In the novel, Offred feels longing more than any other emotion. She often lies awake at night thinking about Luke, her lost lover, and yearning to be with him again. The heartbreak Offred feels when she reminisces on her time spent with Luke compels the reader to sympathize with her. Offred often clarifies that her longing for Luke is not merely lustful. In reality, what she truly longs for is freedom. She wants the liberty to love freely. The contract to the passionate relationship she once had with Luke emphasizes the shallowness of the relationships in her present life. Eventually, these feelings begin to affect Offred's actions when she begins to see Nick as Luke “in another body” (99). Though her secret affair with Nick seems to satiate her longing, it cannot completely ease her sorrow over the loss of her husband.

Offred's memories almost always evoke a sense of sadness. She feels the most sorrow over the loss of her family; that being Luke, her mother, and her daughter. Offred frequently reflects on how much she cared for her child and pray that she was alive and doing well in the present. One instance which caused great sorrow for Offred is when Serena shows her a picture of her daughter. Offred is thankful that her child is alive, but at the same time feels deeply sad because she realizes that she has been forgotten and is now, to her daughter, only “a shadow of a shadow, as dead mothers become” (228). This painful realization, coupled with the fact that she could do nothing about it, made Offred feel that she preferred not knowing about her daughter at all. These painful moments and reflections evoke empathy towards Offred and paint the tone of the scene, while also revealing much about the storyline.

The character Moira, Offred's bold, rebellious, best friend plays a significant role in her flashes to the past as well. Offred looks up to her because Moira represents resistance, standing up, fighting back. She has all the qualities Offred wishes she had the courage to show. Thus, when Offred retells her past with Moira, it is clear that she admires Moira and sees her as an inspiration. Numerous times, Offred curses herself for being weak and not more like Moira, such as when she recounts how Moira cleverly escaped the Red Center. This reverence toward her best friend is important because it sets Offred up for the great disappointment she faces later in the book when she finds Moira in Jezebel's. There, Offred's heroic vision of Moira begins to crumble when she says, “I don't want her to be like me. Give in, go along, save her skin. I want gallantry from her… Something I lack” (249). Offred admits her flaws and reveals her reasons for looking up to Moira. She is broken because she was expected to meet the same daringly courageous rebel, but instead finds that Moira had become complacent with oppression and surrendered to the system, just like her.

Recapturing and reflecting on past emotions plays a significant role in Margaret Atwood's novel The Handmaids Tale because Offred's flashbacks set the mood for the novel and give the reader further insight into her character. By retelling her memories in contrast to narrating the present, she also emphasizes the importance of taking action, a main theme of the novel. The way in which Offred recounts the story almost emerges as a warning of what may happen if we do not stand up for ourselves.

That is the time when any one person realizes that it is necessary to escape and go against society. Individuals begin to break free and go against a corrupt society when they start to think further than what the society wants them to. This is shown through the use of indirect and dynamic characterization in Ayn Rand's timeless novella Anthem, as well as Ray Bradbury's everlasting novel Fahrenheit 451.Throughout the whole story, Equality 7-2521 develops through the use of indirect characterization. He starts off his life being different from others, even looking different: “For your body has grown beyond the bodies of your brothers” (Rand 18).

Even from the start of his life, he is different from others. And although little is known about him except his physical feature, the author constantly reveals what he is like through his thoughts and his actions by the use of indirect characterization. It should be obvious to the reader that he is already beginning to think differently and further than the society thinks. This is revealed through his early thoughts and actions: “'This is a foul place. They are damned who touch the things of the Unmentionable Times.' But our hand which followed the track, as we crawled, clung to the iron as if it would not leave it” (Rand 33). Here, Equality, knows that being around and examining this thing is wrong, and he knows that he shouldn't be doing it, but he does it anyways. We can see through indirect characterization that he is beginning to think differently and beyond what the society would like him to think. He was taught when he was younger that the things of the ancient days were not to be experimented, yet there's this impulse inside of them that tells us, as the reader, that he is really beginning to break away from society.

His train of thought is running into a different station than all of the other ones. He doesn't quite realize here that he needs to start breaking away, but this passage alludes to it. Later on in the story, he realizes what is wrong with the world that he is living in and starts to break free from it: “We swung our first through the windowpane, and we leapt out in a ringing rain of glass” (Rand 75). Equality finally recognizes that it's necessary to getaway from the corrupt world that he is living in. There is always a time in an individual who understands when his moment comes and he needs rebel against the messed up society that he's living in. This was Equality's moment. He leaves in an outburst of anger and by this action the reader should comprehend through indirect characterization that Equality is an individual who is striving to get rid of the government system that exists.

