Syllabus Design

Syllabus Design

Introduction

Syllabus design is important part of English Language Teaching and also for the all the educational institution. Syllabus designs means to design the course of particular standard and are to develop the hidden strength of learner. With the use of syllabus design learner can develop its self and this is very important. With the help of syllabus design one can do research in particular area and field of any work or in any educational field.

So lets’ discuss some area of syllabus design with it various types of trends…

A Syllabus design may be formally documented, as in the aims and content of a national or institutional syllabus for particular groups of learners or in the content material of published textbooks. Every teacher follows a syllabus, but it may vary from being a pre-designed document to a day-to-day choice of content which the teacher regards as serving a course’s particular aims. In the latter case, the syllabus unfolds as lessons progress.

Any syllabus ideally should provide:

ü  A Clear framework of knowledge and capabilities selected to be appropriate to overall aims;

ü  Continuity and a sense of direction in classroom work for teacher and students;

ü  A record for other teacher of what has been in the course;

ü  A Basis for evaluating students’ progress;

ü  A basis for evaluating  the appropriateness of the course in the relation to overall aims and students needs identified both before and during the course;

ü  Content appropriate to the broader language curriculum, the particulars class of learners, and the educational situation and wider society in which the course is located.

To meet these requirement, syllabus designer – including teachers who develop their own syllabuses – apply principles to the organization of the content which they intend the syllabus to cover. These principles can be expressed as question:

1.      What knowledge and capabilities should be focused upon? A syllabus may give priority to linguistic or broader communicative knowledge and focus upon one or all four skills (Reading, Speaking, Writing and Listening) or, more broadly, problem-solving or negotiation capabilities.

2.      What should be selected as appropriate content? Given a linguistic focus, which particular structure and vocabulary should be covered or given a communicative focus, which particular use of language or types of tasks should be selected?

3.      How should the content be subdivided so that it can be dealt with in manageable units? In other words, what is selected as content may be broken down to contributory or constituent parts for ease of teaching and learning in real time.

4.      How should the content be sequenced along a path of development? A syllabus may adopt a step-by-step progression from less to more complex knowledge and capabilities, or it may be cyclic where earlier knowledge and capabilities are revisited and fined at later points.

These four principal of organization defined a syllabus. In the history of language teaching, the last 20 years in particular have revealed significant developments in syllabus design that have led to the application of each of these principles in alternative ways.

Background

Generally speaking, there are four types of syllabus currently used in the language teaching. Syllabus designers, textbook writer, and teachers have evolved versions of these, but their main characteristics usefully revel the development of syllabus design over the last 20 years or so. Before describing the types of syllabus, I give brief history of their emergence to illustrate their differences.

Before the advent of communicative language teaching in the late 1970s, it was widely accepted that the syllabus should focus upon linguistic knowledge and the skills of listening, reading, speaking and writing, usually in that order. In the 1970s, research in the social and conversional use of the language, coupled with growing dissatisfaction with learner’s apparent failure to use the linguistics knowledge outside the classroom which they had gained within it, initiated a major change in syllabus design. Applied linguistic advocated a focus upon language use rather than the formal aspects of language. The initial phase of this transition was exemplified in the development of functional syllabuses focusing upon particular purposes of language and how these would be expressed linguistically. At this same time – in response to the particular needs of certain groups of learners – special purpose syllabuses and teaching materials were quickly developed focusing upon language knowledge and skill needed for academic study or specific occupations e.g. engineering or medicine.

            The second challenge echoed earlier doubts expressed about formal syllabuses. Both types of syllabus would be seen as ‘synthetic’ in that learner were expected gradually to accumulate separated bits of knowledge, be they forms or functions, largely through de-contextualized language focused. Activities before applying such a knowledge as typically synthesized in real communication. They were also seen as partial because either formal of functional knowledge of linguistic structure of utterances were just two elements within broader communicative competence.  

Task based syllabus had their origin in research on second language acquisition during the 1980s. Building upon discoveries from first language acquisition and Krashen’s influential view that language was best acquired through the learners focus upon meaning in the input provided to the learner. The goal of the syllabus designer or teacher therefore, become the provision of suitable task to encourage interaction and through it negotiation and meaning.

