All The Kings Men

Truth Versus Fact         In Robert Penn Warrens All the Kings Men, the cashier, jackass Burden, has an inbred abridge concerning the truth versus the facts. This deficiency is demonstrated several time throughout the novel. On such occurrence universe the Cass Mastern score, and a nonher being the racing shell of the Upright assess. In these scenarios, ambush has problems differentiating surrounded by the truth and the facts.         The first example starts when twat was still in school, trying to get his Ph.D. in Ameri squirt Hi recital. horseshit had come into possession of some journals of a jolly distant congeneric named Cass Mastern. When it comes time for seafarer to select a topic for his dissertation, at his professors suggestion, he chooses to edit and analyze the primary coil source sum up of Cass Mastern and his life. When Jack begins his research, and is telling the story to the reader as the narrator of All the Kings Men, he becomes exclusively engrossed with the story, and he tells it at times as if it were his own. When Jack finally finishes telling the story, he withdraws; he becomes afraid that every he does not visualize history, or that the history could be misinterpreted. Herein lies Jacks dilemma respecting facts and truth. Jack describes himself as one who, opposed others, lives in the chivalric in modulate to escape the present. When Jack reads history, like the Cass Mastern story, he does not observe what he reads as truth to be upheld, nevertheless merely as facts that could be changed or manipulated. Thus, as he finishes the Cass Mastern story, he looks back upon the tosh that he has just entire and sees sole(prenominal) words with no life or import behind them. Jack wherefore abandons the project and halts all arrive at on his dissertation. He runs away from his link of historic to present, as if burning his only bridge home.         The se cond example of Jacks mistaking of facts in ! the past comes with the Case of the Upright Judge. In this pillowcase, Willie has asked Jack, as a historian, to dig up dirt on Judge Irwin to yobbo him into backing Willie or at to the lowest degree withdrawing his assist for Willies opponent. Morality comes into pass in this situation because when Jack was a boy, the Judge had acted as a surrogate cause for Jack.

At the start, Jack is sure that there is nothing to come upon on the Judge, but as he delves further into the past, he discovers that the Judge was involved in some foul play dapple he was in the Attorney Generals office. The Judge had taken a lot of money in stock options in a corporation in exchange for throwing out a case against them. When Jack discovers this, it does not strike him that in enceinte this instruction to Willie he is hurting the Judge. Willie does not see that these facts from the past generate to harmful truths in the present.         In conclusion, Jack, the narrator, does not see that facts that occurred in the past are like truths, he calls them, in the present. He sees past happenings as a fictional story that can be interpreted in any soma of ways. The Case of the Upright Judge and the Cass Mastern story, and the events surrounding them in likeness to Jack, supply this clearly. If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay