Icon or Symbol: A Teachers Moral Dilemma :: Education Teaching Papers

Icon or Symbol: A Teacher's Moral Dilemma Works Cited Missing It all happened so quickly. One moment I was at my blackboard, the next moment I was between two juvenile males who were trying to prove a "pride point" with their fists. I had, without a conscious thought about it, drawn a crown on the board. Next I heard chairs hitting the floor and screams of profanity. I was called a not-so-nice name by one of my students, followed by his strange comment: "We know who your favorites in this class are." Another student from across the room overturned his chair and, breath coming fast, managed to get out the words "Don't get on her, man. And don't you never mess with the crown! Don't mess with my blood, man!" Then they were at each other's throats and I was between them, not knowing what had happened. I work at a juvenile prison for all male offenders. Quite honestly, I feel as if my students and I speak different languages sometimes. After talking to students and counselors after this incident, I discovered that the crown I had drawn to represent Prince Hamlet of Denmark was interpreted as a gang symbol by the members of my class. By drawing the crown, I had somehow affiliated myself with the Ghetto Boys of Indianapolis. This angered my students who consider themselves members of a rival gang. What would Shakespeare think of such a situation? I guess the real question is what do I think about such a situation and how do I define my role in the classroom? Peirce's theory of signs and his classification from the point of view of the object of the sign (representant) is helpful in understanding this classroom incident. Peirce defined a sign as "anything which is so determined by something else, called its object, and so determines an effect upon a person, which effect I call its interpretant" (Houser 257). In this view, educators use signs all of the time, to interact with students. In fact, in his article "Toward a Peircean Theory," Nathan Houser relates Peirce's belief that "signs are the matter, or the substance of thought" (257). Peirce goes even further to say that life itself "is a train of thought" (Houser 256). In other words, life and signs are "fundamentally related" and unseparable for all humans (Houser 257). As a teacher, I present my students with signs (representants) in hopes of helping them to understand inf ormation.

J.d. Salinger Essay -- essays research papers

Born on January 1, 1919, Jerome David Salinger was to become one of America’s greatest contemporary authors. In 1938 Salinger briefly attended Ursinus College in Pennsylvania where he wrote a column, "Skipped Diploma," which featured movie reviews for his college newspaper. Salinger made his writing debut when he published his first short story, "The Young Folks," in Whit Burnett’s Story magazine (French, xiii). He was paid only twenty-five dollars. In 1939, at the age of 20, Salinger had not acquired any readers. He later enrolled in a creative writing class at Columbia University. Salinger was very much interested in becoming an actor and a playwright, which was quite odd because he would later in life become a recluse (Wenke, 3). Salinger adjusted his writing style to fit the literary marketplace. He was writing for money and began writing for magazines like Good Housekeeping and Mademoiselle. Many of Salinger’s characters have unique chara cter traits. "Salinger presents a number of stories that consider characters who become involved in degrading, often phony social contexts," states a major critic (Wenke, 7). These characters are often young and have experienced a lot of emotional turmoil. They have been rejected by society and mainly categorized as "misfits." This alienation of the personality is often viewed as a sign of weakness by society when in fact the outcasts ultimately gain strength from their experiences as shown in Nine Stories, The Catcher in the Rye, and Franny and Zooey. Salinger is telling a tale of the human condition in its reality through his novels. Nine Stories is a collection of short stories of people who are uncertain of the next path to take in life. They are lonely, needy, and searching for love. One of these stories, "A Perfect Day for Bananafish," is the story of a young couple who try to understand their life together and the true meaning of love. Seymour Gl ass has just been released from the Army Hospital and he is unable to adjust to life with his "crass wife Muriel amidst the lavish and vulgar atmosphere of their post-war second honeymoon" (Gwynn & Blotner, 19). It has often been called "the loveless tunnel of love." Salinger portrays Muriel in the first part of the story as superficial. ... ...at lead us to believe that life has leading characters and minor characters, important details and unimportant details, beginnings, middles, ends" (Bryfonski, 521). Many critics acclaim that Nine Stories and The Catcher in The Rye are Salinger’s most famous and important works (Bryfonski, 521). The Glass family saga starting in Nine Stories and continuing in and ending in Franny and Zooey shows how the lack of love and the influence of society can lead to destruction unless you find enough inner strength to rise above it. Many of Salinger’s characters are connected to other fictional characters by other authors. In The Catcher in The Rye, the young Holden Caulfield is compared by critics to Huckleberry Finn: He has a colloquialism as marked as Huck’s†¦Like Huck, Holden is neither comical or misanthrope. He is an observer. Unlike Huck, he makes judgements by the dozen, but these are not to be taken seriously; they are concepts (Lomazoff, 7). Holden i s also compared to Hamlet but to a lesser degree; they are both not totally in the minds. The majority of Salinger’s characters learn from being alienated. Through learning this one aspect, they gain strength from it to move on.

Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s house Essay

Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s house is all about women’s rights. We can infer from the theme of the novel that the author Henrik Ibsen was a strong Feminist as he created characters that fought for the rights of women. The central character of A Doll’s house, Nora fought for the same cause. Nora attempts to become a strong individual even though she was being locked in a male dominated world. Her husband Torvald’s dominating nature was the one that was preventing her from become self motivated. She appeared inexperienced, naive and vulnerable till the end when she surprised everybody by boldly leaving her husband and children to live an independent life. Nora’s world appeared to be so childish that the author has named it as a ‘doll’s house’. She appeared as an alien to the real world with no real world experience. She was even found humorous in few incidents. But we can see the same Nora being serious and trying to be superior as she says â€Å"one isn’t without influence†. This shows the feminist views of the character or the author. A Doll`s house speaks about women’s rights. Even though Nora is constructed as immature and silly, we can see that this nature is enforced by the society around her. However her true nature was destined to be revealed later. Nora is found to be an independent woman who was restricted within the ‘dollhouse’ by her husband. Her life was like that of a butterfly that is trying to get out of the cocoon to show its true colors. We can see Nora striving, throughout the play, and finally unveiling her original self. She is indeed a classical hero. She was submissive to her husband and was enthusiastic and smart. We can say that Nora was always right in her attitude as this was the best she can be towards her dominating husband. Towards the end of the play she discovered herself and took the big shocking decision to leave her husband and children for ever. The feminist ideologies of Nora were revealed in the end of the novel. She was found subordinate to her husband Torvald who believed that women are frail and can never make decision of their own. However finally Nora gets hold of her individuality and dares to take the great decision to abandon her husband and children. Nora’s great passion for life and her strong feministic beliefs stimulated her to take the decision of her life. She courageously broke away from the doll house that appeared as a prison for her all through these days. Nora was always under the care of someone, first with her father and then with her husband. Nora was a materialistic, impulsive and babyish. But Nora appeared as a bold woman in the final scene of the play. We can see Nora the classical hero walking out of her house in the final scene to live her life. All this makes us doubt whether she was pretending to be silly all through these days to adjust with the patriarchal oppression she was suffering from her husband Torvald. Nora finally becomes fully independent to renounce the false union of marriage and the burden of motherhood. She says â€Å"Never see him again. Never. Never. Never. Never see the children again. Them too. Never. never. Oh – the icy black water! Oh – that bottomless – that -! Oh, if only it were all over! Now he’s got it – he’s reading it. Oh, no, no! Not yet! Goodbye, Torvald! Goodbye, my darlings. † Nora was the upholder of women`s rights. She struggled against the selfish, stifling, oppressive and dominating attitude of her Husband Torvald and the society which he represents. Nora journey lead to her self-discovery as she fought against the exploitation of women by men. Torvald represents the orthodox society and Nora is the advocate of feminism. Torvald did not give any privilege to Nora and called her silly names throughout the play. He called her ‘squirrel’, ‘lark’, ‘little skylark’, ‘little songbird’, ‘little person’, ‘little woman’, and ‘little featherhead’. Torvald never forgot to use the word ‘little’ before these names. He considered her as ‘little’. He was also very possessive and always used ‘my’ before these names. Torvald never considered Nora equal to him. He thought she is inferior to him. The feminist beliefs of Nora rise up at last and she comes to know that she has been a foolish doll in a toy-marriage and walks out of her house slamming the door behind her and surprising Torvald. Nora was just considered like any other possession of Torvald. She was not given any humane privilege. The feminist beliefs of the author hated this attitude of Torvald and encouraged Nora to break away one day from the ‘doll house’. Nora recognizes her rights at last and is awakened. She stops pretending to be what she is not. She became a strong woman and takes control of her own destiny. Torvald considered his wife, children and status symbols and had a very narrow definition about marriage. He thinks that it is the duty of the wife to be good to her husband and children. She deems women as helpless creatures separated from reality and moral force. The author highlighted the self realization of the main character Nora and the way she becomes an example to feminist ideology. The novel thus becomes an extraordinary work in which a man portrays strong feminist ideologies. The attitude of Nora reveals the strong feminist views of the author. Nora always wanted to get out of the clutch of her husband as she says to Rank and Linde â€Å"I’ve the most extraordinary longing to say: ‘Bloody hell! ’† She finally gets out all her social and traditional commitments and obligations as become free as a hero. She is such a classical character that our hearts are with her even though she took the pitiless decision to leave her moral husband and innocent little children. She can be called as a hero as a fought for a good cause, the freedom for the weaker sex. The position of women in the 1800’s, during the time of Nora was too low. They lived as housewives with no right to vote, own property, and make any significant transactions. Nora recognized her slavery and preferred to break away and live a life with freedom. It is nothing but her courage to fight against oppression made her the most admirable stage heroine of the century. What she has done is perfectly justifiable in the light is modern ideology and culture. She was just being a model to the women of modern days. She stepped into a wider world and making her husband understands that he is not the noble person that she expected him to be. She understands that she can no longer continue as a shadow of her husband. She turned out to be a classical hero in the contemporary male dominated society that oppressed women to the core and considered them as a second-class citizen.She just initiated an awakening and made a classical turn in history. Sources Ibsen, Henrik. ‘A Doll’s House’. Introduction to Literature: Reading, Analyzing, and Writing. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice, 1990. Henrik Ibsen. Doll’s House: The Wild Duck: The Lady from the Sea . J M Dent & Sons Ltd, 1979. Marianne Sturman. CliffsNotes on Ibsen’s A Doll’s House & Hedda Gabler. Cliffs Notes, 2003. Egil Tornqvist. Ibsen: A Doll’s House. Cambridge University Press, 2004. Henrik Ibsen A Doll’s House and Other Plays. Penguin Classics, 1965.

