The Sports Of Sports And Religion - 1482 Words

So who do you really want on your team? There is a real debate going on. Would you rather be on a team with a born-again Christian, who would rather read the Bible than the playbook, or a with a party going statistic acquiring machine that stays out late getting drunk, or is constantly seeking performance enhancing drugs? This question has been going back since the beginning of professional sports, and it probably will never be answered. The co-existence of sports and religion occur throughout most nations. Character building, discipline, physical fitness, competitions, constant practices, mental fitness, fairness, rules, nationalism, religiosity, and so on, continue to help build a beautiful intriguing positive society. Among some†¦show more content†¦According to Achebe (1980) the elders of the two communities involved in the wrestling contest visited the shrines and consulted their gods, offering sacrifices, led by their priests and priestesses, for blessings to ensure they won the contest. During the contest, the drummers beat their drums like those possessed and this it was believed signified the presence of the spirits who were the determining factors in the results of the contest. In the modern society today, there are a number of interesting likes between sports and religion, including the worship of athletes as gods and heroes (e.g. LeBron James, Tom Brady, etc.), of symbols of Faith such as trophies, baseballs, game balls, and sport-related souvenirs, and the charisma that is attached to the elites and leaders in the sport world. Sports and religion have often been used to create strong emotions and celebrate selected group values through rituals and public events. There are many subjective examples of how religion has been used to simply reaffirm and intensify angles that lead to success in competitive sports. Some pastors challenge those with doubts on the co-existence of sport and religion by emphasizing dimensions of training and sport participation that fit well with the certain aspects of the Protestant Ethic. Some athletes and coaches may use their religion as a source of psychological support as

