Mr. Know All The central theme is stated in very first two paragraphs.

From the start, The narrator was prepared to dislike Mr. Kelada even before he saw him. When he first entered the cabin, he saw Mr. Kelada's luggage and toilet things that had already been unpacked. The man's name and the sight of his things aroused a strong repulsion in him, since he was prejudiced against all non- Britons, feeling superior to them. When he met Mr. Kelada, his hatred got even stronger. He abhorred the cultural differences between Kelada and himself. He both detested and despised Mr. Kelada's gestures. Therefore, the description of Kelada is negative and biased. Actually,the narrator's prejudice is based on several cultural differences between him and Mr. Kelada. Mr. Kelada is chatty and argumentative, also dogmatic and aggressive. The narrator thought he shouldnt show off and boast about his superior knowledge he should be modest and keep quiet during meals. While, Mr. Kelada was a person that seemed to know everything and was involved in everything, not sensing that he was disliked by everybody. He was very chatty and talked as if he had been superior to everybody else. The passengers mocked him and called him Mr. Know - All even to his face. As the story develops, the narrator changes from referring to Kelada by name to using the term Levantine. When Britain took over part of the Levant at the end of the First World War, some in the new government used the term Levantine as an insult to local people of mixed Arab and European blood. This suggests that the narrators prejudice against MrKelada is an example of racism, which is supported by the fact that he also refers to Keladas oriental smile and possible birth in Alexandria or Beirut The climax of the story develops from an argument over pearls, and Keladas claim that the newly developed cultured pearl industry would not reduce the value of those produced naturally. In this he is correct as nowadays natural pearls are very rare and very valuable. However, the cultured pearl industry has grown to be much larger than the natural pearl industry, and over 99% of the pearls sold around the world today are of the cultured variety.Just as the story goes, as Mrs. Ramsay was wearing a string of pearls, Mr. Kelada announced that it certainly was a genuine one which had probably cost many thousands of dollars. He was ready to bet a hundred dollars on it. Mr. Ramsay, on the other hand, believed that his wife had bought it for 18 dollars in a department store. When Mr. Know - All took out a magnifying glass from his pocket, he noticed a desperate appeal in Mrs. Ramsay's eyes. He then realized that Mrs. Ramsay got the pearls from her lover.Since Mr. Kelada didn't want to

destroy Mrs. Ramsay's marriage, he ruined his reputation instead - he told everybody that he was wrong and that the string was an excellent imitation. He gave Mr. Ramsay a hundred dollars. As the story goes to the last, we know that everybody or even all over the ship had mocked Mr. Kelada. Later, while the narrator and Mr. Know - All were in their cabin, an envelope was pushed under the door. It contained a hundred dollar bill from Mrs. Ramsay. It was then that the narrator learned to value the dark - skinned Levantine. He was amazed at Mr. Kelada's generosity. Mr. Kelada was labeled a person of loquacity by the narrator, people may say it was just the narrators prejudice against him and they tried to examine Mr. Kelada with objectiveness. However from his behavior and words, people could found that he really didnt leave people a good impression. He was chatty, arrogance and vanity. But as Jim Carrey once said in the movie Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004), Constantly talking isnt necessarily communicating. For the most times, he was just expressing rather than communicating. It was irony enough that with all his loquacity, had never told anyone what his business was. He can know everyone on board in three days, yet most people disliked him and didnt want to talk with him. Furthermore, he was conceited when talking with people, for instance, he would not drop a subject, however unimportant, till he had brought you round to his way of thinking. The possibility that he could be mistaken never occurred to him. When they talked about Mrs. Ramsays pearl necklace, again he boasted, Theyll never be able to get a culture pearl that an expert like me cant tell with half an eye. He pointed to a chain that Mrs. Ramsay wore. You take my word for it, Mrs. Ramsay, that chain youre wearing will never be worth a cent less than it is now. When it came to his vanity, it has been exposed to the full. Firstly, it was quite ironic that people called him Mr. Know All, even to his face yet he took it as a compliment. Secondly, judging from his choice of words, Mr. Kelada appeared to be very artificial. I was jolly glad when I heard you were English. He said when he greeted his roommate. Instead of using very glad, he chose an old-fashion English word jolly, which was usually used by the noble. Moreover, when he offered some wine to the narrator he said, Well, there are plenty more where that came from, and if youve got any friends on board, you tell them youve got a pal whos got all the liquor in the world. No matter through the narrator or judged by the readers themselves, obviously, all that readers knew about him was merely his loquacity and kindness. Actually in his

