| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "SMOOTH TALK": |
|
|
"Where Are You Going?" and "Smooth Talk", 2008.
A comparative analysis of the short story "Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?" by Joyce Carol Oates and its film version "Smooth Talk".
1,560 words (approx. 6.2 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 51.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at how the short story "Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?" by Joyce Carol Oates, was primarily inspired by two sources. First, the serial killer, Charles Schmid of Tuscon Arizona, and second, Bob Dylan's song "It's All Over Now, Baby Blue." It then analyzes how Oates' short story was brought to life when Joyce Chopra directed the film named "Smooth Talk" in 1986 and how, although the film is inspired by Oates' short story, it greatly compromised her original vision.
From the Paper
"First, Charles Schmid's killings in the 1960's were a primary source of inspiration for Oates' short story. He was notoriously famous for his "youthful magnetism". Schmid persuaded young girls to fall in love with him and later strangled them to death. He is very similar to one of the main characters in Oates' short story named Arnold Friend.
According to Hanna Miller of the Arizona Daily Star, "Charles Schmid, who's killings brought Tucson national attention in the '60s, was an unlikely teen idol who painted a mole on his powdered face and stuffed tin cans into his cowboy boots to add a few inches to his tiny frame." In comparison, Arnold Friend also stuffed his boots to appear taller for he too had a small frame and very persistent with persuasion. "
| |
|
"What We Talk About When We Talk About Love", 2002.
A review of the short story, "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love" by Raymond Carver.
1,493 words (approx. 6.0 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Raymond Carver's short story, "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love". The paper illustrates the plot and the setting of the short story, and describes the story's conversation between two couples. The characters are analyzed and their personalities are examined with reference to their current and past marriages.
From the Paper
"The conversation involves two couples. The protagonist is Nick who is happily married to Laura; they are at the home of a cardiologist, Mel Guinness, and his wife Terri (Teresa). Mel and Terri have been married for four years; Nick and Laura, for a little more than a year. So let?s visit some of the definitions of love: According to Mel, "real love [is] nothing less than spiritual love." (Carver, p. 137) This was from his days as a seminarian before going to medical school."
| |
|
"What We Talk about When We Talk about Love", 2005.
Explain's Raymond Carver's use of sunlight as a symbol in his story, "What We Talk about When We Talk about Love".
1,061 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 37.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper shows how the author, Raymond Carver, uses "sunlight" throughout the story as a symbol of the story's progress, mood, and characters.
From the Paper
"In the story, "WHAT WE TALK ABOUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT LOVE", one apparent symbol of this story is sunlight. The element of sunlight serves as an indicator of the mood in each scene where it is mentioned. The amount of sunlight described in this short story at any given point reflects many things. The amount sunlight reflects at what point the story is in, beginning, middle, or end. The amount of sunlight reflects the mood of the characters. The amount of sunlight also reflects the characters' willingness to discuss the topic of love."
| |
|
"What We Talk About When We Talk About Love", 2002.
Examines the theme of love in Raymond Carver's short story.
1,380 words (approx. 5.5 pages), 1 source, $ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In the short story "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love" by Raymond Carver, the discussion of love and the nature and relationships of the four characters reflect the same issues, the same ideas and the same difficulties. The paper shows that the discussion has the aura of something that is repeated over and over, as if these four talk about love often. They clearly know one another very well and know all about each other's loves, past and present, yet they still talk about them and their feelings endlessly, as if doing so enables them to understand those feelings and themselves. The paper examines the interaction in dialogue and relationships between the four characters, Mel, Terri, Nick and Laura.
From the Paper
"The central question raised is what constitutes love, and this is raised in terms of how certain actions and behaviors might claim to be love but really cannot be. That, at least, is Mel's point of view when Terri talks about the man she lived with before: "Terri said the man she lived with before she lived with Mel loved her so much he tried to kill her" (256). Mel takes umbrage at this characterization: "That's not love, and you know it" (256). Terri's description of what the man did to her is especially brutal, but all the while the man continued saying that he loved her even as he beat her and dragged her around the room. Underlying this talk is a certain tension between Mel and Terri that emerges in what they say about each other and what they think about this former boyfriend. Terri is indulgent with him and also understands that love may take some odd forms, while Mel pretends that love has only one definition and one manifestation, though he himself shows that this is not the case."
| |
|
Raymond Carver's " What We Talk About When We Talk About Love", 2000.