Best Novel of the Twentieth Century Essay

Best Novel of the Twentieth Century Alfred Nobel gave his last name to one of the most prestigious literature prizes today. He specified that the award should go to ‘the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work in the ideal direction’ (Cited in Danson & Gupta, 2005) Over the years the criteria the prize was awarded on kept on changing along with the changing times. â€Å"In 1964, the French philosopher, novelist and playwright Jean-Paul Sarte voluntarily declined the Nobel Prize. † (Danson and Gupta, 2005, p. 212) The prize for the best novel of the twentieth century will follow guidelines that perhaps even Sartre would consider just and accept the prize if it were offered to him. Today, the Nobel Prize is regarded as one of the highest honors in literature but there was a period in history when Sartre’s refusal threatened its universality of honor. Five years later, Samuel Beckett received the award and the Nobel Prize gained back some of its authority as a universal honor. Becket had contemplated whether he should accept the award or not because he realized the recent controversy arisen by Sarte’s rejection but did not want to simply mimic his actions. (Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 213-4) â€Å"The Booker Prize was launched in 1968 to provide a benchmark for the ‘best of contemporary British fiction’ by awarding a prize for what was deemed to be, in the joint opinion of the judges selected by the management committee, the most outstanding novel by a ‘British or Commonwealth writer’ in any given year. † (Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 295) Tom Maschler found the booker prize and can be viewed as a successful marketer of his time. His goal was to ensure that serious British fiction gains market share through public relation-ing efforts, specifically, the use of touch programs. He did for books back in the 1960’s for books, what people do for movies now: create a lot of hype before the release date, a lot of publicity, and going big at the box office. Stated by Iyer in 1993, â€Å"the Booker [had become] London’s way of formally commemorating and coronating literary tradition †¦ the closest thing in writing to the movies’ Academy† (cited in Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 295) â€Å"Plato suggests that literature is not an end in itself; it has a broader social responsibility which imposes a duty on poets to make sure that their works are not immoral or untrue. Poetry and art in general have fundamental responsibilities to the society that produces them. If poets are unwilling to tether their imitations of life to the demands of that society, Plato argues, then they should be kicked out of the republic. † (Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 4) This idea by Plato is the concept behind instrumentalism. If Plato was alive today, he would condone ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ all the way. Just like any big corporation should be held responsible for what its actions are outside of producing a certain product or service, Plato believed that poet was responsible for what he was producing. In reality, Corporate Social Responsibility, if analyzed in the long run, can be the best thing for a company. If a company carries out its duties other than delivering a great product to society, it gains the people’s trust, maintains goodwill, and cashes in on the steady profits in the long term. In the same light, according to Plato, a poet must create poetry responsibly and cater to the needs and demands of his society. In doing this, the poet must create works that might eventually become simply a thing that society demands. By doing this, literature looses its essence and becomes simply what the public wants but to create continuously what the public wants and have it accepted by them is an art of its own. To observe the cycle like this, Plato’s simple theory of producing work responsibly becomes producing work to cater to a specific demand, which then becomes a sort of artistic economics, and simply a work of beauty like Oscar Wilde’s. For this reason, instrumentalism or aestheticism alone cannot be the judge of good literature. Basically, both the Nobel and Booker were found to expand British literature, the former by means of transforming the judging criteria from time to time and the later by 21st century marketing tactics. â€Å"A neo-Kantian might advise the Nobel or Booker judges as follows: derive your standards for judging literary works themselves rather than by following extant rules of literary judgment; look to exemplary works of genius for guidance in judging the work before you; treat such works as models, and never reduce them to a list of determinate rules, formulae or precepts. † (Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 203) Keeping in mind the advice given by the neo-Kantian the new prize for the best novel of the twentieth century will weigh the literatures strength according to its aesthetics, instruments, and modernist views. The goal of the prize is not to simply canonize a work of literature or deem it best because beauty is a more important characteristic than content or vice versa. The goal is to view the work for it is, just like a human being, and appreciate what it intends to do or tell. Like the age old example of ‘apples and oranges’, the prize will look at each work for what it is. A work may not be deemed the best simply because it is more inclined towards Wilde’s criteria or Plato’s criteria. No one will be thrown out of ‘The Republic’ but instead the competition will be different because the apples will be competing against the other apples and the oranges against the other but not against each others. In other words, a work may