Romanticism and Realism are two distinct artistic periods that overlapped for almost a decade. Despite their differences, there are also similarities between them. Romanticism was an intellectual movement in the arts that lasted from 1790 to 1870. It rejected Classicism and the Enlightenment, instead focusing on the individual, bias, illogical, creative, spontaneous, emotional, and transcendental aspects of life. On the other hand, Realism reflected its time period as an intellectual movement that began around 1861 and ended in 1914 with the start of World War I. Its aim was to depict reality without idealization.
The similarities between Romanticism and Realism are not numerous, but they do exist. Both originated in Europe and quickly spread to America. They were also influenced by the events of their time. Romanticism emerged as a response to the suppression of creative thinking during the Age of Reason, while Realism arose as a result of political and social issues. The Civil War in the United States and urbanization due to the Industrial Revolution led people to reject the mystical aspects of Romanticism. However, both artistic movements emphasized nature and its impact on society. They also focused on the poor and working class, highlighting injustices that plagued them.
Both Romanticism and Realism had unique elements. Romanticism emphasized emotion over reason, the senses over intellect, heightened examination of human personality and its moods and mental potentials, preoccupation with the genius and hero, focus on passions and inner struggles, focus on the dark hero, prioritization of the artist’s creative spirit over strict adherence to formal rules and traditional procedures. Additionally, there was an obsessive interest in folk culture (folk tale), medieval era, mysterious subjects; experimentation in science; quest for pure beauty; use of far away (in the past); nature as a place to find God; fascination with supernatural elements; fascination with exotic places. (P. Reuben)
Realism, on the other hand, can be described as the direct opposite of these elements. The Realists incorporated a rejection of the idealized, larger-than-life hero found in Romantic literature. Instead, they focused on describing ordinary characters and realistic events with an emphasis on characters from cities and lower classes. They avoided the exotic, sensational, and overly dramatic while using everyday speech patterns to reveal class distinctions. Realists also focused on ethical struggles and social issues present in real-life situations. (P. Penrose)
These differences were primarily due to the drastic changes in people’s lives. Times were no longer idealistic, and art had to reflect this reality. Each artistic movement reflects the situations of its time period, but there are always similarities. This is because while society and technology are constantly changing and transforming their taste in art, people will always want to be entertained.
Works Cited
- Penrose,Patricia.“Realism1865-1910.” http://www.ncteamericancollection.org/amer_realism.htm
- Reuben, Paul P. “Perspectives in American Literature – A Reference Guide.” 21 Feb. 2007 http://web.csustan.edu/english/reuben/pal/chap3/3intro.html.
Compare And Contrast Of Attitudes, Expectations, And Behavior Between Men And Women
In this existence full of vagueness and ever-fleeting prospects of change, there is only one constant that holds to be an unbending truth in all thinkable dimensions, feasible planes of reality, and possibly in every crack and crease across the universe. This perplexing difference is between a man and a woman, specifically in dating and relationships.
When it comes to keeping a relationship intact, both men and women value details, but in contrasting ways. Women tend to glorify and highlight even the smallest details in and out of the relationship, taking extensive notes especially when it comes to mistakes made by their partner. Women rarely forget anything as clinical psychologist Dr. Michael G. Conner explains that women have an enhanced ability to recall memories that have strong emotional components.” This includes fights, arguments, and even nonsensical discussions. Men also value details but may not focus on them as much as women do.
On the other hand, women tend to pay close attention to details and have a better memory recall than men. Men, on the other hand, have much more ease in effortlessly dismissing things, sometimes everything. They optimize the use of indispensable tools such as denial and disagreement when it comes to their slip-ups. According to Dr. Conner’s assessment, “Men tend to recall events using strategies that rely on reconstructing the experience in terms of elements, tasks or activities that took place.”
Men can easily attempt to combat women’s intuition and memory recall by playing dumb because sadly, that is sometimes actually the case. In a relationship between a man and woman fueled by admiration, respect, attraction and ultimately love; they realize that despite having “the” connection when it boils down to detail specification- women assure nothing is overlooked while everything is dissected.
The man has no choice but to face reality with no chance of getting away from it.
When it comes to problem-solving in a relationship, both men and women aim to identify a solution at the end of every challenging situation, but their methods differ. A man in a relationship under troubling circumstances with a woman would choose to directly address the root cause of the problem. As Dr. Conner identifies, Men have a tendency to dominate and assume authority in a problem-solving process.” On the other hand, women in relationships opt to alleviate stress, pain, and anxiety by discussing what went wrong in that certain situation repeatedly and in detail. Dr. Conner evidences this by saying, “Women are usually more concerned about how problems are solved than merely solving the problem itself.”
When it comes to planning for the future of their relationship, men and women consider long-term goals but differ in pacing when handling things. Men tend to take things rather elementarily – valuing today over tomorrow. According to Dr. Conner: “Men come to understand and consider problems one piece at a time.” By nature, men choose not to rush into final commitments; they take things slow instead. Conversely, women think ahead beyond just now or right now; they value both present moments as well as future possibilities equally important when making decisions about their relationships.
In conclusion, human beings are created as social beings and have a natural necessity for companionship and belongingness. Men and women generally share the same aspirations in this regard, but differences inevitably arise. However, despite these similarities and dissimilarities, when a man and woman are together in harmony, it is the most natural and beautiful thing imaginable.
Works Cited
Conner, Michael G. wrote an article titled Understanding the Difference Between Men and Women” in 2000.
Oregon Counseling, December 9th, 2008. Available at: http://www.oregoncounseling.org/ArticlesPapers/Documents/DifferencesMenWomen.htm.
Comparison Of Wells’ Original Novel And Haskin’s Film
Comparison and Contrast Between H.G. Wells’ Original Novel The War of the Worlds and Byron Haskins 1953 Film The War of the Worlds
Movies that are created based on novels usually have some parts that are different from the actual novel, or at least, do not reach the expectations of the reader. There are a lot of factors to this. For one, readers have different interpretations and depth of imaginations about the novel they have read. By the time they watch the movie, they are surprised with the differences they found. Some say the movie is better, while others say the opposite. Another reason for these changes is time. Some fictional novels written a few years ago would have some of the parts already discovered and showing it may no longer be appropriate. Instead of following the novel, story writers of novel-based movies alter these parts. Still another reason is art itself. Directors usually alter some scenes so that it will create a much better effect to the audience or the people watching the movie.
This is the case with the novel-based movie, The War of The Worlds. The novel was written by H.G. Wells in 1898. The movie was created in 1953 under the direction of Byron Haskins. Three of the most enduring scenes occurred in Book One Chapters 3 and 16 and in Book Two Chapter 8. In Book One, Chapter 3, entitled “On Horsell Common,” the narrator talked about the arrival of the aliens (only one was depicted in this scene). The same had happened in the movie except that there were fewer people gathered around the “meteor.” Still, the important characters were there. Chapter 16 of Book One showed the flight from London. This time, the invasion already devastated many parts of the known land. In Book Two, Chapter 8, entitled “Dead London,” the main character had seen the aliens died. The same with the movie except that there was not much exposure of the alien as it had been in the novel.
I believe changes made to the original narrative did not hurt the story. Instead, it helped improve the story that was written half a century before the movie was created. One importance is that there seemed to be a connection between the ideas of the past (as written in the novel) and the present (as depicted in the movie). Also, the movie version would be predictable enough if it was entirely based to the novel. It suits the audience; both those who had read the novel and those who did not. I think the movie version was as great as the printed one.
References
Wells, H.G. The War of the Worlds. New York: NYRB Classics