Feminist Approach to Witchcraft; Case Study Miller’s the Crucible Free Essays

string(78) " commodity in what Luce Irigaray has termed a â€Å"dominant scopic economy\." Title: Re(dis)covering the Witches in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible: A Feminist Reading Author(s): Wendy Schissel Publication Details: Modern Drama 37. 3 (Fall 1994): p461-473. Source: Drama Criticism. We will write a custom essay sample on Feminist Approach to Witchcraft; Case Study: Miller’s the Crucible or any similar topic only for you Order Now Vol. 31. Detroit: Gale. From Literature Resource Center. Document Type: Critical essay Bookmark: Bookmark this Document Full Text: COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning Title Re(dis)covering the Witches in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible: A Feminist Reading [(essay date fall 1994) In the following essay, Schissel offers a feminist reading of The Crucible, in an effort to deconstruct â€Å"the phallologocentric sanctions implicit in Miller’s account of Abigail’s fate, Elizabeth’s confession, and John’s temptation and death. ] Arthur Miller’s The Crucible is a disturbing work, not only because of the obvious moral dilemma that is irresolutely solved by John Proctor’s death, but also because of the treatment that Abigail and Elizabeth receive at Miller’s hands and at the hands of critics. In forty years of criticism very little has been said about the ways in which The Crucible reinforces stereotypes of femme fatales and cold and unforgiving wives in order to assert apparently universal virtues. It is a morality play based upon a questionable androcentric morality. Like Proctor, The Crucible â€Å"[roars] down† Elizabeth, making her concede a fault which is not hers but of Miller’s making: â€Å"It needs a cold wife to prompt lechery,†1 she admits in her final meeting with her husband. Critics have seen John as a â€Å"tragically heroic common man,†2 humanly tempted, â€Å"a just man in a universe gone mad,†3 but they have never given Elizabeth similar consideration, nor have they deconstructed the phallologocentric sanctions implicit in Miller’s account of Abigail’s fate, Elizabeth’s confession, and John’s temptation and death. As a feminist reader of the 1990s, I am troubled by the unrecognized fallout from the existential humanism that Miller and his critics have held dear. The Crucible is in need of an/Other reading, one that reveals the assumptions of the text, the author, and the reader/critic who â€Å"is part of the shared consciousness created by the [play]. â€Å"4 It is time to reveal the vicarious enjoyment that Miller and his critics have found in a cathartic male character who has enacted their exual and political fantasies. The setting of The Crucible is a favoured starting point in an analysis of the play. Puritan New England of 1692 may indeed have had its parallels to McCarthy’s America of 1952,5 but there is more to the paranoia than xenophobia–of Natives and Communists, respectively. Implicit in Puritan theology, in Miller’s version of the Salem witch trials, and all too frequent in the society which has produced Miller’s critics is gynecophobia–fear a nd distrust of women. The â€Å"half dozen heavy books† (36) which the zealous Reverend Hale endows on Salem â€Å"like a bridegroom to his beloved, bearing gifts† (132) are books on witchcraft from which he has acquired an â€Å"armory of symptoms, catchwords, and diagnostic procedures† (36). A 1948 edition of the 1486 Malleus Maleficarum (Hammer of Witches), with a foreword by Montague Summers, may have prompted Miller’s inclusion of seventeenth-century and Protestant elucidations upon a work originally sanctioned by the Roman Church. Hale’s books would be â€Å"highly misogynic† tomes, for like the Malleus they would be premised on the belief that â€Å"‘All witchcraft comes from carnal lust which in women is insatiable. ‘†7 The authors of the Maleus, two Dominican monks, Johan Sprenger and Heinrich Kraemer, were writing yet another fear-filled version of the apocryphal bad woman: they looked to Ecclesiasties which declares the wickedness of a woman is all evil †¦ there is no anger above the anger of a woman. It will be more agreeable to abide with a lion and a dragon, than to dwell with a wicked woman †¦ rom the woman came the beginning of sin, and by her we all die. (25:17, 23, 33) The Crucible is evidence that Miller partakes of similar fears about wicked, angry, or wise women; even if his complicity in such gynecophobia is unwitting–and that is the most generous thing we can accord him, a â€Å"misrecognition† of himself and his reputation-conscious hero John as the authors of a subjectivity8 which belongs exclusively to men–the result for generations of readers has been the same. In Salem, the majority of witches condemned to die were women. Even so, Salem’s numbers were negligible9 compared with the gynocide in Europe: Andrea Dworkin quotes a moderate estimate of nine million witches executed at a ratio of women to men of as much as 100 to 1. 10 Miller assures us in one of his editorial and political (and long and didactic) comments, that despite the Puritans’ belief in witchcraft, â€Å"there were no witches† (35) in Salem; his play, however, belies his claim, and so do his critics. The Crucible is filled with witches, from the wise woman/healer Rebecca Nurse to the black woman Tituba, who initiates the girls into the dancing which has always been part of the communal celebrations of women healers/witches. 11 But the most obvious witch in Miller’s invention upon Salem history is Abigail Williams. She is the consummate seductress; the witchcraft hysteria in the play originates in her carnal lust for Proctor. Miller describes Abigail as â€Å"a strikingly beautiful girl †¦ ith an endless capacity for dissembling† (8-9). In 1953, William Hawkins called Abigail â€Å"an evil child†;12 in 1967, critic Leonard Moss said she was a â€Å"malicious figure† and â€Å"unstable†;13 in 1987, June Schlueter and James Flanagan proclaimed her â€Å"a whore,†14 echoing Proctor’s â€Å"How do you call Heaven! Whore! Whore! † (109); and in 1989, Bernard Dukore suggested that â€Å"if the ‘strikingly beautiful†™ Abigail’s behaviour in the play is an indication, she may have been the one to take the initiative. 15 The critics forget what Abigail cannot: â€Å"John Proctor †¦ took me from my sleep and put knowledge in my heart! † (24). They, like Miller, underplay so as not openly to condone the â€Å"natural† behaviour of a man tempted to adultery because of a young woman’s beauty and precociousness, her proximity in a house where there is also an apparently frigid wife, and the repression of Puritan society and religion. Abigail is a delectable commodity in what Luce Irigaray has termed a â€Å"dominant scopic economy. You read "Feminist Approach to Witchcraft; Case Study: Miller’s the Crucible" in category "Free Case study samples" 16 We are covertly invited to equate John’s admirable rebellion at the end of the play–against the unconscionable demands of implicating others in a falsely acknowledged sin of serving that which is anti thetical to community (the Puritans called that antithesis the devil)–with his more self-serving rebellion against its sexual mores. The subtle equation allows Miller not only to project fault upon Abigail, but also to make what is really a cliched act of adultery on John’s part much more interesting. Miller wants us to recognize, if not celebrate, the individual trials of his existential hero, a â€Å"spokesman for rational feeling and disinterested intelligence† in a play about â€Å"integrity and its obverse, compromise. â€Å"17 Mary Daly might describe the scholarly support that Miller has received for his fantasy-fulfilling hero as â€Å"The second element of the Sado-Ritual [of the witch-craze] †¦ [an] erasure of responsibility. â€Å"18 No critic has asked, though, how a seventeen-year-old girl, raised in the household of a Puritan minister, can have the knowledge of how to seduce a man. The only rationale offered scapegoats another woman, Tituba, complicating gynecophobia with xenophobia. ) The omission on Miller’s and his critics’ parts implies that Abigail’s sexual knowledge must be inherent in her gender. I see the condemnation of Abigail as an all too common example of blaming the victim. Mercy Lewis’s reaction to John is an other indictment of the sexual precociousness of the girls of Salem. Obviously knowledgeable of John and Abigail’s affair, Mercy is both afraid of John and, Miller says, â€Å"strangely titillated† as she â€Å"sidles out† of the room (21). Mary Warren, too, knows: â€Å"Abby’ll charge lechery on you, Mr. Proctor† (80), she says when he demands she tell what she knows about the â€Å"poppet† to the court. John is aghast: â€Å"She’s told you! † (80). Rather than condemning John, all these incidents are included to emphasize the â€Å"vengeance of a little girl† (79), and, I would add, to convince the reader who is supposed to sympathize with John (or to feel titillation himself) that no girl is a â€Å"good girl,† free of sexual knowledge, that each is her mother Eve’s daughter. The fact is, however, that Salem’s young women, who have been preached at by a fire and brimstone preacher, Mr. Parris, are ashamed of their bodies. A gynocritical reading of Mary Warren’s cramps after Sarah Good mumbles her displeasure at being turned away from the Proctor’s door empty-handed is explainable as a â€Å"curse† of a more periodic nature: But what does she mumble? You must remember, Goody Proctor. Last Month–a Monday, I think–she walked away, and I thought my guts would burst for two days after. Do you remember it? 58) The â€Å"girls† are the inheritors of Eve’s sin, and their bodies are their reminders. Though, like all young people, they find ways to rebel–just because adolescence did not exist in Puritan society does not mean that the hormones did not flow–they are seriously repressed. And the most insidious aspect of that repression, in a society in which girls are not considered women until they marry (as young as fourteen, or significantly, with the onset of menses), is the turning of the young women’s frustrations upon members of their own gender. It is not so strange as Proctor suggests for â€Å"a Christian girl to hang old women! † (58), when one such Christian girl claims her position in society with understandable determination: â€Å"I’ll not be ordered to bed no more, Mr. Proctor! I am eighteen and a woman, however single! † (60). Paradoxically, of course, the discord only serves to prove the assumptions of a parochial society about the jealousies of women, an important aspect of this play in which Miller makes each woman in John’s life claim herself as his rightful spouse: Elizabeth assures him that â€Å"I will be your only wife, or no wife at all! (62); and Abigail makes her heart’s desire plain with â€Å"I will make you such a wife when the world is white again! † (150). To realize her claim Abigail has sought the help of voodoo–Tituba’s and the court’s–to get rid of Elizabeth, but not without clear provocation on John’s part. Miller miss es an opportunity to make an important comment upon the real and perceived competitions for men forced upon women in a patriarchal society by subsuming the women’s concerns within what he knows his audience will recognize as more admirable communal and idealistic concerns. The eternal triangle motif, while it serves many interests for Miller, is, ultimately, less important than the overwhelming nobility of John’s Christ-like martyrdom; against that the women’s complaints seem petty indeed, and an audience whose collective consciousness recognizes a dutifully repentent hero also sees the women in his life as less sympathetic. 19 For Abigail and Elizabeth also represent the extremes of female sexuality–sultriness and frigidity, respectively–which test a man’s body, endanger his spirit, and threaten his â€Å"natural† dominance or needs. In order to make Abigail’s seductive capability more believable and John’s culpability less pronounced, Miller has deliberately raised Abigail’s age (â€Å"A Note on the Historical Accuracy of This Play†) from twelve to seventeen. 20 He introduces us to John and Abigail in the first act with John’s acknowledgement of her young age. Abby–the diminutive form of her name is not to be missed–is understandably annoyed: â€Å"How do you call me child! † (23). We already know about his having â€Å"clutched† her back behind his house and â€Å"sweated like a stallion† at her every approach (22). Despite Abigail’s allegations, Miller achieves the curious effect of making her the apparent aggressor in this scene–as critical commentary proves. Miller’s ploy, to blame a woman for the Fall of a good man, is a sleight of pen as old as the Old Testament. There is something too convenient in the fact that â€Å"legend has it that Abigail turned up later as a prostitute in Boston† (â€Å"Echoes Down the Corridor†). Prostitution is not only the oldest profession, but it is also the oldest evidence for the law of supply and demand. Men demand sexual services of women they in turn regard as socially deviant. Miller’s statement of Abigail’s fate resounds with implicit forgiveness for the man who is unwittingly tempted by a fatal female, a conniving witch. Miller’s treatment of Abigail in the second scene of Act Two, left out of the original reading version and most productions but included as an appendix in contemporary texts of the play, is also dishonest. Having promised Elizabeth as she is being taken away in chains that â€Å"I will fall like an ocean on that court! Fear nothing† (78)–at the end of the first scene of Act Two–John returns to Abigail, alone and at night. The scene is both anticlimactic and potentially damning of the hero. What may have begun as Miller’s attempt to have the rational John reason with Abigail, even with the defense that Elizabeth has adjured him to talk to her (61)–although that is before Elizabeth is herself accused–ends in a discussion that is dangerous to John’s position in the play. Miller wants us to believe, as Proctor does â€Å"seeing her madness† when she reveals her self-inflicted injuries, that Abigail is insane: â€Å"I’m holes all over from their damned needles and pins† (149). While Miller may have intended her madness to be a metaphor for her inherent evil–sociologists suggest that madness replaced witchcraft as a pathology to be treated not by burning or hanging but by physicians and incarceration in mental institutions21–he must have realized he ran the risk of making her more sympathetic than he intended. Miller is intent upon presenting John as a man haunted by guilt and aware of his own hypocrisy, and to make Abigail equally aware, even in a state of madness, is too risky. Her long speech about John’s â€Å"goodness† cannot be tolerated because its irony is too costly to John. Why, you taught me goodness, therefore you are good. It were fire you walked me through, and all my ignorance was burned away. It were a fire, John, we lay in fire. And from that night no woman dare call me wicked any more but I knew my answer. I used to weep for my sins when the wind lifted up my skirts; and blushed for shame because some old Rebecca called me loose. And then you burned my ignorance away. As bare as some December ree I saw them all–walking like saints to church, running to feed the sick, and hypocrites in their hearts! And God gave me strength to call them liars, and God made men to listen to me, and by God I will scrub the world clean for the love of Him! (150)22 We must not forget, either, when we are considering critical commentary, that we are dealing with an art form which has a specular dimension. The many Abigails of the stage have no doubt contributed to the unacknowledged view of Abigail as siren/witch that so many critics have. In Jed Harris’s original production in 1953, in Miller’s own production of the same year (to which the later excised scene was first added), and in Laurence Olivier’s 1965 production, Abigail was played by an actress in her twenties, not a young girl. The intent on each director’s part had to have been to make Abigail’s lust for John believable. Individual performers have consistently enacted the siren’s role: The eyes of Madeleine Sherwood, who played Abigail in 1953, glowed with lust †¦ [but] Perhaps the most impressive Abigail has been that of Sarah Miles in 1965. A â€Å"plaguingly sexy mixture of beauty and crossness† †¦ Miles â€Å"reeks with the cunning of suppressed evil and steams with the promise of suppressed passion. â€Å"23 Only the 1980 production of The Crucible by Bill Bryden employed girls who looked even younger than seventeen. Dukore suggests that Bryden’s solution to the fact that John’s â€Å"seduction of a teenage girl half his age appears not to have impressed [critics] as a major fault† was â€Å"ingenious yet (now that he has done it) obvious. â€Å"24 Abigail is not the only witch in Miller’s play, though; Elizabeth, too, is a hag. But it is Elizabeth who is most in need of feminist reader-redemption. If John is diminished as Christian hero by a feminist deconstruction, the diminution is necessary to a balanced reading of the play and to a revised mythopoeia of the paternalistic monotheism of the Puritans and its twentieth-century equivalent, the existential mysticism of Miller. John’s sense of guilt is intended by Miller to act as salve to any emotional injuries given his wife and his own conscience. When his conscience cannot be calmed, when he quakes at doing what he knows must be done in revealing Abigail’s deceit, it is upon Elizabeth that he turns his wrath: Spare me! You forget nothin’ and forgive nothin’. Learn charity, woman. I have gone tiptoe in this house all seven month since she is gone. I have not moved from there to there without I think to please you, and still an everlasting funeral marches round your heart. I cannot speak but I am doubted, every moment judged for lies, as though I come into a court when I come into this house. (54-55) What we are meant to read as understandably defensive anger–that is if we read within the patriarchal framework in which the play is written–must be re-evaluated; such a reading must be done in the light of Elizabeth’s logic–paradoxically, the only â€Å"cold† thing about her. She is right when she turns his anger back on him with â€Å"the magistrate sits in your heart that judges you† (55). She is also right on two other counts. First, John has â€Å"a faulty understanding of young girls. There is a promise made in any bed† (61). The uninitiated and obviously self-punishing Abigail may be excused for thinking as she does (once again in the excised scene) that he is â€Å"singing secret hallelujahs that [his] wife will hang! † (152) Second, John does retain some tender feelings for Abigail despite his indignation. Elizabeth’s question reverberates with insight: â€Å"if it were not Abigail that you must go to hurt, would you falter now? I think not† (54). John has already admitted to Abigail–and to us–in the first act that â€Å"I may think of you softly from time to time† (23), and he does look at her with â€Å"the faintest suggestion of a knowing smile on his face† (21). And John’s use of wintry images of Elizabeth and their home in Act Two–â€Å"It’s winter in her yet† (51)–echoes the imagery used by Abigail in Act One. 25 John is to Abigail â€Å"no wintry man,† but one whose â€Å"heat† has drawn her to her window to see him looking up (23). She is the one who describes Elizabeth as â€Å"a cold, snivelling woman† (24), but it is Miller’s favoured imagery for a stereotypically frigid wife who is no less a witch (in patriarchal lore) than a hot-blooded sperm-stealer like Abigail. Exacerbating all of this is the fact that John lies to Elizabeth about having been alone with Abigail in Parris’s house; Miller would have us believe that John lies to save Elizabeth pain, but I believe he lies out of a rationalizing habit that he carries forward to his death. Miller may want to be kind to Elizabeth, but he cannot manage that and John’s heroism, too. Act Two opens with Elizabeth as hearth angel singing softly offstage to the children who are, significantly, never seen in the play, and bringing John his supper–stewed rabbit which, she says, â€Å"it hurt my heart to strip† (50). But in the space of four pages Miller upbraids her six times. First, John â€Å"is not quite pleased† (49) with the taste of Elizabeth’s stew, and before she appears on stage he adds salt to it. Second, there is a â€Å"certain disappointment† (50) for John in the way Elizabeth receives his kiss. Third, John’s request for â€Å"Cider? made â€Å"as gently as he can† (51) leaves Elizabeth â€Å"reprimanding herself for having forgot† (51). Fourth, John reminds Elizabeth of the cold atmosphere in their house: â€Å"You ought to bring flowers in the house †¦ It’s winter in here yet† (51). Fifth, John perceives Elizabeth’s melancholy as something perennial: â€Å"I think youâ⠂¬â„¢re sad again† (51, emphasis added). And sixth, and in a more overtly condemning mood, John berates Elizabeth when he discovers that she has allowed Mary Warren to go to Salem to testify: â€Å"It is a fault, it is a fault, Elizabeth–you’re the mistress here† (52). Cumulatively, these criticisms work to arouse sympathy for a man who would season his meal, his home, and his amour, a man who is meant to appeal to us because of his sensual awareness of spring’s erotic promise: â€Å"It’s warm as blood beneath the clods† (50), and â€Å"I never see such a load of flowers on the earth. †¦ Lilacs have a purple smell. Lilac is the smell of nightfall† (51). We, too, are seasoned to believe that John really does â€Å"[aim] to please† Elizabeth, and that Elizabeth is relentless in her admonishing of John for his affair, of which she is knowledgeable. It is for John that we are to feel sympathy when he says, â€Å"Let you look to your own improvement before you go to judge your husband more† (54). Miller has informed us of several ways in which Elizabeth could improve herself. Neil Carson claims that â€Å"Miller intends the audience to view Proctor ironically† in this scene; Proctor, he says, is â€Å"a man who is rationalising in order to avoid facing himself,† and at the beginning of Act Two â€Å"Proctor is as guilty as any of projecting his own faults onto others. 