be the best aesthetic piece of literature or the best instrumentalist literature. The winner will be the work which tells of something deeply moving and presents new ideas that are life changing way in the most beautiful manner possible. The winner will the perfect blend of apples and oranges and the runner up will be the best apple, the best orange, or the less perfect blend of the two. â€Å"†¦Writers such as Oscar Wilde and Joris-Karl Huysmans advocated a view of art which denied that it should have any moral, political or social function. † (Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 4) Cuddon stated in 1982 that â€Å"art for art’s sake† (cited in Danson and Gupta, 2005) was the fundamental of aestheticism. When we consider Virginia Woolf’s novel Orlando, it has all the elements of beautifully portrayed writing and meaning and content. What causes this text to be the winner of the prize for the best book of the twentieth century is that as time went on, the books purpose and meaning evolved. â€Å"In a survey of the Nobel Prize, Kjell Espmark (1999) discerns the following phases: from 1901 to 1912, prizes were given to writers who demonstrated ‘a lofty and sound idealism’; from 1912 to 1920, a ‘literary policy of [political] neutrality’ was followed; in the 1920s, award winners were marked as a possessing a classical ‘great style’; in the 1930s, ‘universal interest’ was considered key; from 1946 to 1977, writers were chosen who had made a ‘pioneering’ contribution; from 1978 to 1985, attention was given to ‘unknown masters’; from 1986 onwards, the emphasis had been on recognizing the literary productions of the ‘whole world’†(Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 211) Unlike the Nobel prize and its changing criteria over the years, Orlando was viewed differently as time went on. â€Å"We read Orlando now most often as a feminist work that explores the boundaries of gender and sexuality and the limits of women writers within literary history, or as a sharp critique on the possibilities of biography. But Orlando was often first read by its contemporary audience as a gossipy portrait of Vita Sackville-West. †(Tetterton, 1995) When the novel was first written it was a mere work of comedic art with no instrumental purpose but to paint a certain portrait of someone. Virginia Woolf’s writing is difficult to read and understand because of the transitions she makes and her style of writing. Back in the day, this novel was, â€Å"†¦taken as the delightful joke that Woolf herself claimed it to be. It was a hugely successful joke — not just critically, but financially as well, both in England and America. It was Orlando that enabled the Woolf’s to purchase their first car, and it put them on stable financial footing for the rest of their lives. † (Tetterton, 1995) The novel perhaps served an instrumental purpose to the Woold family but not society, it was viewed as a work of fiction and no action was taken against it because of the hints of lesbianism since the main character was a man when he fell in love the princess. This work could be simply viewed as ‘art for the sake of art’ at the time by the audience but it had a greater purpose. Some say that it was a secretly a love letter to the woman Virginia Woolf loved. When we read Orlando now we pay more attention to the gender issues present in the book. The book was not viewed as an important work I feminine and lesbian literature back in the day because none of the feminist movements had occurred yet. When we look at the work now we can’t help but get a sense of what Woolf was really trying to say. It was only in the later years that the work evolved from simply aesthetical and comical to instrumental. Woolf shed’s light on the issue of lesbianism and gets away with it in the era where other writers were being banned for bringing up the same subjects. She fulfils the purpose of feministic liberation because after the 300 years the main character becomes a liberated and free woman in the early nineties. These demands were initially not required by society and no one but Virginia and her contemporaries who felt the same way craved the need for someone to bring about this revolution. Today, Virginia Woolf’s Orlando caters to the demands of society and the feminist revolution that is still shaping itself and the freedom of exploring one’s sexuality freely. Virginia created the perfect blend of aestheticism and instrumentalism with the aide of time. In the century that it was written in, the novel served its aesthetic purpose and in the next century it the audience learnt to look at its real instrumental purpose. Woolf created this perfect blend and proved that she was two steps ahead of the whole world. She was a modernist because she re-evaluated where society currently stood and where it needed to go and through what means. Woolf paved a way for future writers to explore new territory and have the freedom of self expression. One argument presented by Kelly Tetterton at the The Fifth Annual Virginia Woolf Conference at Otterbein College, June 18, 1995 is that the segue the audience made from the comical to the serious category is through the publication method of the book. She points out, â€Å"Partly yes — we are far more sensitive to issues of gender than those readers of long ago because it’s now part of our social consciousness; even those who might disagree with such a critical approach must now acknowledge the validity of the approach itself. And partly no — we are simply reacting to what we’re given to read. Take a look at the most recent paperback covers for Orlando — one from Harcourt Brace Jovanovich and one from the Quality Paperback Book Club. Anyone casually glancing at these covers is likely to suspect that issues of gender and sexuality are involved