paradox? To conclude this question, one must estimate that most of everyone was raised with the developmental dread of good and bad. Most of everyone also would commonly scoff that war is not good. So why do community hush go, and why do we not diddle from its mistakes without someone having to live with them?From statistics taken in the course of instruction two kB fourteen, seven pct of Americas society is a veterinarian, and in that year on that point were near three hundred eighteen million citizens. That means that oer twenty two million American citizens are veterans of foreign war. So how is it that we can convince over seven percent of our citizens to go risk their livelihood? We hardened that war is handle so how do we replace the ideas of good and bad?To mend answer that question, it is better to replace the work of a soldier with a catamount. In order to ask someone who isnot a painter become a painter, one would spend a penny to go by dint of a series of tasks. First, cut off access to other mediums. Do not totall(a)yow that person to work with anything other then painting. If they want to write a letter home, they paint it.If they want to pee-pee something three dimensional, they paint it. If they want to tell a story, they again, allow paint it. today there is no difference of opinion surrounded by the painter with their paintbrush, and the recruit with their rifle. Second, apply influences to assess the ideals. The same recruited painter now inescapably to be surrounded with slew who piece the same ideals.The painter cannot have the influences of sculptors, brilliant designers, or any other ambassador of other art form. The painter necessitate the overall support of peers with the subject matter. This again, is no different from the soldier and their peers. Third, discourage all other ideals. The facilitator, who is regulating the transition mingled with non-painters to painters, needs to openly degrade the ideals of all other art forms. The facilitator needs to identify sure that the recruits hear their passionate opinions slightly how other art forms are wrong. This will guide the recruits to also office the same ideals.This relationship resembles the relationship surrounded by Drill Instructors and their recruits. Fourthly, revival the title has a baronial history of reno wned individuals. For a painter, there are many distinguished individuals that made a dramatically difference within the realm of art. For some examples, there is Vincent Van Gough, Pablo Picasso, and Leonardo De Vinci. It is up to the facilitator to venerate these individuals in front of the forth-coming painters. This will mete out the recruited painters the expectations they need to become idolized into their mod profession.This willalso make the recruited painters gain to achieve the same honor. For the recruited soldier, they hear around the selfless actions of the Medal of Honor, Prisoners of War, and Purple nucleus recipients. For them, they also strive to achieve that honor. Lastly, rear the potassium alum with a quote that brands them with honor. For instance, EARTH, Semper Fi, or Army of One.This will give the graduate something to display as pride and coalesce them unendingly with the other individuals who also have endured the same training. Now returning tho tocks to the question, when does a paradox become ahypocrisy, the response needed to be evaluated for the literary device of hypocrisy. Is a good war is a war that teaches its mistakes without one having to live with them, a response of hypocrisy. Through the development of good and bad, we have concluded that war is wrong.To suggest differently would put up a state of insanity. craziness is a derangement of the mind or not conforming. Since we have conclude that the pop choice is tosay that war is wrong suggests that people who desire to go to war, miss war, or idolize war are in lucid. So are they insane? If the response,war teaches its mistakes without one having to live with them is true, than yes.However, the statement is hypocrisy and hypocrisy is the pretense of having. So retrogression back to the practice of transitioning from non-painter to painter, the recruit became a painter. Now what if, during the transition, the recruit never got the luck to paint. The entire p rison term the recruit was given(p) black ink to practice the techniques of painting, but never nonplusd oil or acrylic paints. The recruit sat by dint of sessions where they viewed images of others painters and their colorfulpaintings, only to never receive color to paint with.After the transitions period, after the recruit was given the title of painter and hope to finally paint with color. However, the restraint continues and they again were never given oil or acrylic paints. They had practiced the slew for years without actual execution. The outcome is apparent. They will forever long to paint. This is the situation with the soldier. The soldier practices with blank ammunition for years, views images of warfare, practices the techniques of warfare, and never gets to implement their practices in war.The outcome is apparent. They will forever long for warfare. So in regards to the response, from the soldiers perspective, they would protest because war cannot teach its mist akes without one having to live with them. They themselves desire warfare. However, for sanities sake, they would suggest the response to be true in the smart set of other American citizens. This is the pretense of having and concludes the statement to be hypocrisy at least(prenominal) from the soldiers perspective. So does the statement apply to other citizens of America?Again, the responseto the initial question suggests that war is wrong and a sane response is to agree with the statement. This implies that American citizens do not see the statement as hypocrisy. However, how much cash is accumulated over the showing of one Hollywood word-painting more or less warfare? How much money and time is spent reading finished the stories or so warfare?How often do people find excitement when share a conversation with a veteran where they can ask own(prenominal) questions about their experiences? As peaceful people who agree with the statement, American citizens curiously find so mething make about war.It is not my position to lodge the masses of being warmongers. However, to defend the faithfulness of my response, the response is hypocrisy. It cannot teach its mistakes if people live vicariously through the experiences of war. Without war that satisfaction is taken away and the diversion lost, suggesting that the mistakes arent learned theyre idolized. To propose other wise is the pretense of having or also known as hypocrisy. So can war teach its mistakes?Can the statement ever become true? Lets again look at the question, when does paradox become hypocrisy? and differentiate itto the response, a good war is a war that teaches its mistakes without one having to live with them. In order to make the response true we would have to paraphrase the question. This time we will ask, when does paradox become fair play?We have concluded that the response to the initial question is both a paradox and hypocrisy, but we have overlooked one literary device. Per sonification. Personification is the representation of an stimulus generalization in the form of a person. In the response we suggested that a good war is a paradox, and if war teaches its mistakes without one having to live with them is hypocrisy.However, the response also suggests that we have personified war. So in order to make the statement, a good war is a war that teaches its mistakes without one having to live with them true, we have to remove the embodiment and rephrase the response to a good person is a person that teaches their mistakes without one having to live with them.By removing the literary device of personification we have successful removed the other literary devices of paradox and hypocrisy, and gave the response integrity. If a good person were to teach others about their lifes mistakes, maybe others couldlearn from them. It is the afford from the veteran of foreign wars to deport to others the mistakes of warfare.From that point forward, it is up to the re cipient of the gift to learn from the veterans mistakes. War cannot teach its mistakes because war as a whole removes the face-to-face case of warfare. It gives the individual a number kinda of a valued story. However, the individuals personal story, the veteran, includes the emotional toll of warfare. From that personal story, the audience can now puzzle to understand the dysfunction of warfare and that personal story can be place as the gift.