There are four types of syllabus.

v  Language syllabus

v  Culture syllabus

v  Communicative activities syllabus

v  General language education syllabus

v  Language syllabus

Major goal: Proficiency,

Content:  The systematic study of the language in terms of its formal and functional characteristics.

v  Culture syllabus

Major goal: Knowledge,

Content: The systematic study of people who usd the language in term of their society, history, values, etc.                 

v  Communicative activities syllabus

Major goal: Proficiency,

Content:  use of language in its socio cultural context, both inside and outside the classroom.

v  General language education syllabus

Major goal: transfer of knowledge and experience.

Content:  reflecting on language, culture, and learning.

Conclusion

So we can say that Syllabus design is important t for learner and teacher. In general, therefore, there are four main trends in current syllabus design.

1)      Communication

2)      Sociocultural

3)      Learning – how – to – learn

4)      Language and cultural awareness

5)      General knowledge.

With the help of it we can easily understand the syllabus and it design very well. It is very useful in study and also in learning process for both learner and teacher.

Salman Rushdie’s views on Attenborough’s Gandhi

Salman Rushdie’s views on Attenborough’s Gandhi

Introduction:

 Imaginary Homelands is the essay which this collection takes its title was Salman Rushdie’s contribution to a seminar about Indian writing in English held in London during the festival of India in 1982. It is a collection of Rushdie’s essays, seminar papers, articles, reviews.     

          Salman Rushdie is an Indian writer and also a diasporic writer. He is from India and now he is living in London. There are some special characteristics of diasporic writings. Diasporic writer is someone who is away from his/her homeland and write about his/her homeland. So when diasporic writer is writing something, it differs in a way. In writers mind there is love for motherland and at the same time hate as well. So there is always conflict goes on within him.

            In Imaginary Homeland there are 70 pieces divided into 12 sections. The first three parts of Imaginary Homelands gather Rushdie’s thoughts on what he calls “Sub Continental” matters from the assignation of Indira Gandhi to the work of novelist Anita Desai, a particularly representative essay, “Common Wealth does not exit” angrily rejects the marginalization of   non British writers of English. Section-4 contains Rushdie’s response to T.V and movie subjects, such as Indian director Stayjit Ray and Richard Attenborough’s Oscar winning “Gandhi”. Section-5 examines a frequent unhide concern, the condition of third world migrates in Britain and Section-6 focuses on British politics. The next five parts reprint Rushdie’s reviews of boos by authors from around the world and the finale five pieces should be linked to ‘Satanic Verses Crisis’. Rushdie remarks hopefully in his preface that,

“Reason is slowly replacing anger at the center of the debate”.

Attenborough’s Gandhi:

“Sometimes we feel we straddle two cultures

   at other times that we fall between two stools”

          In the essay ‘Attenborough’s Gandhi’ in which Salman Rushdie talks about the movie ‘Gandhi’. As I have mentioned before that section- 4 contains Rushdie’s responses to TV and movie subjects, so here we talk about it in detail.

           The essay starts with the word ‘Deification’, and Rushdie further said that deification is an Indian disease, as Attenborough might now about it and he has construct Gandhi as a ‘Mahatma’, as it is Indian disease to say that ‘Avatar’ will come and do something good for human being and they makes a human as a ‘Avatar’ and console their human self and depend over avatar and Attenborough has do it in the movie. But he has not described. ‘Gandhi-a gift human’ and Attenborough knows that what Indian like and for what Oscar-Nobel committee would be like and for that he has just put the image of Gandhi as a Mahatma and has avoided Nathuram Godse’s speech, ploticalthriller also absent in the movie.

           He also gives the three broad headings.

1.     Spiritualism

2.     Simplicity

3.     Change anything, Submit yourself

  Here we can also say that Spiritual idea is good in only in idea, thinking not in practical.

            At Attenborough’s didn’t include speech of Nathuram Godse’s because he knows that, no one like to watch or listen Nathuram Godse as he has killed ‘Mahatma’ in that case Nathuram is a villain and if he has included this portion into movie than movie might not be selected as a Oscar winning movie. Here we can say that Richard Attenborough has chosen the events, in the movie. Which is distorted the history.         

           The Reason say Salman Rushdie might be viewing Gandhi as a spiritual mystical person. He view that when he saw this movie that time he found that Attenborough unfortunately saw the image of Gandhi as a Christ and comparison with Christ. In Christianity we can see that how the Jew people killed the Christ and Attenborough also tried to saw these things in different way. And we can say that Gandhi is a spiritual person.

