Validity of Names in Machiavelli’s Prince and Simone de Beauvoir’s Second Sex :: Machiavelli Prince Essays

harshness of Names in Machiavellis Prince and Simone de Beauvoirs assist Sex batch often drop titles to assure the achievement of whatever close it is they are trying to achieve. This tactic works especially well in business, but it can too work in argument. Names of potent people lead influential affects. I know Don Corleone, would surely have gotten nearly anything done in Mario Puzos The Godfather. Both Simone de Beauvoir and Niccol Machiavelli employ the names of well-known people to add a sense of immensity and truth to what it was they were saying. Their choice of names is very similar. They both chose fabled heroes, preceding(a) and present political figures and fictional powers to help their work gain value. However, they differ in a subtle way. The names are pulmonary tuberculosisd a lot like a recipe uses measurements one part politics to ii parts fiction. This ratio adds a different tone to each argument, which also helps to get the authors, de Beauvoir or Machiavellis, point across. In de Beauvoirs The Second Sex, there are many references made to true, verifiable sources. Granted that she makes use of nearly all possible spectrums of existence in terms of beings she chooses to cite, there is an underlying tone of definite truth in her work. She cites these people in packs and lists, using context to categorize her groups. Some isolated individuals Sappho c. 610-c. 580 b.c., Christine de Pisan 1364-1431, Mary Wollstonecraft 1759-1997, Olympe de Gouges 1748-1793 have protested against the harshness of their destiny, (de Beauvoir). Joan of Arc (1412-1431), Mme Jeanne-Marie Roland (1759-1793), Flora Tristan (1803-1844)Figures important for their political or subverter activity, (Jacobus footnote, p 179). In the first case, we make a list of quartet sure-fire sources, all of whom protested against the harshness of their destiny. We find out later in the work that these four people were all authors. In the second case, we see true- life people, all of whom were some how politically involved. De Beauvoir hits us with a rapid-fire bombardment of needful truths. When she uses a fictitious character, however, it is usually alone. The suicide of Lucretia has had value only as a symbol, (de Beauvoir). Here we see a not-so verifiable citation. It is alone in the text, an island surrounded by a sea of de Beauvoirs own words. This name is by itself.