Answer: A transitional figure, Irving somewhat ironically contributed to America's literary independence while producing work that was distinctively European in content and style. Like his contemporary James Fenimore Cooper, Irving proved that Americans could write European literature as well as Europeans could
Explanation:
<span>Richie had felt a mad, exhilarating kind of energy growing in the room. . . . He thought he recognized the feeling from his childhood, when he felt it everyday and had come to take it merely as a matter of course. He supposed that, if he had ever thought about that deep-running aquifer of energy as a kid (he could not recall that he ever had), he would have simply dismissed it as a fact of life, something that would always be there, like the color of his eyes . . . .
Well, that hadn't turned out to be true. The energy you drew on so extravagantly when you were a kid, the energy you thought would never exhaust itself—that slipped away somewhere between eighteen and twenty-four, to be replaced by something much duller . . . purpose, maybe, or goals . . . .
Source: King, Stephen. It. New York: Penguin, 1987. Print.</span>
I haven't a full answer for you, but here's how I'd suggest you start it:
There's clear evidence of your theme in the lines "When the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept."
Reason being: Brutus only <em>told (verbally) </em>the people that Caesar was ambitious, giving <em>no </em>examples that are actual proof of how the great Julius Caesar acted. However, Mark Antony states right off the bat of what Caesar had done in his life-time. Antony decidedly debunks Brutus of any honourable traits as he continues with his Eulogy, as the more Antony says Brutus is "honourable," the more it is hypocritically placed. (<em>What I'm trying to say here is the more Antony says Brutus is honourable, it actually counter-intuitive, Antony is trying to take away any honour the horrible man had.)</em>