An examination of the characters' views on ideal and realistic love in this short story.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"In the short story "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love" by Raymond Carver, the discussion of love and the nature and relationships of the four characters reflect the same issues, the same ideas, and the same difficulties. The discussion has the aura of something that is repeated over and over, as if these four talk about love often. They clearly know one another very well and know all about each other's loves, past and present, yet they still talk about them and their feelings endlessly, as if doing so enables them to understand those feelings and themselves.
The central question raised is what constitutes love, and this is raised in terms of how certain actions and behaviors might claim to be love but really cannot be. That, at least, is Mel's point of view when Terri talks about the man she lived with..."
| |
|
?Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?", 2004.
A comparison of Joyce Carol Oates?s short story, ?Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been??, to the film version, "Smooth Talk".
805 words (approx. 3.2 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines Joyce Carol Oates?s short story, ?Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been??, which was written in 1966, and how, twenty years later, it was made into a movie entitled "Smooth Talk", the winner of the 1985 U.S. Film Festival for best dramatic picture. It looks at how Oates extends reality with her character, Arnold Friend, based on the real life of Charles Schmid, who cruised teenage hangouts, picking up girls. It also shows how the producer of "Smooth Talk" also takes detours from the road of reality by further developing the characters of Connie?s mother, father, and older sister, June. In particular, it examines how the two endings differ greatly.
From the Paper
"While the physical characteristics seem similar, however, the description of Connie?s sexual nature differs, playing an important part in the development of the final scenes of both the story and the movie. While the writer of Smooth Talk portrays Connie as a flirt and a tease, she, nevertheless, resists going ?all the way? with the boys she cruises with on summer nights. This makes the compelling seduction by Arnold Friend at the screen door that much more chilling as she faces rape and the loss of innocence to someone she hardly knows. In contrast, by implying in her short story that Connie is already sexually active, author Joyce Oates deepens the terror of the screen-door meeting by focusing not on just the sexually persuasive nature of Arnold Friend but also on the demonic trance-like state he uses in order to control his victims."
| |
|
"When We Talk about Love", 2005.
This paper discusses the use of sunlight as a symbol in R. Carver's short story, "What We Talk about When We Talk about Love".
1,665 words (approx. 6.7 pages), 0 sources, $ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, in R. Carver's short story, "What We Talk about When We Talk about Love," the element of sunlight serves as an indicator of the mood in each scene, reflecting the mood of the characters and the progression of the story from beginning to end. The author points out that the amount of sunlight also reflects the characters' willingness to discuss the topic of love. The paper concludes that the story presents a picture of how alcohol can destroy relationships and cut people off from life and love, which are imminently accessible, yet impossible to reach from the perspective of darkness.
From the Paper
"In the beginning of the story, "Sunlight filled the kitchen from the big window behind the sink." This hints that on a subliminal level, the sunlight fills the room in much the same way that positive words and feelings are filling the room. The sunshine of love is imparting joy to everything it touches in the room. The feeling is relaxed, happy, and comfortable. Here, we find the couples (Mel and Terri / Nick and Laura), sitting in Mel's kitchen drinking gin and having a good time. The topic of love came up."
| |
|
Talk Shows, 2004.
Uses Tom Shachtman's "Talk Shows and the Dumbing of America" to discuss selected daytime and nightime talk shows.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 3 sources, APA, $ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the point made by Tom Shachtman, in his essay "Talk Shows and the Dumbing of America", that talk shows are indicative of a dumbing down of America. The discussion focuses on talk shows such as Oprah, Jerry Springer, Maury Povich and uses the Hilton sisters as examples of the types of people to whom Shachtman is referring.
From the Paper
"Tom Shachtman, in his essay titled "Talk Shows and the Dumbing of America", makes the point that the talk shows that are featured on network and cable television tend to present a portrait of America and Americans that is indicative of a gradual dumbing down effect. It is Shachtman's thesis that despite the inherent literacy of the people who create talk shows, the vast majority of these programs present individuals, both celebrities and ordinary people, who seem to be largely illiterate, unable..."
| |
|
Talk Radio and Modern Media, 2000.
A short history of talk radio with a focus on conservative talk radio hosts of today.
1,705 words (approx. 6.8 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the current trend of people listening more frequently to conservative or "right wing" talk shows. It focuses on the shows of three hosts - John Carlson, Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh and discusses how they have successfully adapted their conservative radio programs to compete with new forms of media.
