Hypocrisy in the context of "Resurrection (Tolstoy novel)"

Play Trivia Questions online!

or

Skip to study material about Hypocrisy in the context of "Resurrection (Tolstoy novel)"

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Hypocrisy

Hypocrisy is the practice of feigning what one is not or professing what one does not believe. The word "hypocrisy" entered the English language c. 1200 with the meaning "the sin of pretending to virtue or goodness". Today, "hypocrisy" often refers to advocating behaviors that one does not practice. However, the term can also refer to other forms of pretense, such as engaging in pious or moral behaviors out of a desire for praise rather than out of genuinely pious or moral motivations.

Definitions of hypocrisy vary. In moral psychology, it is the failure to follow one's own expressed moral rules and principles. According to British political philosopher David Runciman, "other kinds of hypocritical deception include claims to knowledge that one lacks, claims to a consistency that one cannot sustain, claims to a loyalty that one does not possess, claims to an identity that one does not hold". American political journalist Michael Gerson says that political hypocrisy is "the conscious use of a mask to fool the public and gain political benefit".

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<

👉 Hypocrisy in the context of Resurrection (Tolstoy novel)

Resurrection (pre-reform Russian: Воскресеніе; post-reform Russian: Воскресение, romanizedVoskreséniye, also translated as The Awakening), first published in December 1899, was the last novel written by Leo Tolstoy. The book is the final of his major long fiction works published in his lifetime. Tolstoy intended the novel as a panoramic view of Russia at the end of the 19th century from the highest to the lowest levels of society and as an exposition of the injustice of man-made laws and the hypocrisy of the institutionalized church. The novel also explores the economic philosophy of Georgism, of which Tolstoy had become a very strong advocate towards the end of his life, and explains the theory in detail. The publication of Resurrection led to Tolstoy's excommunication by the Holy Synod from the Russian Orthodox Church in 1901.

↓ Explore More Topics
In this Dossier

Hypocrisy in the context of The Red Room (Strindberg novel)

The Red Room (Swedish: Röda rummet) is a Swedish novel by August Strindberg that was first published in 1879. A satire of Stockholm society, it has frequently been described as the first modern Swedish novel. In this novel, Strindberg reflects on his own experiences of living in poverty while writing this novel from February to November 1879. While receiving mixed reviews in Sweden, it was acclaimed in Denmark, where Strindberg was hailed as a genius. As a result of The Red Room, Strindberg became famous throughout Scandinavia. Edvard Brandes wrote that it "makes the reader want to join the fight against hypocrisy and reaction."

A young idealistic civil servant, Arvid Falk, leaves the drudgery of bureaucracy to become a journalist and author. As he explores various social activities—politics, publishing, theatre, philanthropy, and business—he finds more hypocrisy and political corruption than he thought possible. He takes refuge with a group of "bohemians", who meet in a red dining room in Berns Salonger to discuss these matters.

↑ Return to Menu

Hypocrisy in the context of Integrity

Integrity is the quality of being honest and having a consistent and uncompromising adherence to strong moral and ethical principles and values.In ethics, integrity is regarded as the honesty and truthfulness or earnestness of one's actions. Integrity can stand in opposition to hypocrisy. It regards internal consistency as a virtue, and suggests that people who hold apparently conflicting values should account for the discrepancy or alter those values.

The word integrity evolved from the Latin adjective integer, meaning whole or complete. In this context, integrity is the inner sense of "wholeness" deriving from qualities such as honesty and consistency of character.

↑ Return to Menu

Hypocrisy in the context of Le Misanthrope

The Misanthrope, or the Cantankerous Lover (French: Le Misanthrope ou l'Atrabilaire amoureux; French pronunciation: [lə mizɑ̃tʁɔp u latʁabilɛːʁ amuʁø]) is a 17th-century comedy of manners in verse written by Molière. It was first performed on 4 June 1666 at the Théâtre du Palais-Royal, Paris by the King's Players.