in the text beneath the covers. The 1973 HBJ paperback gives us two almost identical figures, one male and one female, divided by a clock; the 1993 QBC book cover is more abstract, but there’s a prominent pink triangle on its spine and back. If we are better readers today, it’s because we have some help from the publishers. † (1995) The second half of her argument is valid because the pictures or hype that surrounds a text greatly affect how a work of literature is viewed. The different publications have a sort of Booker Prize affect on the audience. The different paperback version somewhat manipulates what’s inside and this factor can be used to sway the judgment about the work greatly. Nevertheless, the publication or marketing aspects do not take away from the book itself because part one of the argument presented by Tetterton is just as valid and in sync with the entire critique of the book making it the best book of the twentieth century. â€Å"In 1934, the first issue of the British journal Left Review published a position statement by the Writers’ International, a group of radical writers. The statement included the following thoughts on what role writers should play in the British society:†¦It is time for these, together with the working-class journalists and writers who are trying to express the feelings of their class, to organize an association of revolutionary writers. † (Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 117) Interpreting this role British writers were asked to play in society is the very fundamental of instrumentalism, producing responsibly what the society demands as a whole. The author of Sunset Song, Lewis Grassic Gibbon replied to this message in a mostly positive manner except for two discrepancies. This declaration stated that literature â€Å"is anything but elevated, self-contained or sacrosanct, as the aesthetes had claimed; rather, for the Writers’ International, literature has the potential, even and obligation, to criticize society and to contribute to the building of a socialist future. † (Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 118) Gibbon said, â€Å"I hate capitalism; all my books are explicit or implicit propaganda. †(cited in Danson & Gupta, 2005, p118) The first of the two points Gibbon disagreed with was that capitalism was perhaps dead economically but the literature was thriving, untouched, and unharmed and that there was a huge difference between the two. Second, he thought that writers should actually work for the socialist coast and not just say it. (Danson & Gibbon, 2005) The use of Scottish accents and dialects is present throughout the entire novel. This style earns him points for true instrumentalism. He sticks to his roots, much like the writers of today who add flavorful touches of their mother tongue in their works. From the earlier point about supporting the revolutionary cause of socialism he strips away whatever he can of capitalism by staying true to his origins no matter what. â€Å"The young Chris must choose between life on the land, her Scottish identity, and the English part of her which draws her away from home towards books and education. Yet even once she has made her decision, the way of life of her community is altered forever by the Great War. † (BBC) The story is about a little boy understanding what really is going on around him and how he must deal with everything. The book is runner up to Orlando by Virginia Woolf because it is the best work of instrumentalism at its extreme whereas Woolf’s novel encompasses all the concepts of aesthetics to modernism to instrumentalism. Sunset Song is a great example of a believing in a cause and writing for it to change the society as a whole and lead into a revolution. â€Å"However, it is important that while Sunset Song mourns the loss of a past age, it is not hopeless. The images of light and the morning star in the closing pages of the novel anticipate the rest of the trilogy, emphasizing Gibbon’s desire to construct a future rather than simply mourn the loss of a Golden Age. † (BBC) Gobbin, like his response to the Writers’ International delivers what he has said and paints a window to the future. He can be viewed as a modernist in the sense that he re-evaluated how society was going to reach a certain place and stuck to different ideas and did not conform to capitalistic views. â€Å"Gibbon uses the narrative device of flashforward, or prolepsis, at the start at each of the four main parts of the novel. † (Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 132) His style of writing and the techniques he uses also earns him points for creatively constructing the passage of work. â€Å"All Gibbon’s sympathetic characters – the Guthries, Chae Strachan, Long Rob and, more ambivalently, Ewan Tavendale – are associated with the traditional peasant way of life. In contrast, the characters who embrace small-scale capitalist production – Ellison, Mutch, Munro and Cuddiestoun – are represented as thoroughly unattractive. † (Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 141) The author clearly indicated his leaning towards socialism through his characters and their analysis throughout the book. He successfully achieves his goal of taking a stance against capitalism and that lands him into the runner up spot in the best writer of the twentieth century. â€Å"An important motivation at the core of Gibbon’s writing, closely connected to his political commitment, is his desire to rescue the forgotten, unrecorded histories of Scotland’s poor. † (Danson & Gupta, 2005, p. 150) Gibbon is one of those revolutionaries whole believes that all the toil and blood and hardship that went into making the future what it is today should never be ignored. It should be remembered and used as inspiration to move