From the Paper
"Imagine a view from the early 1920?s; a family huddled together in front of their brand new radio. The children are excitedly waiting for the familiar sounds of ?The Lone Ranger.? Mom and Dad sit back, enjoying not only the family time together, but their moments of quiet relaxation. Eighty years ago this was the image most Americans conjure in their minds when they pictured the early day of radio. Today, radio has changed dramatically. The word radio no longer can describe the genera?s housed under it. We have music radio, with pop, rock, country and jazz. Separate from musical radio is talk radio, which encompassed home and garden tips, health information, and, often, conservative opinion talk radio programs."
| |
|
TV Talk Shows, 2008.
An analysis of the article, "Talk Show Telling versus Authentic Telling: The Effects of the Popular Media on Secrecy and Openness" by Evan Imber-Black.
1,070 words (approx. 4.3 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 37.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines the argument presented by Evan Imber-Black, in her article "Talk Show Telling versus Authentic Telling: The Effects of the Popular Media on Secrecy and Openness", that television talk shows have greatly diminished our moral views of what consequences may arise from casually revealing life-changing secrets. The paper maintains that Imber-Black fails to provide enough substantial evidence to support her argument. The paper is of the opinion that this article is a simplistic, one-sided view of those who watch TV talk shows.
From the Paper
"At first glance, and from Imber-Black's psychiatric view, this atmosphere of greater openness brought benefits. Patients were less reluctant to reveal secrets that once might not have been raised. None the less, a frightening cultural shift was taking place. With the rising popularity of "ambush" style talk shows, people began to correlate opening secrets with the belief such actions were virtuous and automatically healing. What was once deeply personal and unmentionable was becoming a popular spectacle on a grand scale and was simply assumed to be cathartic."
| |
|
Ethics, Talk-Show Hosts, and Producers, 2004.
A look at the way talk-show hosts and producers violate ethical codes of conduct in their profession.
1,578 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 51.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper argues that talk TV shows are responsible for physical or emotional harm, as talk-show hosts and producers deliberately anger guests and shock them into extreme and unthoughtful emotional reactions.
From the Paper
"Like most media viewers realize, the media plays a large role n shaping their opinions and forming their attitudes towards issues and people. As viewers, many of us respect and admire TV personalities, believing that talk show hosts, for example, reached their positions because they have something important to say. In other words, Jerry Springer viewers can be easily influenced by his opinions and the content of his show when they look at his ratings and discover that millions are watching an listening to him. Of course there are many who know that the media should not always be listened to because the views and information offered could e prejudiced, or who realize that one should not allow the views of a talk show host to influence him as they could be subjective ones. The problem is that not all media viewers have this awareness. Therefore, it is very important that the media follow the code of ethics that was established specifically for it. In the media code of ethics there is one simple, but very important rule, which is respecting others. As "Panel: Dr. Laura Violates Ethics Code," explains, the media should not promote opinions that will, in any way, encourage discrimination, hatred or actions that will motivate people to go against the human rights of others. Quite simply, the media should not promote hatred, incite rage, or encourage people to fight with, or harm others. The media has a moral responsibility towards its viewers. Unfortunately, when one looks at the current popular talk TV shows, such as Jerry Spring, Jenny Jones, Maury Povich, Ricki Lake and others, one finds that there is a real disregard for this ethical code. Guests are encouraged to display rage, be violent, exhibit discrimination and even deliberately incited by TV hosts and producers to display extreme levels of negative emotion towards others. The consequence is that guests are often psychologically and physically harmed by other guests, with TV talk show hosts an producers arguing that it is not their responsibility but the responsibility of the guests themselves. While it is true that it is the guests who inflict harm upon one another, the fact is that the talk TV shows are responsible for the physical or emotional harm as talk show hosts and producers deliberately anger guests and shock them into making extreme and unthoughtful emotional reactions."
| |
|
Ireland Peace Talks, 2003.
This paper discusses President Clinton's involvement in the Ireland peace talks.
1,700 words (approx. 6.8 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, against opposition both within the U.S. and in the countries involved in the Ireland conflict, President Clinton remained consistent and compelling in his assertion that a third party, the U.S., and a radically different approach towards peace was undeniably necessary in the Ireland Peace talks. The author points out that, during his term, he actively worked with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, convincing him finally to allow Sinn Fein leaders into the peace talks. The paper relates that Clinton's diplomacy was responsible only partially for the decline of terrorism in Ireland during the 1990's because, demographically, Ireland is tipping rapidly towards a Catholic majority, making attacks from the IRA and other Republican paramilitary groups far less frequent.