The play satirizes the hypocrisies of French aristocratic society, but it also engages a more serious tone when pointing out the flaws that afflict all humans. The play differs from other farces of the time by employing dynamic characters like Alceste and Célimène as opposed to the flat caricatures of traditional social satire. It also differs from most of Molière's other works by focusing more on character development and nuances than on plot progression. The play, though not a commercial success in its time, survives as Molière's best-known work today.

↑ Return to Menu

Hypocrisy in the context of Dream of the Rarebit Fiend

Dream of the Rarebit Fiend is a newspaper comic strip by American cartoonist Winsor McCay, begun September 10, 1904. It was McCay's second successful strip, after Little Sammy Sneeze secured him a position on the cartoon staff of the New York Herald. Rarebit Fiend appeared in the Evening Telegram, a newspaper published by the Herald. For contractual reasons, McCay signed the strip with the pen name "Silas".

The strip had no continuity or recurring characters, but a recurring theme: a character has a nightmare or other bizarre dream, usually after eating a Welsh rarebit—a cheese-on-toast dish. The character awakens in the closing panel and regrets having eaten the rarebit. The dreams often reveal unflattering sides of the dreamers' psyches—their phobias, hypocrisies, discomforts, and dark fantasies. This was in great contrast to the colorful fantasy dreams in McCay's signature strip Little Nemo, which he began in 1905. Whereas children were Nemo's target audience, McCay aimed Rarebit Fiend at adults.

↑ Return to Menu

Hypocrisy in the context of Time Lord

The Time Lords are a fictional ancient race of extraterrestrial people in the British science fiction television series Doctor Who. In-universe, they hail from the planet Gallifrey and are stated to have invented time travel technology. They have sworn an oath to not interfere in the universe; those who reject this and leave the planet to live in the universe are referred to as "renegades". One of their number, the Doctor, fled Gallifrey, stealing one of their time machines known as a TARDIS. In the early days of the series, the Time Lords were not initially referred to, and though the Doctor was stated to be non-human, the character did not clarify beyond that. The Time Lords, as well as the Doctor's affiliation with them, first appeared in the 1969 serial The War Games. Following this appearance, the Time Lords serve as recurring characters, with many individual Time Lords serving either antagonistic or supporting roles in the series. Following the show's 2005 revival, it is revealed the Time Lords had been wiped out in-universe, killed by the Doctor during the events of a war against a species known as the Daleks. Though the Doctor is later able to go back and save the Time Lords in the 2013 episode "The Day of the Doctor", they are killed again by the antagonist the Master during the events of the 2020 episode "Spyfall".

The Time Lords originally did not exist in the series' narrative, though the Doctor referred to not being human. When creating 1969 serial The War Games, the production team needed a way to resolve the narrative of the serial in a satisfying manner. The team decided to have him meet his own people to bring the narrative back to the Doctor's origins. The Time Lords are believed to have been conceived by producer Derrick Sherwin, who initially had assumed they were a pre-existing element in the series. Sherwin discussed and planned out the Time Lords' role with co-writer Terrance Dicks, laying the groundwork for the Time Lords' future appearances in the series. Though the Time Lords were initially portrayed as god-like figures, they were recontextualised significantly by the 1976 serial The Deadly Assassin. The serial depicted them as having internal political struggles, with Time Lords being hypocritical and corrupt in their nature. The serial also established a distinct visual identity for the Time Lord race, having them wear ceremonial robes and large collars. This depiction of the Time Lords would be maintained throughout the rest of the show's original run. The show's 2005 revival would end up killing the Time Lord race due to showrunner Russell T Davies finding the Time Lords boring, while also wanting to establish them as mythological figures in the series' lore. The following showrunner, Steven Moffat, would bring them back to establish a new character arc for the Doctor, allowing the character to move on from their guilt caused by their actions in destroying them.

↑ Return to Menu