deep soul, he wanted so badly to be accepted by other groups of people, especially by the native British people. His appearance, words and behavior showed that he was not a British people in born but a native of one of the British colonies. The reason why he appeared to be extremely talkative and vehement was that he wanted to be with other people and find a sense of belonging. His country turned to the colony of the Britain, therefore it has lost its sovereignty, and so did its people. They have no dignity. Maybe they simply wanted to find something that could make them equal to these British colonizers. He chatted with almost everyone on every topic to prove how great he was and put some air on him. Secondly, the techniques used by the author in creating the story. In this short story, irony, contrast and foreshadowing were applied in shaping the characters and developing the plot. Basically, instead of presenting his feelings towards the characters directly, the author used objective facts, the incisive, vivid and unique artistic description to give the readers space to have ideas of their own. Take some sentences from the story as illustrations, I fell pretty sure that a closer inspection of that British passport would have betrayed the fact that Mr.Kelada was born under a bluer sky than is generally seen in England.These words came from the narrator. He didnt directly point out that Mr. Kelada was not a British people, but used A bluer sky to make it humorous and ironic. The author used a large amount of dialogues to interpret Mr.Keladasarrogance and loquacity with a view to form a contrast with his considerate and sympathy to Mrs. Ramsay. It was not difficult to find that foreshadowing existed in this story that indicated what would happen later. For example, the description of Mr. Keladas luggage was actually the indication of his social status and his background. His luggage contained many staffs: excellent Monsieur Coty,and brushes ebonized with his monogram in gold. These indicated that he was an experienced man and with some money. In addition, he ran everything. He was everywhere and always. He liked to deal with all kind of people, when he saw Mrs. Ramsays necklace, he recognized it immediately and pretty sure it was made by real pearls. Needless to say he dared to have a wager with Mr. Ramsay. But when he saw Mrs. Ramsays wide and terrified eyes, he said he was mistaken. It was also an indication that Mrs. Ramsays necklace was really valuable, he was a good person at the end of the story. What is more ,Mr Know-All is a narrative written in the first person. This allows the reader to see the point of view (including opinions, thoughts, and feelings) only of the narrator, and no other characters. A very important part of reading a story

like this is trying to understand the narrators position in relation to the story being The Open Window The short story "The Open Window" by Saki gives us a marvelous example of how appearance, semblance and our naivety can distract our attention from reality and even make harm to our health. This story also shows how a writer can make perfect use of irony. "The Open Window" is a story about deception, perpetrated on an unsuspecting, and constitutionally nervous man, Mr. Nuttel. He comes to the country in order to cure his nervous condition. He pays a visit to the home of Mrs. Sappleton to introduce himself. Mr. Nuttel is intercepted by her niece, who, while they are waiting for her aunt, regales him with an artful story that, in the end, only makes his nervous condition worse. In the story under consideration I would single out the following types of conflict: an external and an internal one. The internal conflict is a conflict within Mr. Nuttel himself, between the feelings he experienced. The external conflict represents differences between generations. The author contrasts two worlds: that of young people and that of adults. The world of adults is full of prejudices, stringent rules and fears; youthfulness is at the same time full of imagination, inspiration and creativity. Humorous repercussions of the story are caused by the anticipation of the superiority of the child, while controlling the adults. The young girl managed to make fool of five people and what is more, of millions and millions of readers. Towards the end of the story we are unaware of the author's intentions. At first we are inclined to laugh at Mr. Nuttel for being so gullible. We cannot even imagine that we are victims of the very same hoax that Vera perpetrates on Mr. Nuttel; that we have believed Vera's well-told and interesting tale. The author makes use of the third person narrator. He does not interfere for any comments or reflections of the events and does not help the readers to form their own impressions and make their own judgements. And we can conclude that this kind of narrator is an unreliable one, because the readers cannot understand the main irony till the very end of the story. The protagonists of the story are characterized both directly and indirectly. With the help of indirect means of characterization, thoughts, words and actions of Mr.Nuttel, we understand that he is a tactful, delicate and sympathetic man who

