As time has passed, people have failed to understand that power is not something anyone should have. This can be observed in 1984 by George Orwell and “The Lady, or the Tiger?” by Frank R. Stockton, which involve imperious rulers who misuse their authority by ruining the lives of others under their control and choosing their fates. The authors, Orwell and Stockton, both show that power put in the wrong hands can be abused by setting a mood, describing the setting, and using characterization; however, Orwell conveys his message more effectively than Stockton.
When it came to developing a mood, both authors used distinct methods to create suspense. For example, in “The Lady, or the Tiger?,” Stockton portrays the semi-barbaric princess as the one who is deciding whether her …show more content…
To demonstrate, Stockton describes the king as someone with “an authority so irresistible that…[he] turned his varied fancies into facts”(Stockton 5). The king used his power to do what pleased him; presumably, he may have done so at the expense of others. The author may be conveying that autocrats, such as the king, use their power without caring about who may be negatively affected by their desires. Similarly, Orwell initially depicted Winston as a weak man who despised the Party; however, by the end of the book, he is a much weaker man who loves nothing but Big Brother and the Party. O’Brien managed to manipulate Winston to the point where he could no longer form his own opinions. It is perceivable that this may be Orwell’s warning to everyone that if society kept going towards the direction it was going to (back in 1944), the government would eventually gain almost full control over the human mind with propaganda and falsehoods. With this in mind, it is conceivable that Orwell was able to progress his characters much further than Stockton; thus revealing his message of
When it came to developing a mood, both authors used distinct methods to create suspense. For example, in “The Lady, or the Tiger?,” Stockton portrays the semi-barbaric princess as the one who is deciding whether her …show more content…
To demonstrate, Stockton describes the king as someone with “an authority so irresistible that…[he] turned his varied fancies into facts”(Stockton 5). The king used his power to do what pleased him; presumably, he may have done so at the expense of others. The author may be conveying that autocrats, such as the king, use their power without caring about who may be negatively affected by their desires. Similarly, Orwell initially depicted Winston as a weak man who despised the Party; however, by the end of the book, he is a much weaker man who loves nothing but Big Brother and the Party. O’Brien managed to manipulate Winston to the point where he could no longer form his own opinions. It is perceivable that this may be Orwell’s warning to everyone that if society kept going towards the direction it was going to (back in 1944), the government would eventually gain almost full control over the human mind with propaganda and falsehoods. With this in mind, it is conceivable that Orwell was able to progress his characters much further than Stockton; thus revealing his message of