                   Here we can also see that how Attenborough saw the image and represent the image of Gandhi as a submission, self-sacrifice, and non-violence image. Gandhi believes in these things and he follows these things in his whole life. And here Attenborough saw these things very well and describe beautifully. 

           We have mindset that ‘Gandhi’ movie made in western is must be good. A movie gathered applause for this reason that a western has made the movie on Gandhi and also the character of Gandhi played by the western man Ben Kingsley. So it for must be selected for the Oscar. People don’t like to criticize over through the movie has lots of mistake but it is our mindset that movie must be good as it was made in western, but Rushdie was in against of it and he has criticize the movie.

Rushdie asks:

“Why American academy wish to help by offering in a temple eight glittering statuettes to a film?”

Ø The exotic impulse to see India as the Fountain to spiritual plastically wisdom.

Ø The Christian longing for a leader’s dedicated to ideals for poverty and simplicity.

Ø A political desire that revolutions should be made purely by non-violence alone.

Rushdie criticizes the Amritsar massacre Dyer’s action at Jallianwala Bagh.

           We can say that Amritsar massacre is perhaps the most powerful sequence in the film. Both the massacre and the subsequent court-martial at which outraged Englishman question the unrepentant Dyer with basely suppressed horror are staged accurately and with passion. In this Dyer represents the cruel itself. The crowd sent him for the killing. But Dyer this two scenes mean is that Dyer’s actions at the Jallianwala Bagh where those of a cruel over jealous individual and that they were immediately condemned by Anglo-Indian.

          The court martial may have condemns Dyer but the colonist did not. He had taught the wags a lesson he was a hero. And when he returned to England he was given a heroic welcome. An appeal fund launch on his behalf made him a rich man. Tagore discussed by the British reaction to the massacre return his knighthood.

          In the case of Amritsar, artistic selection has altered the meaning of the event. It is an unforgivable distortion.

           Another example: the assassination of Gandhi. Attenborough considers it important enough to place it at the as well as the end of his film; but during the intervening three hours, he tells us nothing about it. Not the assassin’s name. Not the name of the organization behind the killing. Not the ghost of a motive for the deed. In political thriller, this would be merely crass; in Gandhi it is something worse.

           We all know that Gandhi was murdered by Nathuram Godse, a member of the Hindu-fanatic RSS, who blamed the Mahatma for Partition of India. But in the film the killer is not differentiated from the crowd; he simply step out the crowd with a gun. This could mean one of three things: that he represents the crowd-that the people turned against Gandhi that the mob threw up a killer who did its work; that Godse was ‘one lone nut’, albeit a lone nut under the influence of a sinister–looking sadhu in a rickshaw; or that Gandhi is Christ in a loincloth. We know why Christ died he died that others might live. But Godse was no representative of the crowd. He did not work alone. And the killing was a political, not a mystical, act. Attenborough’s distortions mythologize, but they also lie.           

          Rushdie says that British have been mingling Indian history for centuries. Much of debate has been done about this movie that why Subhas Chandra Bose? Why not Tagore? Why not Nehru? The answer is the centre is important for any artistic work because that creates a well designed story.

          The film is a biography not a political work. Even if one accepts this distinction one must reply that a biography if it is not to turn into hagiography must tackle the awkward aspects of the subjects as well as the lovable side. The Bramcharya experiments during which Gandhi would live with young naked woman all night to taste his will to abstain are well known not without filmic possibilities and they are of course ambiguous events. The film omits them. It also omits Gandhi’s fondness for Indian billionaire industrialist so.

          This is a rich area for a biographer to mine the man of the masses, dedicated to the simple life, self-denial, asceticism, who was finance all his life by super capitalist patrons, and some would say hopelessly a compromise by them. a written biography, which failed to enter such murky water would not be worth reading we should not be less critical of a film.

          In the movie Godse was not representative of the Mob because he was not alone in his war the awkward aspects are there in the movie. The movie also omits Gandhi’s fondness for Indian billionaire industrialists. He died in Birla house in Delhi. Gandhi also represents the portrayal of most of leader who struggle for the independence. Sardar Patel is a hardworking man where he is like a clown here, Jinnah is portrayed as a count Dracula and we can see the most important change in the personality of Nehru.