From the Paper
"President Bill Clinton became involved in 1993 after a winning presidential campaign pledging to help end the violence in Ireland. Against the past policy of the United States, Clinton stepped in, arguing primarily for the rights and demands of Catholics in Ireland. Behind the back and against the will of the British, "Rarely in the history of Anglo-American relations has the White House...supported Irish demands against Great Britain"4, he began organizing a series of peace talks, bringing together over the course of several years the leaders of Northern Ireland and the Irish Free State ('Southern Ireland'), and, countering the advice of the Irish Prime Minister, worked intensively on a network of compromises that would yield a cease-fire and eventually a level of peace between Northern Ireland, the Irish Free State and Britain."
| |
|
Talk Show Performance, 2004.
An analysis of the nature, processes and roles of the 'ritual of performance' in talk shows on American television.
2,893 words (approx. 11.6 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 85.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents the idea that the ritual of performance has become the primary factor that determines the talk show's function and importance not only to the mass media, but most importantly, to its audience. Through this discussion and analysis, the paper carries with it the thesis that indeed, the ritual of performance is the most important process that talk shows can offer to its audience and viewers in American society today.
From the Paper
"Television, being the most accessible and audio-visually-appealing mass medium, has introduced and cultivated numerous innovations and new ideas that became part of the American popular culture. Since its inception in the 1940s, television had then invaded the homes of numerous Americans, with its commercial availability a decade later, during the 1950s. The TV has become a household necessity for the Americans in the twentieth century, becoming a constant companion of American families, providing them with the latest news and information about the America and the world, as well as entertaining them with numerous shows that range from fictional depictions (sitcoms, soap operas) to real-life discussions and illustrations of life through talk and game shows."
| |
|
"Talking Heads", 2002.
An analysis of some of the techniques which Alan Bennett uses to convince the voices of his characters to the audience in his book "Talking Heads".
2,245 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 69.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reviews Alan Bennett?s powerful book "Talking Heads", a compilation of many intriguing characters incorporated within six highly different monologues. It compares and contrasts the varied techniques employed by Bennett in the crafting and presentation of sustained, convincing and engaging voices for his protagonists. It looks at the use of techniques such as stereotypes, character self-denial, humour and moreover the use of powerful language, i.e. witticisms, idioms, cynicism and colloquialisms.
From the Paper
"Bennett uses a variety of techniques to show the characters emotions in each monologue, some are the same and others are completely different. A change of subject is quite common. In ?Soldiering On? Muriel?s remorse and grief are shown quite sparsely but when it is shown, ?then I felt a bit choked? the subject is changed immediately, ?Anyway the tablet did the trick.? She appears extremely distraught about her husbands? death but the way she has been brought up dictates her behaviour as ?keeping up appearances?. Bennett shows Susan?s emotions in ?Bed among the lentils? with the use of frequent sarcasm towards her husband, herself and others. ?Geoffrey praying in that pausy way he does.? ?For once I got it right.? ?Fan club running around in small circles? Mrs Frobisher even went as far as to squeeze my elbow.? Susan created the feeling of being useless and unloved, and basically being in the way."
| |
|
"Talking in Bed" and "Metamorphosis", 2005.
A critical analysis of Philip Larkin's "Talking in Bed" and Franz Kafka's "Metamorphosis".
1,216 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how the poem by Philip Larkin, "Talking in Bed" discusses alienation and isolation from humankind. It looks at how the poem can be compared to Franz Kafka's, "The Metamorphosis", because it deals with isolation and estrangement from one's own comfort. In this case, his home life. It discusses how both works deal with ontological issues- the state of being- and present themselves in a bleak, murky tone and how Larkin and Kafka both share experiences of isolation and alienation from their societies.
From the Paper
"The sense of broken communication is well displayed through the structure and form of the poem. The iambic pentameter and the three-tercet rhyme scheme (aba, cac, dcd, eee) portray the absence of continuity and the broken-up nature of the couple's discourse. Each stanza in the poem, with exception given to the third stanza, contains end-stopped lines. This form displays the isolation of each stanza in relation to the couple isolating themselves from one another. "At the unique distance from isolation/It becomes still more difficult to find" (Larkin, 9-10) discusses the unique isolation the couple is faced with and contains no end-stop punctuation to separate the two verses. "
|
|
|