In comparison, indirect characterization is also used throughout the story of Guy Montag to show when individuals recognize the need to break free from a tainted society. Guy is a burner of knowledge. His job is to destroy books as if they were monsters. He is stirred to think about things from a different viewpoint by Clarisse McClellan, his neighbor. His conversations everyday always end up with him rethinking about what life is: “He felt his body divide itself into a hotness and coldness, a softness and a hardness, a trembling and a non-trembling, the two halves grinding one upon the other” (Bradbury 24). Through indirect characterization, the audience can tell that he's beginning to question everything that he has been doing. His conversations with this one girl, Clarisse McClellan, have such a big effect on him. Montag lives in a brainwashed society, but he is starting to think beyond what the government wants him too.

Only one in a million, like McClellan, actually think about what life is and question what happens every day. Montag, being a fireman, is almost like a tool that is being used by society to destroy all knowledge of the past. This is like in Equality's story, where to seek knowledge of the past is forbidden, and it's wrong and shunned upon. Both of the characters in the stories realize that knowledge is something that should be sought through. Equality and Montag both take extreme measure to prevent the destruction of knowledge, which eventually leads to straight-forward rebellion. Later on in the story, Montag begins to escape and rebel against society. This can be seen as he is talking to an old scholar, Faber, when they start to hatch a plan, “Plant the books, turn in an alarm, and see the firemen's houses burn” (Bradbury 85). His words tell the audience that he is a man of action, and that he wants to do something about the “burning books” problem as soon as possible.

This is the time in his life that Montag begins to understand why he needs to run away from this polluted society and get away to rebel. He's ready to turn around and betray his fellow fireman and instead of burning books, he plans to burn the people that burn books. Although this plan is very direct, in reality it would never work because the society has already stopped reading, the problem is not because of the fireman, but it goes deeper, it goes to the loss of knowledge probably years and years back. In both stories, it should be obvious that Montag and Equality relate to each other in many ways. They both have a point in their lives when they realize that need to break free from the society that is corrupt and damaged. This indirect characterization in both Fahrenheit 451 and Anthem show the reader and the audience the development of the main characters and when and how they break free of the corrupt society that they live in.

Also, as Equality develops throughout the story, he is seen as a dynamic character and this is also another element that shows why and when individuals need to break away from a corrupt society. As Equality grows through the story, he changes quite a bit. He is taught the rules of society and the values of the society, but he changes from them and develops his own values. He is always constantly changing and disregarding the rules: “Never, not in the memory of the Ancient Ones' Ancients, have men done that which we are doing. And yet there is no shame in us and no regret” (Rand 37). Equality is obviously changing dramatically because, he feels that never, not once in the history of the whole world, has anyone done as much evil as he has. This dynamic change shows us how he is breaking away from this tarnished society. He starts disregarding the rules, he develops his own ideas and own values, and he doesn't feel any wrongdoing in it, where as any other person in that society would feel wrong and live with it on their conscious.

He is always constantly growing and realizing that he needs to break away sometime soon and his changes are dynamic. And even once he is away from society and his community, he still is constantly changing: “But I am done with this creed of corruption. I am done with the monster of “We,” the word of serfdom, of plunder, of misery, falsehood and shame” (Rand 97). This change in character tells the reader, that even though he's basically alone, he is still going against society. Throughout his whole life, he has been taught the word “we” as a word of equality, but he realizes that this definition of “we” isn't the definition that is true. His dynamic characterization in this novella shows how individuals break free of a corrupt society.

Along with Equality, the dynamic growth in Guy Montag also shows individuals breaking free of society. He starts of as a fireman, a burner of knowledge, and a wielder of fire. In the beginning, he believes that fire is this beautiful thing, this flame, but as he is changing and growing, he realizes that “Its real beauty is that it destroys responsibility and consequences” (Bradbury 115). This is a very dynamic change because he was always someone who favored fire. The author tells us that he always loved to burn; he always thought, “It was a pleasure to burn” (Bradbury 3). And as he goes on through the story, he comes to realize that fire destroys as well as creates. It takes away as well as gives. This change in him helps him realize that knowledge should be sought and should be taught instead of being burnt and lost forever. His thought changes from the brainwashed state that was of the past: “Montag grinned the fierce grin of all men singed and driven back by flame” (4).