          Nehru was not Gandhi’s disciple. There debate was central to the freedom movement-Nehru, the urban sophisticate who wanted to industrialize India, to bring it into modern age versus rural handicraft loving. And keep India in the modern age to increase industrialism. Sometime medieval figure of Gandhi: the country lived this debate, and it had to choose. In this film, Nehru becomes acolyte of Gandhi. Here Bose was evident. He improved the movie. The message of Gandhi was to fight against oppressors without weapon, without violence but it was all non-sense. The leader in India did succeed because they were moral then British. The British were smarter, craftier, better fighting politicians then their opponents. Gandhi shows as a saint who vanquished an Empire. This is a fiction.

           Rushdie says that it in a satirized manner that it was better film of 1983, according to hidden agenda Oscar sididh committee and god help the film industry. It was expensive movie.  Thus Rushdie gives his views about Attenborough’s Gandhi and at the end he significantly said that,

“What it is an incredibly expensive movie about a man who was dedicated to the small scale and to asceticism”.

Conclusion:

         A Few words more, we can say that Salman Rushdie has written an article about “Attenborough’s Gandhi” in which he has indicated about Gandhi and also made criticism on him. He didn’t write only good things about but also wrote and made mockery on him. He writes also about Nathuram Godse and told that he was right according to him and Gandhiji was also right at his place. Therefore Rushdie has given his views about Gandhi in this essay.

                      

Comparison between Santiago & Willy Lowman

Introduction:

Arthur Miller was one of the most shining stars of American Literature. He was more famous for his works especially for plays which have been written by him. He was born on October 17, 1915 at New York City. He started to write plays when he was studying at University of Michigan. Several plays were written by him who also won the prizes and some of his works like

Ø  All my sons

Ø  Death of a Salesman etc.

Death of a Salesman also won Pulitzer Prize. Miller gained eminence as a man who understood the deep essence of the United States. He published The Crucible in 1953, a searing indictment of the anti-Communist hysteria that pervaded 1950s America. He has won the New York Drama Critics Circle Award twice, and his Broken Glass (1993) won the Olivier Award for Best Play of the London season.

The basis for the dramatic conflict in Death of a Salesman lies in Arthur Miller’s conflicted relationship with his uncle, Manny Newman, also a salesman. Newman imagined a continuous competition between his son and Miller. Newman refused to accept failure and demanded the appearance of utmost Confidence in his household. A half century after it was written, Death of a Salesman remains a powerful drama. Its indictment of fundamental American values and the American Dream of material success may seem somewhat tame in today’s age of constant national and individual self-analysis and criticism, but its challenge was quite radical for its time.

Death of a Salesman, Miller’s most famous work, addresses the painful conflicts within one family, but it also tackles larger issues regarding American national values. The play examines the cost of blind faith in the American Dream. Although the war had ostensibly engendered an unprecedented sense of American confidence, prosperity, and security, the United States became increasingly embroiled in a tense cold war with the Soviet Union.

 The propagation of myths of a peaceful, homogenous, and nauseatingly gleeful American golden age was tempered by constant anxiety about Communism, barrier racial conflict, and largely ignored economic and social stratification. Uneasy with this American milieu of denial and discord, a new generation of artists and writers influenced by existentialist philosophy and the hypocritical post war condition took up arms in a battle for self-realization a depression of personal meaning.

Such discontented individuals railed against capitalist success as the basis of social approval, disturbed that so many American families cantered their lives around material possessions like cars, appliances, and especially the just introduced television and other in an attempt to keep up with their equally materialistic neighbours.

The climate of the American art world had likewise long been stuck in its own rut of conformity, confusion, and disorder following the pre-war climax of European Modernism and the wake of assorted -isms associated with modern art and literature. The notions of Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung regarding the role of the human subconscious in defining and accepting human existence, coupled with the existentialist concern with the individual’s responsibility for understanding one’s existence on one’s own terms, captivated the imaginations of post war artists and writers. Perhaps the most famous and widely read dramatic work associated with existentialist philosophy is Samuel Becket’s waiting for Godot.

