Kurt
Vonnegut was an American writer <span>and he might be trying to say about today's
society and the role of government in achieving equality among people is that
the government will go too far for the people and tried to make them feel same
and good about themselves. He also said that government limit the actions of
people in the society.</span>
I believe that writers are definitely justified in challenging the artistic status quo, because that's what true artists do. But to answer the question of why they do it, there are more answers. Think of Emily Dickinson, for example. She always strongly stood by her own freedoms and decisions to go against the current, and she's one of the most famous of American writers because of it. Aside from the fact she wanted to, going against the norm for writers often gives them more attention than if they wrote what was "expected" at the time. When studying famous American writers, we are often told to study things that they did differently than most, some, mostly the less notable today, only had minor differences, like they made their stories from different tenses, etc. But the most notorious used themes that may have been taboo and writing styles even more diverse. There is always the counter culture and most writers that we study belonged to it, sick of the large amount of similar, traditional stories that lacked element, or simply wanted to stand out.
Another reason could be that writers wanted to spread the written word to all different kinds of things that have yet to be written about, different characters that haven't yet been discovered. And there are the related reasons like how writers didn't even know they were writing for the public, only time tells, like with Ann Frank. She wasn't afraid to put opinions down on paper because it was her own personal journal but it had become a famous piece of literature because of the opinions.
I think writers break from tradition because the traditions are often not realistic and these artists are the only ones who will tell the truth, and that is why they do it, and that is why they are so important.
Answer:
They more than likely wanted the play to last longer, and/or wanted a more dramatic effect. They add more drama but beside that not much. I think it personally had more impact as it drove the narrative and you felt more from the scenes
Explanation:
At 17 years old, she convinced Sir Robert de Baudricourt, commander of a royal garrison, to let her go see Charles VII. While traveling to court, she began to dress like a man. The prince was skeptical of Joan but desperate for a way to end the war, so he arranged for her to accompany his armed forces.
so sorry if it is wrong but good luck
We can actually infer here that the speaker is imagining himself in these lines from "Ode to a Nightingale" to: With a nightingale in the trees of a dark, nighttime forest.
<h3>What is "Ode to a Nightingale"?</h3>
"Ode to a Nightingale" is actually known to be a poem written by John Keats. It's likely it was written in the garden of the Spaniards Inn.
The poem refers to a kind of conflict that is seen between the ideal and the real and time and the timeless.
Thus, we see that the speaker is seeing himself with a nightingale in the trees of a dark, nighttime forest.
Learn more about Ode to a Nightingale on brainly.com/question/1372522
#SPJ1