26 While I find much in Carson’s entire chapter on The Crucible as sensitive a criticism of the play as any written, I am still uncomfortable about the fact that a â€Å"tragic victory† for the protagonist27 necessarily means an admission of guilt for his wife–once again, it seems to me, a victim is being blamed. No critic, not even Carson, questions Miller’s insistence that Elizabeth is at least partly to blame for John’s infidelity. Her fate is sealed in the lie she tells for love of her husband because she proves him a liar: â€Å"as in All My Sons,† says critic Leonard Moss, â€Å"a woman inadvertently betrays her husband. 28 John has told several lies throughout the play, but it is Elizabeth’s lie that the critics (and Miller) settle upon, for once again the lie fits the stereotype–woman as liar, woman as schemer, woman as witch sealing the fate of man the would-be hero. But looked at another way, Elizabeth is not a liar. The question put to her by Judge Danforth is â€Å"Is [present tense] your husband a lecher! † (113). Elizabeth can in good conscience respond in the negative for she knows the affair to be over. She has no desire to condemn the man who has betrayed her, for she believes John to be nothing but a â€Å"good man †¦ nly somewhat bewildered† (55). Once again, though, her comment condemns her because an audience hears (and Miller perhaps intends) condescension on her part. The patriarchal reading is invited by John’s ironic response: â€Å"Oh, Elizabeth, your justice would freeze beer! † (55). What seems to be happening is that Goody Proctor is turned into a goody two-shoes, a voice of morality. Why we should expect anything else of Elizabeth, raised within a Puritan society and a living example of its valued â€Å"good woman,† escapes me. I find it amazing that the same rules made but not obeyed by â€Å"good† men can be used to condemn the women who do adhere to them. The other thing which Miller and the critics seem unwilling to acknowledge is the hurt that Elizabeth feels over John’s betrayal; instead, her anger, elicited not specifically about the affair but about the incident with the poppet, following hard upon the knowledge of Giles Corey’s wife having been taken, is evidence that she is no good woman. Her language condemns her: â€Å"[Abigail] is murder! She must be ripped out of the world! † (76). Anger in woman, a danger of which Ecclesiastes warns, has been cause for locking her up for centuries. After Elizabeth’s incarceration, and without her persistent logic, Miller is able to focus on John and his sense of failure. But Elizabeth’s last words as she is taken from her home are about the children: â€Å"When the children wake, speak nothing of witchcraft–it will frighten them. She cannot go on. †¦ Tell the children I have gone to visit someone sick† (77-78). I find it strange that John’s similar concerns when he has torn up the confession–â€Å"I have three children–how may I teach them to walk like men in the world, and I sold my riends? † (143)–should be valued above Elizabeth’s. Is it because the children are boys? Is it because Elizabeth is expected to react in the maternal fashion that she does, but for John to respond thus is a sign of sensitive masculinity? Is it because the communal as define d by the Word is threatened by the integrity of women? And why is maintaining a name more important than living? At least alive he might attend to his children’s daily needs–after all, we are told about the sad situation of the â€Å"orphans walking from house to house† (130). 9 It would be foolish to argue that John does not suffer–that, after all, is the point of the play. But what of Elizabeth’s suffering? She is about to lose her husband, her children are without parents, she is sure to be condemned to death as well. Miller must, once again, diminish the threat that Elizabeth offers to John’s martyrdom, for he has created a woman who does not lie, who her husband believes would not give the court the admission of guilt â€Å"if tongs of fire were singeing† her (138). Miller’s play about the life and death struggle for a man’s soul, cannot be threatened by a woman’s struggle. In order to control his character, Miller impregnates her. The court will not sentence an unborn child, so Elizabeth does not have to make a choice. Were she to choose to die without wavering in her decision, as both John and Miller think she would, she would be a threat to the outcome of the play and the sympathy which is supposed to accrue to John. Were she to make the decision to live, for the reasons which Reverend Hale stresses, that â€Å"Life, woman, life is God’s most precious gift; no principle, however glorious, may justify the taking of it† (132), she would undermine existential integrity with compromise. I am not reading another version of The Crucible, one which Miller did not intend, but rather looking at the assumptions inherent in his intentions, assumptions that Miller seems oblivious to and which his critics to date have questioned far too little. I, too, can read the play as a psychological and ethical contest which no one wins, and of which it can be said that both John and Elizabeth are expressions of men and women with all their failings and nobility, but I am troubled by the fact that Elizabeth is seldom granted even that much, that so much is made of Elizabeth’s complicity in John’s adultery, and that the victim of John’s â€Å"virility,†30 Abigail, is blamed because she is evil and/or mad. I do want to question the gender stereotypes in the play nd in the criticism that has been written about it. Let me indulge finally for a moment in another kind of criticism, one that is a fiction, or more precisely, a â€Å"crypto-friction† that defies â€Å"stratifications of canonical thought† and transgresses generic boundaries of drama/fiction and criticism. 31 Like Virginia Woolf I would like to speculate on a play written by a fictional sister to a famous playwright. Let us call Arthur Miller’s wide-eyed younger sister, who believes she can counter a scopic economy by stepping beyond the mirror, Alice Miller. In Alice’s play, Elizabeth and John suffer equally in a domestic problem which is exacerbated by the hysteria around them. John does not try to intimidate Elizabeth with his anger, and she is not described as cold or condescending. Abigail is a victim of an older man’s lust and not inherently a â€Å"bad girl†; she is not beautiful or if she is the playwright does not make so much of it. Her calling out of witches would be explained by wiser critics as the result of her fear and her confusion, not her lust. There is no effort made in Alice’s play to create a hero at the expense of the female characters, or a heroine at the expense of a male character. John is no villain, but–as another male victim/hero character, created by a woman, describes himself–â€Å"a trite, commonplace sinner,†32 trying to right a wrong he admits–without blaming others. Or, here is another version, written by another, more radical f(r)ictional sister, Mary Miller, a real hag. In it, all the witches celebrate the death of John Proctor. The idea comes from two sources: first, a question from a female student who wanted to know if part of Elizabeth’s motivation in not pressing her husband to confess is her desire to pay him back for his betrayal; and second, from a response to Jean-Paul Sartre’s ending for the film Les Sorcieres de Salem. In his 1957 version of John Proctor’s story, Sartre identifies Elizabeth â€Å"with the God of prohibiting sex and the God of judgment,† but he has her save Abigail, who tries to break John out of jail and is in danger of being hanged as a traitor too, because Elizabeth realizes â€Å"‘she loved [John]. † As the film ends, â€Å"Abigail stands shocked in a new understanding. â€Å"33 In Mary Miller’s version Elizabeth is not identified with the male God of the Word, but with the goddesses of old forced into hiding or hanged because of a renaissance of patriarchal ideology. Mary’s witches come together, alleged seductress and c old wife alike, not for love of a man who does not deserve either, but to celebrate life and their victory over male character, playwright, and critics, â€Å"‘men in power’ †¦ ho create and identify with the roles of both the victimizers and the victims,† men who Mary Miller would suggest â€Å"vicariously enjoyed the women’s suffering. â€Å"34 Notes 1. Arthur Miller, The Crucible (New York, 1981), 137. The play was originally published in 1953, but all further references to The Crucible are to the 1981 Penguin edition, and will be noted parenthetically in the text. 2. June Schlueter and James K. Flanagan, Arthur Miller (New York, 1987), 68. 3. Neil Carson, Arthur Miller (New York, 1982), 61. 4. Sandra Kemp, â€Å"‘But how describe a world seen without self? Feminism, fiction and modernism,† Critical Quarterly 32:1 (1990), 99-118: 104. 5. Miller’s interest in the Salem witchcraft trials predated his confrontation with McCarthyi sm (see E. Miller Budick, â€Å"History and Other Spectres in The Crucible,† Arthur Miller, ed. Harold Bloom (New York, 1987), 127-28, but it is also clear from the Introduction to Miller’s Collected Plays Vol 1 (New York, 1957) that he capitalized upon popular response and critical commentary which linked the two. Miller has been, it seems, a favoured critic on the subject of Arthur Miller. 6. In 1929 George L. Kittredge published a work called Witchcraft in Old and New England (Cambridge) in which he remarked that â€Å"the doctrines of our forefathers differed [in regard to witchcraft] from the doctrines of the Roman and Anglican Church in no essential–one may safely add, in no particular† (21). In GynEcology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism (Boston, 1978), Mary Daly says that during the European witch burnings–she does not deal with the Salem witch trials–Protestants â€Å"vied with and even may have surpassed their catholic counterparts in their fanaticism and cruelty† (185-86). . Cited by Peter Conrad and Joseph W. Schneider, Deviance and Medicalization: From Badness to Sickness, expanded edition (Philadelphia, 1992), 42. 8. Chris Weedon, Feminist Practice and Poststructuralist Theory (Oxford, 1987), 30-31. 9. â€Å"[N]ineteen women and men and two dogs were hanged, one man was pressed to death for refusing to plead, and 150 were imprisoned† (see Schlueter and Flanagan, 72). 10. â€Å"Remembering the Witches,† Our Blood: Prophecies and Discourses on Sexual Politics (London, 1982), 16-17. See also the 1990 National Film Board production, The Burning Times, directed by Donna Read, which declares the European executions for witchcraft to have been a â€Å"women’s holocaust. † Of the nine million people the film numbers among the burned, hanged, or otherwise disposed of, 85 per cent, it reports, were women. 11. The Burning Times discusses at length the place of women healers in Third-World cultures. 12. From Hawkins’s review of the play in File on Miller, ed. Christopher Bigsby (London, 1988), 30. 3. Leonard Moss, Arthur Miller (New York, 1967), 60, 63. 14. Schlueter and Flanagan, 69. 15. Bernard Dukore, â€Å"Death of a Salesman† and â€Å"The Crucible†: Text and Performance (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire and London, 1989), 50. 16. Luce Irigaray, â€Å"This Sex Which Is Not One,† New French Feminisms: An Anthology, ed. Elaine Marks and Isabelle de Courtivron (Amherst, 1980), 101. 17. The only critic I have read who has made comments even remotely similar to my own regarding Abigail is Neil Carson. In a 1982 book he remarks that â€Å"Abigail is portrayed as such an obviously bad piece of goods that it takes a clear-eyed French critic to point out that Proctor was not only twice the age of the girl he seduced, but as her employer he was breaking a double trust† (75). Despite his insight, when it comes to explaining the effect of Miller’s omission of detail regarding the early stages of the affair, he does not, I think, realize its full implications. He says that â€Å"Proctor’s sense of guilt [seems] a little forced and perhaps not really justified,† but I think the choice was deliberately made so as to minimize John’s guilt and emphasize his redemption as an existential man. Conversely, Abigail is more easily targeted (as the critics prove) for her active role in her seduction. 18. Daly, 187. 19. Carol Billman (â€Å"Women and the Family in American Drama,† Arizona Quarterly 36: 1 [1980], 35-48) discusses the study of â€Å"everyman† made in the family dramas of O’Neill, Williams, Albee, and Miller (although she does not mention The Crucible): â€Å"women ecessarily occupy a central position, [but] little attention is paid to their subordination or suffering. †¦ Linda Loman [and I would add Elizabeth Proctor] †¦ suffers at least as much as her husband† (36-7). Victoria Sullivan and James Hatch, as well, have complained about the standards of review: â€Å"‘a comp laining female protagonist is automatically less noble than Stanley Kowalski or Willy Loman †¦ [only] men suffer greatly'† (quoted in Billman, 37, emphasis added). 20. Carson, 66. In a play that is historically accurate in so many ways, it is significant to note that the affair between John and Abigail was invented by Miller (Dukore, 43). 21. Conrad and Schneider, 43. 22. I think that whether or not one sees the irony as intentional on Abby’s part, she becomes more sympathetic. If intentional we can agree with her realization that John’s hypocrisy was least when he was seducing her; he is a commonplace lecher. If Abigail is not cognizant of the extent of the irony of what she is saying, then she truly is too young–or too emotionally disturbed–to understand the implications of what she is doing. Carson again comes close to making a very astute judgment about Abigail’s awareness of events going on around her: â€Å"It seems clear that we are to attribute at least a little of Abby’s ‘wildness’ and sensuality to her relationship with John, and to assume that the ‘knowledge’ which Proctor put in Abigail’s heart is not simply carnal, but also includes some awareness of the hypocrisy of some of the Christian women and covenanted men of the community† (68). Carson’s insight, however, is limited by his belief in the â€Å"‘radical’ side of Proctor’s nature,† something with which modern audiences are sure to identify. The problem here is that the focus is once more removed from Abigail’s plight to her vicarious participation in one more of John Proctor’s admirable traits, for his â€Å"is not a simple personality like that of Rebecca Nurse† (68). 23. Dukore, 102. 24. Ibid. , 95. 25. One critic, who celebrates John’s â€Å"playfulness† and who does not want his description of John as a liar to be taken in a pejorative sense, suggests that John and Abigail share a kindred spirit: â€Å"The physical attractiveness of Abby for John Proctor is obvious in the play, ut, I think, so is the passionate imagination which finds its outlet in one way in her and in another in Proctor† (William T. Liston, â€Å"John Proctor’s Playing in The Crucible,† Midwest Quarterly: A Journal of Contemporary Thought 20:4 (1979), 394-403: 403). John is a liar–that is part of his guilt–and to suggest that Abigail offers John something that Elizabeth does not condemns Elizabeth and exonerates John even more than Miller intends. 26. Carson, 69-70. 27. Ibid. , 75. 28. Leonard Moss, Arthur Miller, revised edition (Boston, 1980), 40, emphasis added. 29. I think it significant that the orphans are but one of the wasted possessions unattended to in Salem. The next part of the same sentence mentions abandoned cattle bellowing and rotted crops stinking. Miller has described a material and contemporary world. 30. Richard Hayes, â€Å"Hysteria and Ideology in The Crucible,† Twentieth Century Interpretations of â€Å"The Crucible,† ed. John H. Ferres (Englewood Cliffs, 1972), 34. I find it interesting and instructive that a 1953 review of the play uses the term to describe Arthur Kennedy’s portrayal of John Proctor. 31. Aritha Van Herk, In Visible Ink (crypto-frictions) (Edmonton, 1991), 14. 2. Charlotte Bronte, Jane Eyre (Harmondsworth, 1984), 160. 33. Eric Mottram, â€Å"Jean-Paul Sartre’s Les Sorcieres de Salem,† Twentieth Century Interpretations of â€Å"The Crucible,† 93, 94. 34. Daly, 215. Source Citation Schissel, Wendy. â€Å"Re(dis)covering the Witches in Arthur Miller’s The Crucib le: A Feminist Reading. † Modern Drama 37. 3 (Fall 1994): 461-473. Rpt. in Drama Criticism. Vol. 31. Detroit: Gale, 2008. Literature Resource Center. Web. 27 July 2011. Document URL http://go. galegroup. com/ps/i. do? id=GALE%7CH1420082425v=2. 1u=uq_stpatricksit=rp=LitRCsw=w Gale Document Number: GALE|H1420082425 How to cite Feminist Approach to Witchcraft; Case Study: Miller’s the Crucible, Free Case study samples