Now let’s discuss about the characters of Willy Lowman in detail before going further

Willy Lowman is the major character of this play and Arthur Miller has given more space as well as more given significance to him. So it can be said that Willy Lowman is the mouth figure of the writer-Arthur Miller.Willy does not achieve the self-realization or self-knowledge typical of the tragic hero. The quasi-resolution that his suicide offers him represents only a partial discovery of the truth. While he achieves a professional understanding of himself and the fundamental nature of the sales profession, Willy fails to realize his personal failure and betrayal of his soul and family through the meticulously constructed artifice of his life.

Willy’s failure to recognize the anguished love offered to him by his family is crucial to the climax of his torturous day, and the play presents this incapacity as the real tragedy. Despite this failure, Willy makes the most extreme sacrifice in his attempt to leave an inheritance that will allow Biff to fulfil the American Dream. Willy does experience a sort of revolution. As he finally comes to understand that the product he sells himself. Through the imaginary advice to Ben, Willy ends up fully believing that his early assertion to Charley that “after all the highways, and the trains, ans appoinmnets, and the years, you end up worth more dead than alive.

Earnest Hemingway was one of the most exceptional writers of the American literature. He was renowned for his novel as he has contributed in the world of literature. His full name was Earnest Miller Hemingway, who was born in Oak Park, Illinois, in 1899. In 1921, Hemingway moved to Paris, where he served as a correspondent for the Toronto Daily Star. In Paris, he fell in with a group of American and English expatriate writers that included F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ezra Pound, Gertrude Stein, and Ford Madox Ford.

In the 1930s, Hemingway lived in Key West, Florida, and later in Cuba, and his years of experience fishing the Gulf Stream and the Caribbean provided an essential background for the vivid descriptions of the fisherman’s craft in The Old Man and the Sea.

Some of his works like

Ø  The Sun also Rises

Ø  The adventures of a young man

Ø  The Garden of Eden

Ø  The Old man and the sea

Because Hemingway was a writer who always relied heavily on autobiographical sources, some critics, not surprisingly, eventually decided that the novella served as a thinly veiled attack upon them. According to this reading, Hemingway was the old master at the end of his career being torn apart by but ultimately triumphing over critics on a feeding frenzy. But this reading ultimately reduces The Old Man and the Sea to life more than an act of literary revenge. The more compelling interpretation asserts that the novella is a parable about life itself; in particular man’s struggle for triumph in a world that seems designed to destroy him.

The huge success of The Old Man and the Sea, published in 1952, was a much-needed vindication. The novella won the 1953 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction, and it likely cinched the Nobel Prize for Hemingway in 1954, as it was cited for particular recognition by the Nobel Academy. It was the last novel published in his lifetime.

Although the novella helped to regenerate Hemingway’s wilting career, it has since been met by divided critical opinion. While some critics have praised The Old Man and the Sea as a new classic that takes its place among such established American works as William Faulkner’s short story “The Bear” and Herman Melville’s Moby-Dick, others have attacked the story as “imitation Hemingway” and find fault with the author’s departure from the uncompromising realism with which he made his name.

A great fan of baseball, Hemingway liked to talk in the sport’s lingo, and by 1952, he badly “needed a win.” His novel Across the River and into the Trees, published in 1950, was a disaster. It was his first novel in ten years, and he had claimed to friends that it was his best yet. Critics, however, disagreed and called the work the worst thing Hemingway had ever written. Many readers claimed it read like a parody of Hemingway. The control and precision of his earlier prose seemed to be lost beyond recovery.

Because Hemingway was a writer who always relied heavily on autobiographical sources, some critics, not surprisingly, eventually decided that the novella served as a thinly veiled attack upon them. According to this reading, Hemingway was

The old master at the end of his career being torn apart by—but ultimately triumphing over—critics on a feeding frenzy. But this reading ultimately reduces The Old Man and the Sea to little more than an act of literary revenge. The more compelling

Interpretation asserts that the novella is a parable about life itself; in particular man’s struggle for triumph in a world that seems designed to destroy him.

Now let’s elaborate the character of Santiago in “The Old man and the sea”.

Santiago is the major character of the novel “The Old man and the sea”. He plays a vital role in this novel. He is the mouth figure of the writer Earnest Hemingway so through this character the author conveys his ideas and shows the struggle of life by putting the struggle of the Old man as he is referred in the novel as a Santiago. He is old man but yet he fights with the fish and kills him he also remains optimistic as he couldn’t catch any fish for so many days therefore I can say that He possesses also heroic qualities as he dreams of lion and fights with the fish continuously three days and it is very much difficult to fight with uncontrollable thing so He becomes also hero of the boy.