"endeavored to say the correct something", sympathized with "the great tragedy" of Mrs. Sappleton. From his sister's words "you'll bury yourself down there and not speak to a living soul" we realize that Mr. Nuttel is quite an unsociable and a withdrawn person who either likes loneliness and prefers it to communication with other people or is afraid of them. The reason of Mr. Nuttel's coming to this village makes us think that he is a very nervous man. The niece of Mrs. Sappleton, Vera, is describes as a "very self-possessed young lady of fifteen". The way this girl speaks to Mr. Nuttel adds to her characterization: "in the meantime you must try and put up with me". She is a self-confident, intrepid, spoilt girl, who possesses an exceptional ability for imagination. By the way, observing the way of her bahaviour after telling her story, we can make a conclusion that Vera is a very good actress. She plays her role till the end of the story and to my mind deserves tumultuous applause. Though Vera's motivations for lying remain unclear to us. We may guess that she could have done it from boredom, not having much to do in the village. Or maybe it was her usual way of behaviour with strangers and she practiced it from time to time. Or perhaps she had some mental problems herself, though she seems to be quite a normal girl. The structure of the story is actually that of a story-within-a-story. The larger "frame" narrative is that of Mr. Nuttel's arrival at Mrs. Sappleton's house. Within this narrative frame is the second story, told by Mrs. Sappleton's niece. The atmosphere and mood of the story can be described from different points of view. While reading the story for the first time and not knowing the truth, the reader is in constant tension and anticipation of what is going to happen. So the atmosphere itself is quite tense. At the same time there present some humorous moments which clear the air. But at the end of the story everybody fully agrees that the atmosphere is ironic. Emotionally-coloured words add to the tension and nervousness of the atmosphere: "shudder", "purely horrible", "ghastly", "shivered", "dazed horror", "shock of nameless fear", "grabbed wildly", "bolted out". The presence of Mrs. Sappleton helps to make the whole atmosphere more cheerful. She "bustled into the room with a whirl of apologies", "rattled on cheerfully", "said something briskly", "brightened into attention". In the story we detect irony of situation, which arouses from the contrast between how a set of circumstances looks on the surface and what it actually is in reality. Saki dramatizes here the conflict between reality and imagination, demonstrating how difficult it can be to distinguish between them. Exactly this can be regarded as the

theme of the short story. Appearances, which can be deceptive, and reality which is hidden behind them, are very often mixed. As a result people are misled by appearances, not recognizing truth, reality, and making fools of themselves. The open window itself can be a symbol of some kind of a boarder between imagination and reality. The message of he story "The Open Window" can be as follows: we must be more prudent and far-sighted in everything, which we have to deal with, in order not to be misled by circumstances and other people. The most dangerous game Major Themes Hunters vs. the hunted The most obvious theme of "The Most Dangerous Game" is that which arises from the relationship of the hunter and the hunted. At the very beginning of story, Rainsford and Zaroff are presented as equals. Both characters are well-accomplished big-game hunters. As the story unfolds, however, their roles change. Rainsford is thrust into the position of the hunted. However, he tries to undermine the game by setting traps for the hunter. Rainsford's form of hunting is passive whereas Zaroff's is active. The fragility of this relationship between the hunted and the hunter is not only displayed in the resolution of the story but also through various passages. For example, Zaroff describes several interactions with animals that resulted in injury on his part. Murder vs. hunting The central moral theme of the story involves the distinction between murder and hunting. Rainsford sees a clear difference between the two, hence his disgust at Zaroff's hunting of men. Zaroff, on the other hand, sees his pastime as similar to a war. This particular theme remains a source of tension throughout the story. As Rainsford is hunted, he does his best to try to destroy Zaroff through a series of traps. In the end, it is implied that Rainsford has proven to be the greater hunter. Rainsford's last line of the story indicates that he slept in Zaroff's bed. Such an action can be read as a metaphor for his unwilling conversion into a hunter of men. Emphasis on color

The darkness presented in the first scene of the story continues through the hunt and the eventual demise of Zaroff. In addition, there are many references to the color black. Ivan is described as having a long, black beard. Zaroff has black eyebrows and a black beard. The eyes of many of the characters are described as black pools. The thematic use of darkness and the color black adds to the suspenseful, dramatic timbre of the story.