Forward The Rennaissance was a time of creativity Essay Example For Students

Forward: The Rennaissance was a time of creativity Essay Forward:The Rennaissance was a time of creativity people started seeing things, I mean really seeing thing. Everything was new, paintings became 3-D, food became nicer Michelangelo Buonarroti was born on March 6, 1475 in Caprese, Italy. When he was 13, he became an apprentice of Domenico Ghirlandaio, and at the time was painting a chapel in the church Santa Maria Novella in Florence. Here, Michelangelo learned the technique fresco (painting on fresh plaster before it dries). He used this technique many years later in his work at the Sistine Chapel in Rome. When he was fifteen, Michelangelo started to spend time in the home and in the gardens of Lorenzo de Medici, where he studied sculpture from Bertoldo di Giovanni. During this time that he finished the Madonna of the Stairs and the Battle of the Centaurs. The political climate in Florence following the death of Lorenzo de Medici may have led Michelangelo to leave the city, going first to Bologna and, after a brief return to Florence, to Rome. In Rome, he carved the Bacchus and then the Piet which is in St. Peters basilica in Rome. Michelangelo returned to Florence where he began work on the David. Called the Giant by his fellow Florentines, this statue was completed in 1504. Later that year, Michelangelo was commissioned to undertake a fresco of the Battle of the Cascina, a work that was unfortunately later destroyed. During this same time period, Michelangelo produced several Madonnas; including the painting the Holy Family (also known as the Doni Madonna), a statue of the Madonna and Child (called the Bruges Madonna) which was purchased by a Flemish merchant and is now in Bruges, and two marble reliefs, the Taddei tondo and the Pitti tondo. Michelangelo was called to Rome by Pope Julius II to create a tomb for him which was to contain forty lifesize figures, an endeavor that was never fully realized. In 1508, Michelangelo began work on the Sistine Chapel ceiling frescoes, a task that would occupy him until 1512. Upon completing the Sistine Chapel, Michelangelo returned to the work on Julius tomb, completing the figure of Moses and leaving unfinished two Slaves. Following Julius death in 1513, he worked for Pope Leo X, Lorenzo de Medicis son. At the Medici familys parish church in Florence, San Lorenzo, Michelangelo created tombs for Giuliano and Lorenzo de Medici (II) and designed the Laurentian library, an annex to San Lorenzo. In 1534, Michelangelo left Florence for Rome, where he was to spend the remainder of his life. He returned to the Sistine Chapel where he created the Last Judgment, another fresco, on the end wall. He designed the dome for St. Peters and the Capitoline Square. He also worked on the Palazzo Farnese. His last paintings were the frescoes of the Conversion of St. Paul and the Crucifixion of St. Peter in the Pauline Chapel in the Vatican. Michelangelo died on February 18, 1564.The Last Judgement

What sort of society and values does Oscar Wilde present in Importance of being Earnest Essay Example