His thought differs from everybody else's, and this difference causes him to discover that his true purpose in his life is to break free of the polluted society that he was born into and then change. He knows that once he takes this road that he can't turn back, but once he started thinking real individual thoughts, there was no turning back from that either, which was like Equality. Also, in both stories, both of the main characters take dramatic action against the society when they break free of it. They both change from people who kind of believe in the society, but always have a doubt, to individuals who both understand when and why they need to take action against the society is damaged beyond repair, so they need to break free, rebel, and create their own. All of these similarities in both stories demonstrate when and why individuals need to break away from a corrupt society because both of the stories are very similar.

Both of the stories, of Montag and of Equality, are similar in many ways. They both start of as individuals who are a part of the society and are apart of the big picture, a piece of the puzzle. But once they break away, the piece is missing and that ruins the whole picture. Both develop by means of dynamic and indirect characterization and this characterization shows individuals breaking away from a corrupt society when necessary. The two stories are also similar in the manner that they both realize that there needs to be a change in the society, whether it's for individuality or for knowledge, the two main characters recognize the need to change and rebel against society.

The authors demonstrate good use of dynamic and indirect characterization in the manner that they are able to convey the message of an individual distinguishing when a society needs to be questioned and to be rebelled against. It's when individuals begin to actually think, to think beyond the need to think, but to think because there's a want to think. To think thoughts that are different, to think thoughts that aren't manipulated, to be creative and think in a manner that would never be imagined, as long as that thought is in a positive manner. That is the moment that an individual will feel the need to change society.

In his essay “Signs Taken For Wonders,” Homi K. Bhahba outlines the effects of imperialism by explaining hybridization and mimicry, and analyzes the relationship between the conquerors and their subjects. Hybridity, according to Bhahba, “is the sign of the productivity of colonial power…It is the name for the strategic reversal of the process of domination through disavowal…Hybridity is the revaluation of the assumption of colonial identity through the repetition of discriminatory identity effects” (Signs 159). Mimicry relates to the conquered mimicking the conquerors as methods of rebellion and rejection of imperialism. In Jamaica Kincaid's novel “Annie John,” the main character narrates her life from childhood to young adulthood, and portrays a life saturated with the Western culture of the British and the culture of West Africa. Annie John's maturation results in her mimicking of British culture and repudiation of her West African roots, and although she strives to leave both behind, she cannot start anew because all she knows is the Western role she's come to inhabit.

In Antigua, Annie John is surrounded by colonialism and African traditions. However, Annie leads a more Western lifestyle, as she goes to an English school and partakes in Western activities. Annie John becomes a hybrid of the West and Africa. “There was a picture of me in my white dress school uniform… There was a picture of my father wearing his white cricket uniform, holding a bat with one hand…There was a picture of me in the white dress in which I had just been received into church and took Communion for the first time, wearing shoes that had a decorative cutout on the sides” (Annie 118). The cutouts in Annie John's shoes represent a part of herself that she attempts to interject in her Westernized persona. It is examples of hybridization such as this that portray Annie, her family, and Antiguans as dominated by the British Empire. She and her family, as observed through the photographs, submit to British influence. Annie John goes a step further by attempting to mimic the British as a method of gaining her own personal identity and renouncing theirs. “Empiricism, idealism, mimeticism, monoculturalism…sustain a tradition of English “cultural' authority” (Signs 150). Her desire to escape Imperialism proves ineffective, as ultimately, Annie John moves to Britain, to the heart of Imperialism and colonialism.

Annie John's relationship to the past is unclear because she isn't sure with which past she should associate herself. “Of course, sometimes, what with our teachers and our books, it was hard for us to tell on which side we really now belonged-with masters or the slaves-for it was all history, it was all in the past, and everybody behaved differently now” (Annie 76). Annie John is representative of a generation experiencing both the African and British cultures, and subtly loses her connection to her roots. When analyzed through the lens of Homi K. Bhahba's essay, Annie John and her peers are victims of hybridization, resulting in their blended and confused cultural associations. “Transparency achieves an effect of authority” by instilling in the minds of natives that there is no direct influence over their lives (Signs 156). This subtle approach makes colonialism incredibly venomous, and it's almost as if the British Empire is trying to sell its brand through a version of product placement.