War as a hunt The theme of war as a hunt resonates through the back story of "The Most Dangerous Game." Zaroff explicitly compares his game to warfare, as a form of justification. He also mentions the plight of the Cossacks, an ethnic group pushed out of Russia after the fall of the Czar. The manner in which they were hunted is similar to the way Zaroff hunts his current prey as the Cossacks were known as fierce warriors. Questioning of accepted logic Zaroff has a rather demented way of viewing the world, one that Rainsford has a difficult time understanding. Zaroff points out numerous times that the hunting of men is not much unlike the hunting of wild animals. Moreover, men have long participated in socially sanctioned activities, such as wars, that result in the death of the opposing party. Zaroff's comparisons and the subsequent hunt constantly raise the question of the validity of any type of hunting or war. The irony of humanity Zaroff is a man of contradictions. While being an extremely "civilized" man in the sense that he is knowledgeable about aspects of high culture, he also presents himself as barbaric. The entire island is a contradiction. The lavish house stands starkly against the dark jungle where the hunt occurs. In some ways, Zaroff can be seen as a stand-in for humanity. The same irony that Zaroff presents in "The Most Dangerous Game" is also present at the pinnacle of civilization today - highly advanced and educated civilizations still murdering each other over land and resources. Inversion of roles Throughout the story there are a series of role inversions. For example, the hunter becomes the hunted twice. The first time, Rainsford is forced into the position of prey by Zaroff; the second, it is Rainsford that hunts Zaroff. The inversion of roles continues until the end of the story, at which point Rainsford metaphorically takes

on the role of Zaroff by sleeping in his bed. Rainsford has ultimately been transformed by Zaroff's game. The Sniper A brother can be someone close to you, your equal, a fellow human, or your relative. "The Sniper", by Liam O'Flaherty, uses point of view with other elements of fiction to send a message to the reader. The theme of "The Sniper" is that war divides us, all of us are brothers, and brothers are killed in war. Through the author's use of the third person limited point of view allows the reader to find the theme of "The Sniper" through characterization, conflict, and setting. Characterization, an important element in the story, is used to allow the reader to identify with the sniper through the third person limited point of view. An obvious piece of characterization, the sniper's name, is left out of the story to help the reader understand the theme. ". a Republican sniper lay watching." Without a name, the sniper could b someone the reader knows or is close to. Another piece of characterization that is left out is that the sniper has a brother, who is also of fighting age with similar skills. Without this knowledge, the fact that the sniper might actually be shooting at his own brother never even enters the mind of the reader, making the ending even more shocking and enlightening. In war brothers get killed, and everyone is a brother of sorts. Another important element of fiction used in "The Sniper" is conflict. Because of the point of view, the reader is with the sniper throughout the entire story and knows that the sniper has two incidents in which he is forced to kill the enemy. In the first incident "The sniper

raised his rifle and fired. The sniper fired again." His movement was quick and expert; he did not need to think about what he was doing as he did his job. The second time, the sniper knew that he ".must kill that enemy and he could not use his rifle. He had only a revolver to do it. Then he thought of a plan." He now had to think about how he was going to make his second kill. He had gained respect for his equal and had to outwit the enemy. The author uses point of view and conflict to make the reader first root for the sniper, then feel disgusted when the truth about the enemy is revealed, pushing the theme of the story deeper into the reader and making the readr unable to escape from the truth. The conflict, through point of view, lets the reader see a ifference in events in the story and then discover the devastating truth. The plot of the story is based on the conflict between the two snipers and point of view is used in conjunction with the plot to arrive at the overall theme. The author uses the point of view so that we see differences in the events of the story. In the first incident, the sniper looks down on the armored car that is ".on the opposite side of the street fifty yards ahead." At the end of the story, the enemy sniper on the opposite roof is at the same level as the sniper; the enemy sniper is an equal; the sniper cannot look down on him. At the end of the story when ". the sniper turned over the dead body." the story does not say that he felt anything, but as the reader of the story, it is easy to infer feelings and to make assumptions about the many emotions the sniper felt at seeing his brother's face. "The Sniper" uses the point of view of third person limited to convey

the theme of the story, in conjunction with characterization, conflict, and plot. The theme of the story is that everyone is a brother or has a brother and war kills brothers. This story is truly an anti-war story that expresses the true calamity of war in a way so that the reader can find out the author's opinion just by reading the story and reflecting on its meaning. War is always terrible because someone's "brother" will be separated from him forever.