What sort of society and values does Oscar Wilde present in Importance of being Earnest Paper In the days when the play was set, people were spilt into three different classes. There were the Upper class people, who lived in an aristocrat society, who mainly invested from lands. Then, there were the tradesmen, who had new wealth which they made from their businesses. Finally, you would have the lower class people, who were the servants of the upper classes. The characters in the play are leading a comfortable life. They live in a sophisticated life style, where everything for them is a breeze, they have servants to do all the work for them, while they sit and relax. They lead a superior life style, everyone under them has to look up to them. The lower classes are expected to respect them. In act 1, when Lady Bracknell visits Algernon, he had eaten all the cucumber sandwiches, which were especially made for her. As a good and loyal servant should do, Lane lies to get his master out of trouble, which is what all good servants should do. Algernon quotes, if the lower orders dont set us a good example, what on earth is the use of them? This shows what they thought of the lower classes as being their guide to life. We will write a custom essay sample on What sort of society and values does Oscar Wilde present in Importance of being Earnest specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on What sort of society and values does Oscar Wilde present in Importance of being Earnest specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on What sort of society and values does Oscar Wilde present in Importance of being Earnest specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Lady Bracknell quotes, Nor do I approve in anyway of the modern sympathy with invalids when speaking to Algernon about Mr Bunbury. She says this with coldness and in an uncaring way. The aristocrat society lives on an unearned income. They, do not have to work for their living, they neednt a job. That is why land and inheritance are important in their life. They invest in land mainly and thats where their money comes from. With no businesses to worry about, they can enjoy the comfort of gong to dinner parties, arranging them, go to the opera and watch plays. They can sometimes to go into debt, like Algernon for example, who owes much money, pays no bills etc. We know this as he quotes, Half of the chaps who get into the bankruptcy Court are called Algernon, This obviously means that he goes there often, if he know everyones names there who go themselves. He lives beyond his means, he just spends, spends, and spends. Lady Bracknell quotes, He has nothing, but he looks everything when trying to persuade Jack to allow Algernon to marry Cecily. They live in an extravagant lifestyle with many luxuries. Algernons flat is said to be artistically furnished. The rich of that era have calling cards, when someone visits, to inform the owners of the house. A servant carries these to them on a salver, a silver plate. They drink good wine and make sure it does not go to waste. They eat their bread with no crust. They usually own a country estate with acres of land, which are usually let out. Then, they should have a town house, somewhere to stay during the season. The season is when everyone comes to London to attend all the parties, galas, balls, etc. to exchange gossip. Young unmarried girls come with their parents to find an eligible bachelor. Rich girls usually married for a title or name. Men with a title or name, but no money, would marry a rich girl, to gain some money. The book is based in a aristocratic society, where they have many values, which are most importantly; Money, appearance, sincerity, social snobbery and superficial values. Oscar Wilde has put in a whole range of these in his play. Money is everything to the aristocrat society. Without it, they would be pushed down the society ladder. They do not work for their money, but instead they invest it from land and properties. If you had money, you could do anything you want. In Act 1, when Lady Bracknell asks for the cucumber sandwiches, Algernon replies, I am greatly distressed, Aunt Augusta, about there being no cucumbers, not even for ready money, This shows that he just gets his food without paying, they just put it on a tab with him. He probably owes many people money, but who is to argue with the rich? Anyone would do anything for money. When Cecily sneaked out of the house to go and visit Jack in his country house, she probably asked her maid to keep quiet about her whereabouts. Though, by the means of a small coin, Lady Bracknell managed to gain the information of her daughters whereabouts. Lady Bracknell is the one in the play who most considers money to be the main importance in life. It would seem obvious that she even married for money herself, as she says, When I married Lord Bracknell I had no fortune of any kind. But I never dreamed for a moment of allowing that to stand in my way. When questioning Jack, to see if he is fit to be even considered to marry her dear Gwendolen, the most important question is What is your income? Jack replies to this saying Between seven and eight thousand a year,, which in those days, would make him a millionaire. This is the only note she makes of him in her notebook. She is perfectly satisfied that Jack makes his money from investments and not so much from land as she says,, Land has ceased to be either a profit or a pleasure, Lady Bracknell questions Cecily to see if she is acceptable to marry her nephew, Algernon. She first says that she is running out of time, halfway through the interview and she must hurry. Then, as a last question, she asks if Cecily has any fortune. She expects Jack to answer that by saying, No, she has little, she lives here as my ward and I provide for her, To her surprise, Jack tells her that Cecily has about  £30,00 in the funds. He then says, Thats all. Good-bye Lady Bracknell, So pleased to have seen you, knowing her attitude would change now to the mention of that large sum of money. Lady Bracknell decides to stay, after discovering that this girl is an extremely wealthy girl and her money is in the funds as well. She now says, Miss Cardew seems to me a most attractive young lady now that I look at her, Lady Bracknell now finds her a respectable candidate for Algernon, as she has all this money. Her plan backfires though, as Jack refuses their engagement. Lady Bracknell tells Jack, that she will overlook Algernons conduct to him, but this is not true, she hasnt carefully considered her decision, but she wants to try and persuade Jack to accept the engagement so Algernon can grab his hands on Cecilys money. Jack tells Lady Bracknell that Cecily does not come legally of age until she is 35. Lady Bracknell has no objection to this though, as she realises that if she leaves the marriage for a few more years, Cecily s money will grow even more. Gwendolen makes it quite clear, that she is wealthy, by pointing out that she buys the more expensive monthly magazines, when talking to Jack. She doesnt but the expensive magazines, but the more expensive ones. Which shows, shes probably no different to Lady Bracknell, as Algernon says, All women become like their mothers. In every interview, she always starts with a few simple questions e. g. how old are you? Then, in the middle of her questions, she adds the most eagerly waited of question, how much money do you have. Appearance is also important to the characters in the play. The whole of the play is based on the one name of Ernest, which for some reason Gwendolen and Cecily adore and is their dream to marry someone with that name. Gwendolen says, There is something in that name that inspires absolute confidence She says that she was destined to love him as soon as she heard the name mentioned. She says that the name, Produces vibrations This shows us that the first thing Gwendolen looks for in a man is his name. Your Christian name has an irresistible fascination, quotes Gwendolen. The name Jack sounds such a plain name, when you think of Jack, you think of someone who lives in the country, who is quite plain and simple. The name Ernest though, sounds more aristocrat and when saying it, Ernest sounds more interesting than Jack does. She looks for a husband who will listen and do everything she commands, just how Lady Bracknell treats her husband. I know this, from the line Gwendolen says at the end of her engagement discussion with Jack. She says, I hope you will always look at me just like that, especially when there are other people present referring to Jacks blue eyes, like a puppy-dog face. She wants him to be like a dog on a leash that she can take with her anywhere and have him well trained. Cecily, a more plain girl, it would seem, but she is also picky with names. She and Gwendolen both say that they, pity any poor married woman whose husband is not called Ernest. Algernon thinks his name is rather an aristocratic name, but Cecily would only give all her love to someone with the name of Ernest. She here is being a little judgmental towards the name of a person. Its like how Gwendolen first met Cecily, Cecily told her, her name and Gwendolen in turn replies, What a very sweet name! Something tells me that we are going to be great friends, Which is a bit ironic, as later on in their meeting, they despise each other. Lady Bracknell considers the odd number side of the street as unfashionable. She tells us this when she is questioning Jack. This shows us that the respected ones in society live in an even numbered house. When Jack tells her about him, that he was discovered in a handbag at Victoria Station, she immediately is disgusted. She almost certainly now will not allow her daughter to marry someone who was found in a handbag, or as she puts it, to marry into a cloakroom and form an alliance with a parcel. She says that Algernon has no money, but he looks the part, though this is a bit false, as Lady Bracknell is always thinking of money when it comes down to these circumstances. Though it doesnt really matter, because if Algernon and Cecily do get married, then Algernon will share her money. She also finds long engagements not acceptable as, They give people the opportunity of finding out each others character before marriage, She has this idea of making someone look something that theyre really not. As long as you look good, thats what important. She examines Cecilys profile, when inquiring about her. Her first impressions of Cecily, were that she dressed too simply and hair was not done up in any extravagant way, but was left as nature might have left it. She tells Cecily to put her chin a little higher, Style largely depends on the way of the chin is worn, as she states. The characters in the book have many false and superficial values. Girls of the aristocrat society, did not have a choice of who they wanted to marry, it was up to their parents to decide for them. We discover in the first act, that Lady Bracknell has a list of eligible young men, the same list as the Duchess of Bolton in fact. She carries a notebook and pencil in her pocket, as though shes always on the look out for new candidates to add to her list. Algernon thinks that Bunburying should be known to every mans life. He believes that if a man doesnt know about it when he gets married, then hell have a very tedious married life. He believes that, in married life three is company and two is none. Bunbury, as Algernon calls it, is way of making up an imaginary friend/relative and using them as an excuse to get out of town into the country or the other way round. Both Algernon and Jack have invented a imaginary friend/relative to get them out of town and dinner parties. Its this bunburying that causes so much trouble and confusion among the characters. In the play, dinner and meals are mentioned quite a lot. Cecily says, When one is going to lead an entirely new life, one requires regular and wholesome meals, Algernons first conversation in the play with Jack, he asks Jack to dine with him and says, I hate people who are not serious about meals. Most of the lines that are to do with food, are Algernons lines. His character is a very greedy character, food wise that is. Algernon states that, it is customary in good society to take some slight refreshment at five oclock. Nearly every moment in the play he is always eating something, I guess that Wilde, perhaps did this deliberately to make the play more amusing. A dinner party is also a key aspect of their lives. Lady Bracknell is an expert in this and plans her seating plans very carefully. So there is the same amount of men as there is women, so they can all pair up. When Algernon says he cannot attend his Aunts dinner party, Lady Bracknell in turn replies to this, It would put my table completely out, Her husband, instead would have to fill in Algernons place, which she is not too pleased about. This shows that her and her husbands relationship, doesnt seem to be a very strong one and she prefers not to mention Lord Bracknell. Dinner parties are the limelight of the season. Its where everyone went to catch up with news and find a husband/wife. The main characteristics of the character in the play, are their social snoberish, Which they show a lot of in the play. Algernon, when it comes to food and drink, hes quite selfish. He had cucumber sandwiches made especially for his Aunt, but he ends up eating them all. He is allowed them, but no one else is. He finds that not receiving invitations is annoying. Algernon takes his life too easy, he lives in debt and if something goes wrong, he has Lane or another lower class to blame. He thinks it is awfully hard work doing nothing, which is quite the opposite of what most people would think. As he has no job, nothing to occupy himself, it is quite easy to get bored and you realise you need the need of some sort of hobby, events to got to etc. Algernon states that, Relations are simply a tedious pack of people, who havent got the remotest knowledge of how to live This is a bit ironic, as at the end of the play, Algernon discovers that his best friend is in fact his elder brother. The characters find the French as disrespectful and are a bad influence on the English. The Germans, however are more respected. Lady Bracknell, always seem to boast about her social links with people of a high position. When Lady Bracknell finds out there are no cucumber sandwiches, she doesnt mind as she had some crumpets with Lady Harbury, a Lady, probably with a high social position. Lady Bracknell even shares the same list of eligible men as the Duchess of Bolton. There are also several other names of high social stature mentioned by Lady Bracknell in her conversations, Lady Lancing and Lady Dumbleton. Lady Bracknell quotes, That in families of high position strange coincidences are not suppose to occur, referring to the confusion of Jacks true identity. She is trying to say that only the common would find themselves in these inexplicable situations. People, according to Lady Bracknell, are only considered respected, if they are seen at social gatherings and dinner parties. They count as Tories. They dine with us. And Indeed I am told that one of the Mr Markbys is occasionally to be seen as dinner parties. So far I am satisfied. These are examples of this way of judging people by their attendance to social parties, that Lady Bracknell says in the play. People who went to Oxford were said to be truthful people, but this is a lie as Algernon went to Oxford and has told many lies in the play. Algernon says, Literacy criticism should be left to those who didnt go to university, Therefore the ones who could not afford to attend universities, but earn a living from writing critical comments in the newspapers. The uproar between Cecily and Gwendolen, is quite amusing, as they both have to try and control their surge of anger, for the sake of their reputation. They dont want Merriman to see them having a bickering, which could break out into violence, that is not what an upper class lady would do, its something that you would see the lower class do. Gwendolen throws such snoberish comments at Cecily. Sugar is not fashionable anymore, and Cake is rarely seen at the best houses nowadays, which really puts Cecily down. Gwendolen tells Cecily that she hates crowds, which is ironic, as Cecily replies to this, I suppose thats why you live in town? and Gwendolen is furious.

