<span>Indirect characterization uses a person/character's speech patterns or other forms of appearance to give a look into their personality. In this case, dialogue would be considered a way to indirectly characterize. Direct characterization, on the other hand, uses actual descriptive words and phrases to give a look at how a character will behave, look, or feel.</span>
In ancient literature, heroes were usually described as males who sacrificed themselves for the benefit of others. They also held certain characteristic such as can be seen through the chivalric code. They were expected to do great deeds of glory to even be counted as a hero in their society. This is why literature such as King Arthur were so popular in their times.
Although heroism in modern can still be represented through the lens of a superhero or war hero, it is generally given a lot more lax, and usually a lot easier to obtain. Unlike in the times of the knights, most people aren't expected to slay dragons, or rescue a damsel in distress. The theme of the "everyday hero" is certainly a huge difference between the two. In modern film, heroes are usually portrayed as the average Joe, sort of character, with flaws and vices just like anyone else. Heroes are now seen as obtainable characters with decent stances of virtue.
It can affect your life in the business world in a lot of ways. If you have good rhetoric, you're more likely to be hired and you'll probably perform better since you'd be more persuasive and eloquent.
If you have poor rhetoric, you're probably less likely to be hired because you don't know the vocabulary or you're not very persuasive. You also might perform poorly (for instance if you had to sell something and you didn't have good speech)
Madison’s version of the speech and press clauses, introduced in the House of Representatives on June 8, 1789, provided: “The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.” The special committee rewrote the language to some extent, adding other provisions from Madison’s draft, to make it read: “ The freedom of speech and of the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble and consult for their common good, and to apply to the government for redress of grievances, shall not be infringed.” In this form it went to the Senate, which rewrote it to read: “That Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and consult for their common good, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Subsequently, the religion clauses and these clauses were combined by the Senate. The final language was agreed upon in conference.