forward and achieve even greater things. (Danson & Gupta, 2005) Virginia Woolf takes away the award from Gibbon’s for first place because she is a modernist in the true sense. Gobbin beautifully portrays what an instrumentalist should do and inspires people and connects with them on a deep level from the get go. He has always presented his work seriously and believed it to bring about a change and get to the end through revolutionary socialist means. The judgment criteria of this award is not to award a socialist when a socialist revolution is going on or a capitalist when capitalism as it its peek. The goal is to judge literature for what is no matter what guards the standards of society now. Gibbon’s is a story that can be read in the democratically inclined times of today and still have an impact and show the clarity of how one can stick to his beliefs and paint a convincing and moving piece of literature. References Brown, R. D. , & Gupta, S. (2005). Aestheticism & modernism: debating twentieth-century literature 1900-1960. Twentieth-century literature : texts and debates. London: Routledge. Brown, R. D. , & Gupta, S. (2004). The popular and the canonical: debating twentieth-century literature 1940-2000. Twentieth-century literature : texts and debates. London: Routledge. Gibbon, L. G. (1981). Sunset song. New York: Schocken Books. Tamir, E. (2007). Gupta/Johnson’s A Twentieth-Century Reader and Johnson’s Debating Twentieth-Century Literature, 1940-2000. Science-Fiction Studies. 34, 343-345. Tetterton, Kelly (1995, June, 18). Virginia Woolf’s Orlando:. Retrieved May 18, 2008, from http://www. tetterton. net/orlando/orlando95_talk. html The Writers. BBC, Retrieved May 19, 2008, from http://www. bbc. co. uk/scotland/arts/writingscotland/writers/lewis_grassic_gibbon/works. shtml Woolf, V. (1928). Orlando: a biography. New York: Harcourt, Brace.

Gender and Hand-Grip Strength essays

Gender and Hand-Grip Strength essays Hand-grip strength plays an important role in assessing clinical situations, daily activities such as picking up a glass full of water, and for vocational reasons. Measurement of hand-grip strength determines the isometric strength of the muscles. Isometric strength or static, or static, strength is the muscle contraction in the joint angle that does not have a change in length but it affects the muscle tension and connective tissues. Hand-grip strength measures the muscles of the hand and the forearm. Studies have shown that the dominant hand is usually stronger than the non-dominant hand due to capability and daily use of the hand A cross-sectional study conducted by Luna-Heredia, E, Martin- Pena, G, and Ruiz-Galiana, J assessed the effects of hand-grip strength on 517 subjects with 267 of them being females and 229 being males to test out the normal reference values of hand-grip strength in men and women related to anthropometry.2 The grip-strength was measured with BASELINE and GRIP-D dynamometer on the dominant hand and non-dominant hand to find measures of each hand with the maximum of 3 trials on each hand. Results showed that males have higher grip strength in left and right hand compared to females by all age groups. The male subjects' non-dominant hand results were 21% greater in hand-grip strength compared to females and dominant being 22% greater. The average kg for male dominant hand was 39.95 kg vs. 25.72 kg in females and average male non-dominant hand was 35.1 vs. 22.8 kg in There are several determining factors that influence the hand-grip strength which are gender, age, height, weight, dominant handedness, physical activity, and occupation.2 These data are important in finding out what type of therapy is needed for the injured hand and for creating a training program that is sport specific. The purpose of this lab is to compare the gender differences in mal...

Symposium De Virtual essays

Symposium De Virtual essays Webster defines cyberspace to be the online world of computer networks, which only makes you believe that Webster has no clue what its talking about. Yes, it is a large network, but it is oh so much more. It has its problems such as cyber crime, hacking, invasion of privacy and other things that need regulations, but the main grandeur of the Internet, is spectacular. My Point of view differs from any I know, which makes cyberspace the concept of concepts. If a survey were being done on how people experience cyberspace, you would immediately notice that no two answers would be the same. Experiencing cyberspace is something that is different for every person. I myself, experience cyberspace psychologically, I experience it in my mind. There have been many attempts at trying to define the complex term, but up to date, no one has pinned the tail on the donkey. There cannot be one solid definition for a word that possesses so many meanings. I personally associate the word cyberspace with the idea of being able to travel to distant places without ever leaving my chair (which I rarely do). Obviously, I know that there is no way of visiting different places or countries using my home computer, but in my mind, when I see the location that I am connected to, it feel as though a part of me is there. The best part is that I can switch from place to place without having to walk a single inch of land. I dont feel a sense of distance or location, e xcept when it takes a long time to connect to a host. When I travel from place to place (site to site), I dont cover any known physical distances, but instead I cover visual distance. Just as many people do, I refer to the places that I visit as virtual worlds. I like calling them this because I never actually get to see the reality of the "world". I only get to see it electronically and digitally. The feeling that I experience while in cy ...

