What is the greatest villain character in literature?
A2A.There’s plenty of good candidates, but mine would be Iago from Shakespeare’s Othello. He is a perfect example of a villain: that of the charming persona but is really underneath, a deceitful liar. He manipulates the people around him, especially Othello, in order to get revenge. He’s also a very complex character as well.He’s the source of doubts that drives Othello to do bad things and also engineers the death of others, including one of his accomplices. He thrives on cunning, Machiavellian and psychological manipulation which drives the plot of the play.Iago follows the template for a worthy antagonist that can be seen in other mediums like Moriarty, The Joker, Hannibal Lecter, Norman Bates, Johan Liebert from Monster, etc.The 10 greatest villains in literature
Why is Les Miserables considered to be great?
For a start, the book was hugely anticipated. Victor Hugo enjoyed a reputation as one of France's foremost poets in the middle of the nineteenth century. In fact even the New York Times announced its forthcoming publication as early as April 1860. A massive advertising campaign preceded the release of the first two volumes of Les Misérables in Brussels and in Paris in 1862.In terms of the book itself, there are few more complete, or more vivid, pictures of France at the beginning of the nineteenth century. Les Miserables is both a thrilling narrative and a social document embracing a wider field than any other novel of its time. The plot had more twists and turns than an Agatha Christie novel, the characters are far more rounded than the two-dimensional figurines one encounters in Dickens' writing. Hugo revels in language. Ideas are stated and restated. Places are exhaustively described. Characters do not speak; they harangue, lament, eulogize. Les Misérables is far more profound than Hugo's other books, for in it he came to grips with the social problems of his own day, which demanded much reflection upon the nature of society and, therefore, upon the nature of man. In 1830, the average life expectancy of a French worker's child was two years. Hugo, unlike many of his contemporaries, did not consider this statistic as "inevitable" or "the fault of the parents," but evaluated it in human terms and cried out that suffering of such magnitude was intolerable and that such conditions must be changed through social action. What social action he considered desirable he shows us indirectly by portraying children who need to be fed, men who need jobs, and women who need protection.Hugo managed to convince the general public that the poor — the misérables — are worth saving: that even the most impudent, scruffy street gamin has something to contribute to society, that even the most hardened convict is capable of great good. And the most appealing and enduring quality of Les Misérables is the fact that it is permeated by this unquenchable belief in the spiritual possibilities of man.
When you're reading a novel, do you hope for detailed physical descriptions of the characters?
Detailed physical descriptions are often used by people who are hesitant about a character. What’s necessary is the characteristics of someone. A scar on the left cheek; bulging muscles beneath a shirt; the golden-rimmed spectacles he wears; those are characteristics - the things you notice when you first meet someone.Everything else is extra and will generally be suited to fit in when you’re in another scene.Absentmindedly she put the strands of her golden hair behind her ear while she was typing away at her essay.Such a passage, revealing her hair color, can easily be used a few chapters later. It’s not mandatory to the story; many people won’t be able to tell what hair color someone has until they have met that person a second or third time, but they do remember that he has a huge scar on his left cheek. That trait, or detail, is what gives an impression of a character.In that sense, I don’t hope for detailed physical descriptions, but would rather see such descriptions trickle in throughout the book, giving me little bits of information to slowly get a feeling of a character. I dislike it when someone starts off with a detailed description of a character, which usually breaks the pace of the story and often it’s not even necessary for me as a reader to know all those little details. Too many details would also be counter to my own imagination, since one would spell out how a character looks like, rather than letting me imagine that person who I only know as a bespectacled, smug-looking guy with a scar on his cheek. I don’t need to know his eyes are normal, or that his mouth is only slightly wider than a normal person as that does nothing to distinguish him from other characters. Let me imagine the character by giving me the characteristics, the features that stand out or are noticeable.On the other hand, in terms of romance, or even better, erotica, I can imagine that one would prefer a detailed description of a person, but I’m not familiar enough with those to get into that.
What is/was your favorite class in high school and why?
Probably English. I love to read (always have) and prefer writing essays and papers to more standardized tests so English classes were always good in my book. It also helped that I had the same amazing teacher throughout most of my high school career for that subject.I think the year that had the most impact was my sophomore year. We read Chaucer’s “The Canterbury Tales” and our teacher had us plan our own pilgrimage to a location in our region that was roughly the same distance traveled in the stories. We made up our own characters and wrote our own verses. It was so creative and fun and really helped me understand the nature and importance of the text.This same teacher also sparked a discussion in class that completely changed the way I viewed a book we’d been required to read. The first time I read “Wuthering Heights” I absolutely HATED it. It was a drag and I resented every second I had to spend reading it. The class after we were supposed to have finished reading was basically a round table debate/discussion that I got so involved in - and so riled up about! - that I went home that night and read it again cover to cover. And that time? I loved it. I experienced it differently the second time because of the different questions she posed and the way she pushed us to think differently about the text and what it meant. It not only changed the way I felt about that book, but it really made me start thinking differently and more critically about all of the books I read.My other favorite classes were psychology (senior year) because I find people and the human mind endlessly fascinating and AP French because our teacher had us read “Les Miserables” (among other classics) in French, had us prepare and share French cuisine, and read French papers and magazines to better understand the culture, how the language was used, and how it evolved.
Has anyone read The Strange case of Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde?
The story goes that Robert Louis Stevenson wrote this novel in just two days, whilst sick with a fever. His wife, who was nursing him, read the completed manuscript and deciding it was rubbish - the deranged ramblings of a very ill man - she threw it onto the fire. Not to be deterred, her husband simply rewrote this story - in another two days. We may be glad of Robert Louis Stevenson's perseverance, as this is a truly astounding novel. At the time it was first published, it was a shocking tale, but whilst modern readers will be familiar with the Jekyll and Hyde concept, they may still be captivated by the quality of the writing and the true horror drawn out in the author's words, which have a sinister quality that the countless film and television versions and variations over the years have failed to match. This isn't just a horror story - it's a book about appearance and reality, and about our notions of who we are and how we are viewed by others. That's not to mention that old chestnut of good versus evil - but here, played out in two sides of the same person. Stevenson's fascinating ideas are brilliantly executed in this little masterpiece of a novel.