150 Foreign Expressions to Inspire You

150 Foreign Expressions to Inspire You 150 Foreign Expressions to Inspire You 150 Foreign Expressions to Inspire You By Mark Nichol Here’s a writing challenge for you: I’ve listed foreign expressions, mostly in Latin, that offer wisdom or otherwise encapsulate a thought-provoking idea. Select one (or more) that resonates with you and employ it as a writing prompt. Note the evocative strength of â€Å"Alis volat propiis,† or the motivating force of â€Å"Audentes fortuna juvat.† Can you taste the bitter regret of â€Å"Dis aliter visum†? What kind of cynical crime noir can you concoct around â€Å"Cherchez la femme†? You’re welcome to suggest others. (Note, however that these are all complete sentences. I have phrases set aside for another day.) 1. Abeunt studia in mores: Practices zealously pursued pass into habits. 2. Absit invidia: Let there be no envy or ill will. 3. Abusus non tollit usum: Abuse does not take away use. (Abuse is not an argument against proper use.) 4. Age quod agis: Do what you are doing. (To the business at hand.) 5. Aide-toi, le ciel t’aidera: Help yourself, and heaven will help you. 6. Alea jacta est: The die is cast. 7. Alis volat propriis: She flies with her own wings. 8. Amor vincit omnia: Love conquers all things. 9. Ars est celare artem: It is (true) art to conceal art. 10. Ars longa, vita brevis: Art is long, life is short. 11. Au pays des aveugles les borgnes sont rois: In the country of the blind, the one-eyed men are kings. 12. Audentes fortuna juvat/Fortes fortuna bravat: Fortune favors the bold/Fortune favors the brave. 13. Bis dat qui cito dat: He gives twice who gives promptly. 14. C’est autre chose: That’s a different thing. 15. C’est la guerre: That’s war. (It cannot be helped.) 16. C’est la vie: That’s life. (That’s how things happen.) 17. C’est plus qu’un crime, c’est une faute: It is worse than a crime, it is a blunder. 18. Ca va sans dire: It goes without saying. 19. Caveat lector: Let the reader beware. 20. Ce n’est que le premier pas qui coute: It is only the first step that costs. 21. Cedant arma togae: Let arms yield to the toga. (Let military power give way to civil power.) 22. Cetera desunt: The rest is missing. 23. Chacun a son gout: Everyone to his taste. 24. Che sara, sara: What will be will be. 25. Cherchez la femme: Look for the woman. 26. Corruptio optimi pessima: The corruption of the best is the worst of all. 27. Credo quia absurdum est: I believe it because it is absurd. 28. Credo ut intelligam: I believe so that I may understand. 29. Damnant quod non intelligunt: They condemn what they do not understand. 30. De gustibus non est disputandum: There is no disputing about tastes. 31. De minimis non curat lex: The law takes no account of trifles. 32. De mortuis nil nisi bonum: Of the dead (say) nothing but good. 33. Dis aliter visum: The gods decreed otherwise. 34. Docendo discimus: We learn by teaching. 35. Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori: It is sweet and seemly to die for one’s country. 36. Dum spiro, spero: While I breathe, I hope. 37. Dum vivimus vivamus: While we live, let us live. 38. Dux femina facti: A woman was leader of the exploit. 39. Ecce signum: Behold the sign. (Look at the proof.) 40. Ecrasez l’infame: Crush the infamous thing. 41. Eheu fugaces labuntur anni: Alas! The fleeting years glide on. 42. Est modus in rebus: There is a proper measure in things. 43. Ex nihilo nihil fit: From nothing, nothing is produced. 44. Ex pede Herculem/Ex ungue leonem: From the foot (we may judge the size of) Hercules, from the claw (we may judge) the lion. 45. Exceptio probat regulam de rebus non exceptis: An exception establishes the rule as to things not excepted. 46. Exitus acta probat: The outcome justifies the deed. 47. Facilis descensus Averno: The descent to Avernus is esay. (The road to evil is easy.) 48. Fas est et ab hoste doceri: It is right even to learn from an enemy. 49. Fata viam invenient: The Fates will find a way. 50. Festina lente: Make haste slowly. 51. Fiat experimentum in corpore vili: Let experiment be made on a worthless body. 52. Fiat justitia, ruat caelum: Let justice be done, though the heavens fall. 53. Fiat lux: Let there be light. 54. Finem respice: Consider the end. 55. Finis coronat opus: The end crowns the work. 56. Fluctuat nec mergitur: It is tossed by the waves but does not sink. 57. Forsan et haec olim meminisse juvabit: Perhaps this too will be a pleasure to look back on one day. 58. Fronti nulla fides: No reliance can be placed on appearance. 59. Gardez la foi: Keep faith. 60. Gaudeamus igitur: Let’s make merry. 61. Gnothi seauton: Know thyself. 62. Hoc age: Do this. (Apply yourself to what you are about.) 63. Hoc opus, hic labor est: This is the hard work, this is the toil. 64. Honi soit qui mal y pense: Shamed be he who thinks evil of it. 65. Humanum est errare: To err is human. 66. Ignorantia juris neminem excusat: Ignorance off the law excuses no one. 67. Il faut cultiver notre jardin: We must cultivate our garden. (We must tend to our own affairs.) 68. Ils ne passeront pas: They shall not pass. 69. In hoc signo vinces: By this sign you shall conquer. 70. Invenit/Pinxit: He (or she) devised/painted it. 71. Ira furor brevis est: Anger is a brief madness. 72. J’y suis, j’y reste: Here I am, here I remain. 73. Jacta alea est: The die is cast. 74. La reine/le roi le vuit: The queen (or the king) wills it. 75. La reine/le roi s’avisera: The queen (or king) will consider. 76. Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch’entrate: Abandon hope, all ye who enter. 77. Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point: The heart has its reasons that reason knows nothing of. 78. Magna est veritas et praevalebit: Truth is mighty and will prevail. 79. Medio tutissimus ibis: You will go most safely by the middle course. 80. Morituri te salutamus: We who about to die salute you. 81. Mutato nomine de te fabula narratur: With the name changed, the story applies to you. 82. Natura non facit saltum: Nature makes no leap. 83. Naturam expellas furca, tamen usque recurret: You may drive Nature out with a pitchfork, but she will keep coming back. 84. Ne cede malis: Yield not to misfortune. 85. Nemo me impune lacessit: No one attacks me with impunity. 86. Nil desperandum: Never despair. 87. Non omnia possumus omnes: We can’t all do all things. 88. Non omnis moriar: I shall not wholly die. 89. Non sum qualis eram: I am not what I used to be. 90. Nosce te ipsum: Know thyself. 91. Nous avons change tout cela: We have changed all that. 92. Nous verrons ce que nous verrons: We shall see what we shall see. 93. Oderint dum metuant: Let them hate, so long as they fear. 94. Odi et amo: I hate and I love. 95. Omne ignotum pro magnifico: The unknown tends to be exaggerated in importance or difficulty. 96. Omnia mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis: All things are changing, and we are changing with them. 97. Omnia vincit amor: Love conquers all. 98. Ora pro nobis: Pray for us. 99. Ou sont les neiges d’antan?: Where are the snows of yesteryear? 100. Panta rhei: All things are in flux. 101. Parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus: The mountains are in labor, and a ridiculous mouse will be brought forth. 102. Pereant qui ante nos nostra dixerunt: May they perish who have expressed our bright ideas before us. 103. Pereunt et imputantur: The hours pass away and are reckoned on our account. 104. Place aux dames: Make room for the ladies. 105. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose (sometimes abbreviated to just â€Å"Plus ca change . . .): The more things change, the more they stay the same. 106. Poeta nascitur, on fit: A poet is born, not made. 107. Primum non nocere: The first thing is to do no harm. 108. Qui facit per alium facit per se: He who does through another does through himself. 109. Qui s’excuse s’accuse: He who excuses himself accuses himself. 110. Qui va la?: Who goes there? 111. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes: Who will keep the keepers? 112. Quo vadis?: Where are you going? 113. Quos deus vult perdere prius dementat: Those whom a god wishes to destroy he first drives mad. 114. Quot homines, tot sententiae: There are as many opinions as there are men. 115. Rem acu tetigisti: You have touched the point with a needle. 116. Requiescat in pace: Rest in peace. 117. Respice finem: Consider the outcome. 118. Resurgam: I shall rise again. 119. Revenons a nos moutons: Let us return to our sheep. (Let us return to our subject.) 120. Salus populi suprema lex esto: Let the welfare of the people be the supreme law. 121. Se non e vero, e ben trovato: Even if it is not true, it is well conceived. 122. Si jeunesse savait, si vieillesse pouvait!: If youth only knew, if age only could! 123. Si monumentum requiris, circumspice: If you seek his monument, look around. 124. Si vis pacem, para bellum: If you wish peace, prepare for war. 125. Sic itur ad astra: Thus one goes to the stars (Such is the way to immortality.) 126. Sic semper tyrannis: Thus ever to tyrants. 127. Sic transit gloria mundi: So passes away the glory of the world. 128. Silent leges inter arma: The laws are silent in the midst of arms. 129. Similia similibus curantur: Like is cured by like. 130. Similis simili gaudet: Like takes pleasure in like. 131. Siste viator: Stop, traveler. 132. Solvitur ambulando: It is solved by walking. (The problem is solved by a practical experiment.) 133. Sunt lacrimae rerum: There are tears for things. 134. Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis: The times are changing, and we are changing with them. 135. Tempus fugit: Time flies. 136. Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes: I fear the Greeks even when they bring gifts. 137. Tout comprende c’est tout pardonner: To understand all is to forgive all. 138. Tout est perdu fors l’honneur: All is lost save honor. 139. Truditur dies die: The day is pushed forth by day. (One day hurries on another.) 140. Tuebor: I will defend. 141. Ua mau ke ea o ka aina i ka pono: The life of the land is perpetuated in righteousness. 142. Vada retro me, Satana: Get behind me, Satan. 143. Vae victis: Woe to the vanquished. 144. Varium et mutabile semper femina: Woman is ever a fickle and changeable thing. 145. Verbum sat sapienti est: A word to the wise is sufficient. 146. Vincit omnia veritas: Truth conquers all things. 147. Vive la difference: Long live the difference (between the sexes). 148. Vogue la galere: Let the galley be kept rowing. (Keep on, whatever may happen.) 149. Voila tout: That’s all. 150. Vox populi vox Dei: The voice of the people is the voice of God. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Expressions category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:English Grammar 101: All You Need to Know44 Resume Writing Tips7 Proofreading Steps