Moreover, Santiago suffers terribly throughout The Old Man and the Sea. In the opening pages of the book, he has gone eighty-four days without catching a fish and has become the laughingstock of his small village. He then endures a long and gruelling struggle with the marlin only to see his trophy catch destroyed by sharks. Yet, the destruction enables the old man to undergo a remarkable transformation, and he rests triumph and renewed life from his seeming defeat. After all, Santiago is an old man whose physical existence is almost over, but the reader is assured that Santiago will persist through Manolin, who, like a disciple, awaits the old man’s teachings and will make use of those lessons long after his teacher has died. Thus, Santiago manages, perhaps, the most miraculous feat of all: he finds a way to prolong his life after death.

Santiago’s pride is what enables him to endure, and it is perhaps endurance that matters the most in Hemingway’s conception of the world, a world in which death and destruction, as part of the natural order of things, are unavoidable. Hemingway seems to believe that there are only two options defeat or endurance and destruction; Santiago clearly chooses the latter. His stoic determination is mystic, nearly Christ like in Proportion. For three days he holds fast to the line that links with the fish, even though it cuts deeply into his palms causes a crippling cramp in his left handmaid also ruins his back. This physical pain allows Santiago to forge a connection with the marlin that goes beyond the literal link; his bodily ashes attest to the fact that he is well matched, that the fish is a worthy oppenet, and that he himself. Because he is able to fight so hard, is a worthy fisherman.

As a Protagonist:

                        In “Death of a Salesman”, Willy Lowman is a major character and though he is a fictional character but the protagonist of the play “Death of a Salesman” which is written by Arthur Miller. Lowman is a 63 years-old travelling salesman from Brooklyn with 34 years of experience with the same company who endures a pay cut and a firing during the play. He has difficulty dealing with his current state and has created a fantasy world to cope with his situation. This does not keep him from multiple suicide attempts.

            While in the novel “The old man and the sea” by Hemingway Santiago possesses very significant role. He is protagonist of this novel so through the character of him Hemingway shows or he rather tries to indicate the struggle of an Old man and human life as an Old man struggles for his life in this novel.

As a tragic figure:

            “Death of a Salesman” is a Will’s play and everything revolves around his character .So during the last 24 hours of his life. All of the characters act in response to Willy Lowman, whether in the present or in Willy’s recollection of the past.Willy’s character, emotions, motivations and destiny are developed through his interactions with others.

             The play begins and ends in the present, and the plot occurs during the last two days of Willy’s life, however, a large portion of the play consists of Willy’s fragmented memories, recollection and recreation of the past, which are spliced in between scenes taking place in the presents. So he is referred here as a tragic figure.

             On the other hand in the novel ‘The Old man and the sea’ the old man or we can say Santiago can be indicated as a tragic figure as up to he remains without catching any fish of so many days but after that he starts to fight as he wants to kill the fish so after that the old man comes back and sleeps but in the novel it is not shown that he dies or not. Therefore he can be considered as a tragic figure. 

Man of struggle:

             Willy is an individual who craves attention and is governed by a desire for success. He constantly refers to older brother Ben, who made a fortune in a diamond mining in Africa, because he represent all the things wily desires for himself and his sons. Willy is forced to work for Howard, the sun of his old boss, who fails to appreciate Willy’s previous sells experience and expertise. Ben on the other hand simplify abounded the city, explore the African and American continents, and went to work for himself as a result after four years in the jungle, Ben was a rich man of the age of the 21, why Willy must struggle to convince Howard to let him work him New York for a reduce salary after working for the company for years.  So here Willy is a man of struggle.

            On the other side in the novel The old man and the sea, Santiago’s struggle has been shown in the other words we can also say that story moves around the character of Santiago and his struggle as he remains without catching a fish up to 84 days and also when he fights with the fish, struggles a lot.  Therefore, struggle is indicated here in this novel.

Conclusion:

            Wily Lowman man is fictional character of the death of the sales man, and Santiago is a major character of Hemingway’s The old man and the sea, Here some aspects resemble with each other in this two characters like Santiago dares a tragic figure and Wily to both have struggle in their life and both are principal character.