As Annie John grows older, she gradually becomes more disconnected with her mother and father. Annie John's mother, when analyzed through the lens of colonialism, is representative of African tradition, while her father, while analyzed through the same lens, is representative of Western influence. “When I look at things in a certain way, I suppose I should say that the two of them made me with their own hands. For most of my life, when the three of us went anywhere together I stood between the two of them or sat between the two of them. But then I got too big, and there I was, shoulder to shoulder with them more or less, and it became not very comfortable to walk down the street together” (Annie 133). Her mother and father and their instillments of traditions and beliefs handcrafted Annie John. Annie John's mother and father instilled their cultures, traditions, and beliefs in her, in turn “handcrafting” her. Annie John speaks of a balance between her parents-a balance between the two worlds her parents represent-and how their respective influences were once proportionate. For Annie John, the environment of Antigua became uncomfortable once she began recognizing the differences between British colonial authority and West African cultural influence. She began to question her roots, and as a result, mimicked a European lifestyle while unknowingly embracing it.

While learning at her English school, Annie John encounters a picture of Columbus in chains. Annie John, describing this discovery, states: “I wrote under it the words "The Great Man Can No Longer Just Get Up and Go." I had written this out with my fountain pen, and in Old English lettering-a script I had recently mastered…I traced the words with my pen over and over, so that the letters grew big and you could read what I had written from not very far away” (Annie 78). Annie John's actions illustrate her sense of disconnection and her inability to relate with colonialism. Also, Annie John's repetitive tracing of her words suggest she is silently speaking out against her oppressors, even though she has become a product of their culture and rule.

As Robert Southey once stated, “A remarkable peculiarity is that they (the English) always write the personal pronoun I with a capital letter. May we not consider this Great I as an unintended proof how much an Englishman thinks of his own consequence?” (Signs 145). That said, Jamaica Kincaid writes in the first person, the narrator being Annie John. Her writing could be seen as unintentional, that perhaps there was no political meaning behind it, but going off of Homi K. Bhahba's essay, this memoir takes direct stabs at British empiricism by Annie John's uses of “I”. Annie John, in putting herself on the same page grammatically as her English counterparts, mimics the rule under which she has toiled, and aims to reign over colonialism.

When analyzed through a postcolonial lens, Jamaica Kincaid's Annie John symbolizes the oriental versus the occident (as coined by Edward Said), the affects of Hybridity, and the saturation of Western culture. Although Annie John attempts to find her own self in a world of cultural and societal identity, she is unable to because she ultimately submits to empirical domination.

Then birds reported seeing rabbits which irritates the Wolf King who then he demanded photos of his acts of triumph. So the monkey photographer was ordered by the Wolf King to take a photo of him.

The monkey photographer came to the Wolf King to take a photo of him. The picture was took and developed the old and gray fox became angry at the photographer for not noticing the rabbit ear in the picture next to the king who looked like he won a boxing match. The monkey then erased the ear sticking out in the photo with a strong acid but soon more problems sprung up in the pictures. When the Wolf wanted a picture of him smashing the beavers dam and scaring away the pigeons the photos showed the rabbits got in the pictures because of there speed. Even though the fox's sharp eyes scanned the area for rabbits the rabbits were so quick they got into the picture without the fox's noticing. The monkey photographer had to erase more rabbits while the Wolf King demanded even and more rabbits appeared in the pictures. The King Wolf started to be even more commanding and changed the bird's tune forcibly.

Also when the photos were being erased of rabbits they began to look defective as if they had been tampered with. More rabbits had appeared which troubled the monkey photographer so he cleverly thought of persuading the Wolf King of sitting on a throne where rabbits can't enter the picture.The monkey than had to take back all the photos with the rabbit and got in trouble with the Wolf King for being accused of a traitor. New security was added which was a boa constrictor and many one hundred eyed spiders set in strategic places to find any rabbits. Another thing that was ordered was half of the population had to cut off their fur. Cows also had their own milk turned sour by the Wolf King too.

During the turning point of the story the monkey had to take a photo of the Wolf King on his throne and he became nervous because if there was a rabbit he had to eat all the photographs. The rabbits than fought off the security of wolves but the rabbits were to fast and agile to be taken down. The rabbits gnawed on the throne and managed to collapse it when the monkey taken the photo and the wolf king had his fur torn and ribs broken.

The wolves lost there power and the monkey photographer developed the picture quickly as he could. The monkey photographer gave his daughter the special picture she wanted and the sun shined with the world full of rabbits.

The theme of the story is that victory of peaceful resistance and strategy and intellect can overcome violet rule. The rabbits are the protagonists of the story and represent peaceful resistance and the Wolf King was the antagonist and represented tyranny and force. Also the Wolf King characteristics were a mean, greedy, uncaring, and boastful person. The gray old fox was a servant of the power structure and the monkey was one too but was a main character. Also when the Wolf King's throne collapsed it represented the power structure collapsing because after that the tyranny of the wolves ended and they retreated.