Career Goals And Future Aspirations

Introduction The topic of interest for this research paper consists of researching role-play within make believe play in young children and if it can predict future career goals depending on the child’s gender. Though this topic can be complex to study, it is incredibly relevant due to the fact play in general; play has a huge impact on children and their development along with enhancement in general in context of multiple skills. Past literature has stated that make-believe play can enhance social†¦ children’s future career goals and lifestyle. The proposed researcher has greatly benefited and enhanced prior background, but future research will focus on gender roles within make-believe play and its significance in a child’s future career to better understand the importance of gender roles in children’s play. With this question not being addressed within any of the prior literature, it is easy to question if gender-role play during make-believe play will impact children’s views on their future career†¦ realized that my career goal is to be involved in these policy decisions but my current knowledge is not ready for it. UofT’s Department of Economics is known to be one of the bests in the world with reputable faculty members and abundant resources for academic research. As a result, I believe that UofT can further my understanding of the real world economy and provide a solid academic base for a future career in shaping economic policy. Back when I finished my high school, a career goal seemed to be†¦ For my future career, I have decided to research the job tasks, pay scale, and requirements for a high school history teacher. I chose this particular career for a number of reasons. History is one of my passions and I knew that I desired to work in a field that pertains to them. I also feel that going into education could entail positive changes for both myself and the current system. Finally, one of my advanced placement teachers in high school motivated me to follow this career path. As a child†¦ My future career goal is to be a Veterinarian, and hopefully to open my own practice. In order to be a Veterinarian, I need to obtain a DVM (Doctor of Veterinary Medicine). The first step to obtaining a DVM is to complete undergraduate school. Several schools only require 45-90 undergraduate hours, but the school I am interested in, requires a bachelors degree. Finding a position in the field of veterinarian medicine has a high chance, due to the current rate of attrition, many Veterinarians are†¦ My professional career goals and aspirations are most accurately encapsulated from a dream which emerged from my subconscious nearly two years ago and influences me to this day. In this dream, I was on a stage preparing to present to a crowd in acceptance of an award. Before I was to speak, a video introduction played and I introduced myself as â€Å"Paris Wicker, Dean of Empathy.† Often, I find myself deconstructing this dream. I have come to understand that being a â€Å"Dean of Empathy† perfectly exemplifies†¦ materials I need they would try their very best to make me and my siblings happy. With my parents support I was able to move further into my education, build courage, confidence, complete all that I had to and will continue on to establish my future career goal. I was born on June 7, 1998 in Brooklyn, New York. I grew up living in Brooklyn, completed elementary school and I later moved to Queens at the age of 14 and started middle school in I.S. 238. I am the oldest child in the family and I have two†¦ have attended any of the fairs. I must say, that this experience opened my eyes to a lot of different things regarding my future career goals. In my paper, I will be discussing the fair that I attended, what I learned about job searching from this experience, how I will apply this experience to my future career goals, how this experience will shape my future internship and/or career path, and finally my overall thoughts of the fair. Job Fair The fair that I attended was the job fair, I decided to attend†¦ would mean so much to me and ensue me to aspire my accomplishments thus far and the accomplishments I strive for in the future. That being said, my father 's words continue to inspire me every single day and have led me to where I am today and will lead me to pursuing my future career goals as a CRNA. As I reflect on my experiences as a patient care technician, my nursing school career, and my experience thus far as a critical care RN, there has always been one thing on my mind that remains constant:†¦ might be. So people make plans. They begin to think about how they want their life to look like, then they form goals. Goals represent the finish line. You can talk about being there as much as you want but, if you do not take the necessary steps, you will be at a stand still. Goals must be formed carefully, with consideration of your past experiences, present situations, and future aspirations. I was raised with a firm understanding in who I was. Having three older brothers, I would pride myself in†¦

The Development of Organisation Theory Assignment

The Development of Organisation Theory - Assignment Example In most organizations, the leading forces impinging on role performance are social or symbolic rather than economic. Although the social significance of the workgroup to individual workers was first reported in the studies of factory workers, recent research shows that the significance of informal work groups is much greater for individuals in high-status positions than those in low-status positions. Management-level employees are more likely to go through social and geographical mobility, which cuts them off from their parents, their place of birth and their friends. As a result, they are inclined to depend greatly on social relationships established at their workplace (Henderson 1996). To the extent that co-workers have become an important reference group for employees, one would expect them to support one another. Abraham Maslow’s (1950) theory of a hierarchy of human needs suggests needs categorized in the following ascending order; (1) physiological, (2) safety, (3) love, (4) esteem, and (5) self-actualization. Under this theory, the type and level of need for work-group appreciation are influenced by the type and level of which the needs are being satisfied by individuals external to the workplace. However, a certain amount of safety and esteem from one’s colleagues, managers and subordinates are crucial for successful functioning within any organization. For this reason, the major focus of managers should be on creating and maintaining good human relations in the workplace (Luthans 2010). Due to the recent technological progress, there is generally a shortage of significant interaction among culturally diverse employees. There is also a deficiency of affection in a number of the homes of workers. Human relations demand employers develop closer personal relationships in their organizations.  

Passion of The Christ Movie Review Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Passion of The Christ - Movie Review Example Throughout the film, Jesus undergoes brutality and much suffering. The other leading roles are Caiaphas (the Jewish High Priest) and Pontius Pilate (the Roman Governor). Both do not want to see Jesus being crucified, but live in a perilous time, and Jesus is a major threat to them1. The film relies mostly on the Gospel of Mark; the Jewish crowds shown in almost all scenes of the film support this. The Jewish crowd is shown as indirectly protecting and directly supporting Jesus against the authority of the high priest, which opposes him according to the Gospel of Mark2. In Mark 15:6, â€Å"Pilate had established an open Passover amnesty: ‘at the festival he used to release a prisoner for them, anyone for whom they asked’.†3 The ceremony was open because the crowd and not the governor selected the person to be released. Mark notes that Barabbas (a prisoner) and Jesus are presented to the crowd for it to choose who is to be released and who is to be crucified. There are many differences between the film and the story of Jesus according to the Gospels. There are some portions of Scripture that have been omitted in the film. Gibson cuts words of Matthew 27:25 which states that â€Å"And all the people said, ‘His blood shall be on us and on our children!†4 and John 19:30 which quotes Jesus saying â€Å"It is finished.†5 There are portions of the film that are extra-biblical such as the scene in which Satan is seen holding a baby. The most central scenes of the film are where Jesus is brutally beaten using a whip by the Roman soldiers and the 14 Stations of the Cross. Techniques used in the film include steadcam cinematography and narrative. The utilization of steadcam cinematography assists in the provision of quasi-documentary feel and look. The film has used the languages of the region where Jesus was actually crucified and the setting of the movie appears to capture the Jerusalem atmosphere (though the filmsetting was in Italy). The languages used

The Advantages of eBooks Versus Traditional Books Essay Example for Free

The Advantages of eBooks Versus Traditional Books Essay Thesis Statement: Ebooks can replace physical books as they have many advantages that allow you to read more however physical books are still a favorite to many readers. II-Ebooks are more accessible. You can simply get your book online the day it drops in the stores without the need of going out and driving to the nearest local bookstore to get a book that you might even find it not available at the moment. Ebooks are easier to travel with as you can have so many books in your Ereader without it getting heavier or being harder to carry, while with physical books you can never travel with a small number of books as it could get your traveling bag so heavy and harder to carry. III-Ebooks offering different multitasking features and keeping you comfy. You can eat and drink while reading and not worry about getting the book all messed up with the grease and crumbles of the food you’re eating, although it won’t be safe for your Ereader as it could get damaged by just one single drop of cola or water as we all know technology and water don’t mix well but for physical books if some water was dropped on it, it will just get wavy but it would still work and you would still be able to read it. Ebooks also give you the ability to take notes easier without always having a pen and a notepad with you all the time as it has all the fancy features to color some words or underline some or even check for words on the dictionary. Ebooks are so comfortable as you can read in any way you like for example you can read sideways before sleeping or you can free both of your hands and lean it to anything near you so you can rest your hands, and anyone who loves reading knows the problems you face when you are reading and your arms get sore and can’t do anything about it. The iv-the beauty of book shopping.When you go shopping for physical books and you see all these beautiful books lined in a sight you can’t help but fall in love with as you can grab any book you like and read the synopsis and look at the magnificent art done by the illustrator to make the beautiful cover that you’re seeing, while with Ebooks this experience is just dead as you can only search for the book that you want to buy and just download it with getting the full experience. V- Real books gives you the real feelings. This is a feeling that not anyone will recognize but real book readers do as there is nothing like the feeling of having a good 450 pages in your hand and you can feel every single detail on the cover with the book title popping up just a little with the smell of the book as you flick every single page away, and this is just something the Ebook can never provide even in a million years. VI- Conclusion.