General Sir William Howe in the American Revolution

General Sir William Howe in the American Revolution General Sir William Howe was a central figure during the early years of the American Revolution (1775-1783) when he served as commander of British forces in North America. A distinguished veteran of the French and Indian War, he took part in many of the conflicts campaigns in Canada. In the years after the war, Howe and his brother, Admiral Richard Howe, were sympathetic to the concerns of the colonists. Despite this, he accepted a post to fight the Americans in 1775. Assuming command in North America the following year, Howe conducted successful campaigns that saw him capture both New York City and Philadelphia. Though victorious on the battlefield, he consistently failed to destroy General George Washingtons army and departed for Britain in 1778. Early Life William Howe was born August 10, 1729, and was the third son of Emanuel Howe, 2nd Viscount Howe and his wife Charlotte. His grandmother had been the mistress of King George I and as a result Howe and his three brothers were the illegitimate uncles of King George III. Influential in the halls of power, Emanuel Howe served as Governor of Barbados while his wife regularly attended the courts of King George II and King George III. Attending Eton, the younger Howe followed his two elder brothers into the military on September 18, 1746 when he purchased a commission as a coronet in Cumberlands Light Dragoons. A quick study, he was promoted to lieutenant the following year and saw service in Flanders during the War of the Austrian Succession.  Elevated to captain on January 2, 1750, Howe transferred to the 20th Regiment of Foot. While with the unit, he befriended Major James Wolfe under whom he would serve in North America during the French and Indian War. Fighting in North America On January 4, 1756, Howe was appointed major of the newly formed 60th Regiment (re-designated 58th in 1757) and traveled with the unit to North America for operations against the French.  Promoted to lieutenant colonel in December 1757, he served in Major General Jeffery Amhersts army during its campaign to capture Cape Breton Island. In this role he took part in Amhersts successful siege of Louisbourg that summer where he commanded the regiment. During the campaign, Howe earned a commendation for making a daring amphibious landing while under fire. With the death of his brother, Brigadier General George Howe at the Battle of Carillon that July, William attained a seat in Parliament representing Nottingham.  This was aided by his mother who campaigned on his behalf while he was overseas as she believed that a seat in Parliament would aid in advancing her sons military career. Battle of Quebec Remaining in North America, Howe served in Wolfes campaign against Quebec in 1759. This began with a failed effort at Beauport on July 31 that saw the British suffer a bloody defeat. Unwilling to press the attack at Beauport, Wolfe decided cross the St. Lawrence River and land at  Anse-au-Foulon to the southwest. This plan was executed and on September 13, Howe led the initial light infantry assault which secured the road up to the Plains of Abraham. Appearing outside of the city, the British opened the the Battle of Quebec later that day and won a decisive victory. Remaining in the region, he helped defend Quebec through the winter, including participation in the Battle of Sainte-Foy, before aiding in Amhersts capture of Montreal the following year. Colonial Tensions Returning to Europe, Howe took part in the siege of Belle ÃŽle in 1762 and was offered the military governorship of the island.  Preferring to remain in active military service, he declined this post and instead served as the adjutant general of the force that assaulted Havana, Cuba in 1763.  With the end of the conflict, Howe returned to England. Appointed colonel of the 46th Regiment of Foot in Ireland in 1764, he was elevated to governor of the Isle of Wight four years later. Recognized as a gifted commander, Howe was promoted to major general in 1772, and a short time later took over training of the armys light infantry units. Representing a largely Whig constituency in Parliament, Howe opposed the Intolerable Acts and preached reconciliation with the American colonists as tensions grew in 1774 and early 1775. His feelings were shared by his brother, Admiral Richard Howe. Though publicly stating that he would resist service against the Americans, he accepted the position as second-in-command of British forces in America. American Revolution Begins Stating that he was ordered, and could not refuse, Howe sailed for Boston with Major Generals Henry Clinton and John Burgoyne. Arriving May 15, Howe brought reinforcements for General Thomas Gage. Under siege in the city following the American victories at Lexington and Concord, the British were forced to take action on June 17 when American forces fortified Breeds Hill on the Charlestown Peninsula overlooking the city. Lacking a sense of urgency, the British commanders spent much of the morning discussing plans and making preparations while the Americans worked to strengthen their position. While Clinton favored an amphibious attack to cut off the American line of retreat, Howe advocated a more conventional frontal attack. Taking the conservative route, Gage ordered Howe to move forward with a direct assault. Bunker Hill In the resulting Battle of Bunker Hill, Howes men succeeded in driving off the Americans but sustained over 1,000 casualties in capturing their works. Though a