Sunday, January 30, 2011
Individualism lost in the robotic movement...
The topic of my paper will center around why I think Zamyatin really wrote the book and what sort of warnings he intended the readers to gather from the novel. I think that he had this amazing insight into the future in regards of dictatorship and the frailty of the human race. I will discuss how his understanding of what it means to be both human and happy may not follow the conventional definition, but he is able to portray a world where neither of those terms truly exist. He does this through the mind of the complex character D-503. Through him, Zamyatin created an ideal canvas to further illustrate this society as a perfect picture of disaster in its prime.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
So after doing some further research about my topic, I got to thinking that I would rather write about similarities from actual components of the novel.
ReplyDeleteOften times when reading this novel, I found myself contemplating how D-503's inner struggles often led to or matched the problems in the onestate as a whole. Building on that idea,I think would be really interesting to compare one of these instances between D-503 and the onestate. I'm thinking about analyzing what significance D-503's inner revolution has to do with the large scale revolution in the onestate. Through this, I will also consider what it means to be human verses robot and what that has to do with revolution as well.
Does this seem like a more comprehensive topic?