The Requiem Scene in Arthur Millers Death of a Salesman Essay

The Requiem Scene in Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman The death of Willy Loman was remembered by few.   He was mourned not because of his tragic death but because of his despairing life.   The Requiem scene in Death of a Salesman describes the ill-attended funeral of Willy, the tragic hero who struggled to fulfill his vision of the American Dream.   This scene brings closure to the play because the audience realizes that only in death is Willy able to accept the failure and false success that has plagued him and his family for years.   Resolution is brought to conflicts between Willy and his own disillusionment, Willy and his hopes for his boys, and Willy and the betrayal of his wife,  Linda.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Willy rejected a life of opportunity and became a salesman because of the promise outlined by the American Dream.   However, because of his inability to grasp reality, his life results in a succession of lies that unwind themselves into devastating consequences.   Willy does not understand that life requires more than good looks and a likeable personality in order to be successful and it is this illusion that causes the lack of substance in his being.   In the Requiem Biff states, â€Å"†¦ the man didn’t know who he was.† (138)   Here, Biff recognizes that Willy... ...tly admits his failure in the chase for the American dream and confesses to the lies that have shaped his tragic life.   The scene also brings closure to disagreements between Willy and his children as Biff and Happy are finally allowed to decide their own destiny.   Lastly,   Linda is free from the weight of constantly trying to comfort Willy and though she is deeply sorry for Willy’s death, she is able to live in peace.   In some cases, such as Willy’s, resolve can only occur in death.  Ã‚  Ã‚   Work Cited Miller, Arthur. "Death of a Salesman" in Literature, Reading, Reacting, Writing, Compact Fourth Edition. Harcourt, Inc. 2000.

In this play, suicide is an act forbidden by religion Essay

â€Å"To be, or not to be† cries a torn Hamlet in Shakespeare’s tragedy, Hamlet. This is not the first time that Hamlet reflects upon his existence and thinks about committing suicide. In this play, suicide is an act forbidden by religion and society that one may take into consideration only after stricken with unbearable grief. In Hamlet’s case, he is stuck between living a horrible life that may not seem worth living, and taking his own life to end the cruelty of it, which he claims he would if God had not made it forbidden. Subsequently, Hamlet fuels his fire to live and not follow the path of suicide by remembering his duty as a person, which for him is to avenge his murdered father before it is too late. Before we can understand Hamlet’s popular predicament to be or not to be as a whole, we must make sure that we define the concepts that are key in his situation to place ourselves in Hamlet’s depressing shoes. For one, suicide is a broad, varying act that has different meanings to different people in different times. For the people of Hamlet’s setting, it was an atrocious, intentional act that only the horrid sinners would commit against the almighty Biblical God. Even after death, the people still looked down upon the dead that did not pass naturally into the afterlife by holding a funeral that only genocidal dictator would be worthy of; one that involved throwing rubble into the pit of the dead instead of pious flowers and ornaments. Also, though, what must be considered is the situation a person might be in. For example, if you live a life that involves lying in a dreadful hospital bed with very little consciousness and no sense of elation, one might argue, from a Christian viewpoint, that it is not immoral to kill yourself. Whether or not someone believes in a supreme being, one generally has morals. Morals are a set of rules or schemas that people follow and live by which they create, edit, and alter throughout their lives. In Hamlet, we see that almost everyone holds a heavy, negative view against suicide. The play leads us to think that suicide is something that is unnatural and undeniably immoral. When Ophelia dies, many people believed it was suicide, while others assumed it was an accidental death (Act IV, scene vii). Depending upon which side they took, their culminating feelings towards Ophelia was created based on their initial assumptions. The gravediggers or clowns that spoke during Ophelia’s funeral procession question whether she will receive a proper, Christian burial, or if she will be treated like a bag of bones and skin, essentially, and be buried in an unfavorable fashion. Though the situation pointed towards suicide, Ophelia received a funeral that was Christianesque mainly because of her royal blood (Act V, scene i). This specific example from the play shows us how immoral suicide, to the people of the play, really was. Where do the roots of morals lie? The answer exists in religion. The characters of Hamlet all consider religion and the laws of it to be of utmost importance. In Hamlet, Christianity is the only religion mentioned and is followed by practically everyone. Considering most people were very religious, we can infer that they followed the rules very closely and criticized those that did not, even if it was they. In one of Hamlet’s soliloquies, we learn that one of the few things preventing Hamlet from ending his miserable life is the commandment of God. â€Å"Or that the Everlasting had not fix’d His canon ‘gainst self-slaughter!† If it were not against the will of God, Hamlet would have considered suicide even more and maybe even committed the treacherous act. Christianity condemns suicide (Act I, scene ii). The people of the play follow Christianity rigorously. Therefore, the people of the play look down upon suicide mainly because of their religious views.

John Locke outlinect Essay

â€Å"Rationalism is the thought that appeals to reason or intellect a primary or fundamental source of knowledge or justification. † â€Å"It is typically contrasted with empiricism, which appeals to sensory experience as a primary or fundamental source of knowledge or justification. † John Locke argues that, â€Å"We come to this world knowing nothing whatsoever. † (Warburton 74). He believes that experience teaches us everything we know. This view is usually known as empiricism, in contrast to innatism, (the theory that some of our knowledge is in born), and to  rationalism (the strife that we can achieve knowledge of the world by the power of reason alone). ?Locke’s essay â€Å"Human Understanding† published in 1689, soon became a philosophical bestseller. He produced four editions of it in his lifetime, and it had already reached its eleventh by 1735. This book is complex and wide ranging work; its main focus is the origin and limits of human knowledge. He tries to answer these questions. * what can we know? * What is the relation between thought and reality? These are real the perennial questions of the branch of philosophy called epistemology, or the theory of knowledge. ?Locke described his role as that of an underlabourer , clearing away conceptual confusions so that the scientists, or natural philosophers, as they were then known, could carry on their important work of adding to human knowledge. (Warburton 75). ? No innate principle 1. Locke does not believe that it makes sense to say that someone could be having a thought without their knowing what that thought was about. He rejects any idea of unconscious thoughts as nonsensical. A) One argument he uses to support his claim that there are no innate principles is that it is obvious that there is not total agreement about what the supposedly innate  principles might be. If we were all born knowing that, for example, we should keep our promises, then everyone would recognize this as fundamental principle. But, as Locke points out, there is no such general agreement. (Warburton 76). Nor do children immediately recognize the principle as one binding on them. Locke continues to argue that there is no innate principle aside from the principle that is taught and learnt. ?Locke supports his idea by saying, if there were innate principles then children must strongly abide by them since adults have already influenced by the culture and people. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ These and other arguments lead Locke to reject the view that there are any innate principles. This led him with the task of explaining how it is that the human mind comes to be furnished with thoughts, beliefs, and knowledge of the world. His answer is that all our ideas come from experience. Ideas Locke uses the word idea to mean whatever it is that anyone thinks about. When you look out of your window, what you see – a tree perhaps, or a sparrow – is not the tree or sparrow itself, but rather representation of it, an idea, something like a picture in your head. (Warburton 76). Locke believes that not all our ideas are received from immediate sensation of the world. Some of them are ideas of reflection, such as when we reason, or remember or will do something. Locke believes that all our ideas ultimately come from experience, so that the contents of our thoughts, even when we are reflecting rather than perceiving, all come from sensation. Example: A child locked away would have no more idea of scarlet and green than he would of the taste of  oyster or pineapple if he had never tried them. Ideas can be combined in several ways, so that once we have the idea of scarlet and the idea of a coat, we can imagine a scarlet coat, even if we’ve never actually seen one. But the simpler ideas from which the complex ones are built all originate in perception by one or more of the five senses. ( Warburton 77). Primary and Secondary Qualities When we say that a snowball is greyish-white and cold and round, what we mean is that it can produce in us ides of these properties. Locke distinguishes primary and secondary qualities , giving a very different account of each. -Primary qualities are inseparable from objects. The primary qualities of a snowball would include its shape and solidity, but not its color or its coldness. Solidity and shapes are more likely to remain constant at place over time. – Secondary qualities would be color and coldness because its coldness can be changed at a different room temperature while different light settings can give shade to whatever object of your concentration that in a way gives you an illusion view of what you’re actually watching. Personal Identity.

Gustave Eiffel and the Eiffel Tower

Gustave Eiffel and the Eiffel Tower A master engineer who came to be known as â€Å"the magician of iron,† Alexandre-Gustave Eiffel’s reputation was ultimately crowned by the marvelous, latticed Parisian tower that bears his name. But the 300-meter–high sensation has dwarfed a catalog of sensational projects by the Dijon-born visionary. Early Life and Career Born in 1832 in Djion, France, Eiffel’s mother owned a prosperous coal business. Two uncles, Jean-Baptiste Mollerat and Michel Perret, were major influences on Eiffel, discussing a wide range of subjects with the boy. After finishing high school, Eiffel was admitted to a top school, Ecole Centrale des Arts et Manufactures in Paris. Eiffel studied chemistry there, but after graduating in 1855, he took a job with a company that specialized in making ​railway bridges.   Eiffel was a fast learner. By 1858 he was directing bridge construction. In 1866 he went into business for himself and in 1868 formed a company, Eiffel Cie. That company installed a  major bridge, the Ponte Dona Maria, in Porto, Portugal with 525-foot steel arch, and the highest bridge in France, the Garabit Viaduct, before eventually dissolving. Eiffel’s list of constructions is daunting. He built the Nice Observatory, the Cathedral of San Pedro de Tacna in Peru, plus theaters, hotels, and fountains.   Ã‚      Eiffels Work on the Statue of Liberty Among his many great constructions, one project rivaled the Eiffel Tower in terms of fame and glory: designing the interior frame for the Statue of Liberty. Eiffel took the design- by sculptor Frà ©dà ©ric Auguste Bartholdi- and made it a reality, creating an internal framework around which the massive statue could be sculpted. It was Eiffel who conceived of the two spiral staircases inside the statue.   The Eiffel Tower The Statue of Liberty was finished and opened in 1886. The next year work began on Eiffel’s defining piece, a tower for the 1889 Universal Exposition in Paris, France, built to honor the 100th anniversary of the French Revolution. Construction of the Eiffel Tower, an astounding feat of engineering, took more than two years, but it was worth the wait. Visitors flocked to the stunning 300 meter-high work- at the time the world’s tallest man-made structure- and made the exhibition one of the few worlds fairs to make a profit.   Eiffels Death and Legacy The Eiffel Tower was originally supposed to be taken down after the fair, but the decision was reconsidered. The architectural wonder remained, and is now as popular as ever, drawing immense crowds each day.    Eiffel died in 1923 at the age of 91.