The statement basically states “Books should show us the real world and not a fantasy where we are thought to believe things. It must guide us in our time on Earth.” You are supposed to provide your opinion on what you think.
I would write something like this:
Literature has been around for centuries, maybe even millenniums. It has brought people out of the depths of despair and helped them over come problems in day-to- day life. There are all kinds of books out there - fantasy, adventure, romance, but should all those books be forgotten and thrown out for man only to read non-fictional books that are factual rather than interesting?
On one hand, books should be used as a tool for living. They should be informative and contain facts that could benefit us through out our lifetime. An interesting quote is, ‘Knowledge is the key to life’ therefore reading non-fiction books will help us in the future and reflect our actions when we grow up.
On the other hand, books have been brought to life to transport a person away from his troubles into a fictional world, where they are happy and blissful. Taking away such books and reading only factual information will not benefit a humans mind, for they will grow old and grumpy; they will obtain a lot of information but they will be dissatisfied with life - so what is the point of that? Moreover, books are books. No matter the genre or the origination of the book, it will teach us grammar and vocabulary which is vital for a human to know; it will make us emotionally happy and we will still gain knowledge from it.
In my opinion, Forster is wrong because a work of literature MUST provide a scope for the imagination and it must alter reality a little but for us to imagine - for without imagination, we are nothing.
I hope this helps, and please tell me what grade you got as I would love to know:))
Everyone shows up to the party, even people who were not invited. Most of the people don't even know who Gatsby is and how he looks like.
After the parties, people leave recklessly. There is a scene of a guy, called Owl Eyes, who crashes his car just a few seconds after he starts driving away. Furthermore, because he's drunk, he continues to drive it even after one of the wheels has come off.
i think ur looking for this describes a beautiful but very remote area in the Scottish highlands. The narrator speaks of his perceptions of the countryside, but in vivid and energetic terms. He is overwhelmed by the vast size of the landscape at first but rapidly overcomes this apprehension, feeling that the experience has enriched him.
im prett sure this is the one it is asking The poet and narrator may be the same person. It is written in first person as if the narrator is speaking and describing an experience to listeners. if not im very srry for wasting ur time
Answer:
Following are the responses to the given question.
Explanation:
Romeo and Juliet were the only other book that I read. I would be a little insulted as a feminist. Shakespeare portrays Juliet as also being essential. She appears clingy, too. Without the need for a guy, I believe that woman might go. She may even flourish under society at large pressure, which tells us why we need a guy. We aren't facts. This changes the way I view it by maybe getting the whole thing closer.