victory, the battle deeply influenced Howe and crushed his initial belief that the rebels represented only a small part of the American people. A dashing, daring commander earlier in his career, the high losses at Bunker Hill made Howe more conservative and less inclined to attack strong enemy positions. Battle of Bunker Hill. Photograph Source: Public Domain Knighted that year, Howe was temporarily appointed commander-in-chief on October 10 (it was made permanent in April 1776) when Gage returned to England. Assessing the strategic situation, Howe and his superiors in London planned to establish bases in New York and Rhode Island in 1776 with the goal of isolating the rebellion and containing it in New England. Forced out of Boston on March 17, 1776, after General George Washington emplaced guns on Dorchester Heights, Howe withdrew with the army to Halifax, Nova Scotia. New York There, a new campaign was planned with the goal of taking New York. Landing on Staten Island on July 2, Howes army soon swelled to over 30,000 men. Crossing to Gravesend Bay, Howe exploited the light American defenses at Jamaica Pass and succeeded in flanking Washingtons army.  The resulting Battle of Long Island on August 26/27 saw the Americans beaten and forced to retreat. Falling back to fortifications at Brooklyn Heights, the Americans awaited a British assault. Based on his earlier experiences, Howe was reluctant to attack and began siege operations. Battle of Long Island by Alonzo Chappel. Public Domain This hesitation allowed Washingtons army to escape to Manhattan. Howe was soon joined by his brother who had orders to act as a peace commissioner. On September 11, 1776, the Howes met with John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Edward Rutledge on Staten Island. While the American representatives demanded recognition of independence, the Howes were only permitted to extend pardons to those rebels who submitted to British authority. Their offer refused, they began active operations against New York City. Landing on Manhattan on September 15, Howe suffered a setback at Harlem Heights the next day but ultimately forced Washington from the island and later drove him from a defensive position at the Battle of White Plains. Rather than pursue Washingtons beaten army, Howe returned to New York to secure Forts Washington and Lee. New Jersey Again showing an unwillingness to eliminate Washingtons army, Howe soon moved into winter quarters around New York and only dispatched a small force under Major General Lord Charles Cornwallis to create a safe zone in northern New Jersey. He also dispatched Clinton to occupy Newport, RI. Recovering in Pennsylvania, Washington was able to win victories at Trenton, Assunpink Creek, Princeton in December and January. As a result, Howe pulled back many of his outposts. While Washington continued small-scale operations during the winter, Howe was content to remain in New York enjoying a full social calendar. Two Plans In the spring of 1777, Burgoyne proposed a plan for defeating the Americans which called for him to lead an army south through Lake Champlain to Albany while a second column advanced east from Lake Ontario. These advances were to be supported by an advance north from New York by Howe. While this plan was approved by Colonial Secretary Lord George Germain, Howes role was never clearly defined nor was he issued orders from London to aid Burgoyne. As a result, though Burgoyne moved forward, Howe launched his own campaign to capture the American capital at Philadelphia. Left on his own, Burgoyne was defeated in the critical Battle of Saratoga. Philadelphia Captured Sailing south from New York, Howe moved up the Chesapeake Bay and landed at Head of Elk on August 25, 1777. Moving north into Delaware, his men skirmished with the Americans at Coochs Bridge on September 3. Pressing on, Howe defeated Washington at the Battle of Brandywine on September 11. Outmaneuvering the Americans, he captured Philadelphia without a fight eleven days later. Concerned about Washingtons army, Howe left a small garrison in the city and moved northwest. Fighting around Cliveden during the Battle of Germantown. Photograph Source: Public Domain On October 4, he won a near-run victory at the Battle of Germantown. In the wake of the defeat, Washington retreated into winter quarters at Valley Forge. Having taken the city, Howe also worked to open the Delaware River to British shipping.  This saw his men defeated at Red Bank but victorious in the Siege of Fort  Mifflin. Under severe criticism in England for failing to crush the Americans and feeling he had lost the kings confidence, Howe requested to be relieved on October 22. After attempting to lure Washington into battle late that fall, Howe and the army entered winter quarters in Philadelphia. Again enjoying a lively social scene, Howe received word that his resignation had been accepted on April 14, 1778. Later Life Arriving in England, Howe entered into the debate over the conduct of the war and published a defense of his actions. Made a privy counselor and Lieutenant General of the Ordnance in 1782, Howe remained in active service. With the outbreak of the French Revolution he served in a variety of senior commands in England. Made a full general in 1793, he died on July 12, 1814, after a prolonged illness, while serving as governor of Plymouth. An adept battlefield commander, Howe was beloved by his men but received little credit for his victories in America. Slow and indolent by nature, his greatest failure was an inability to follow up on his successes.