Monopolies in Industry Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Monopolies in Industry - Essay Example Rockefeller (American industrialist)-Britannica Online Encyclopedia." Encyclopedia - Britannica Online Encyclopedia, n.d). Originally, this Trust was made to bring cash in through the conversion from whale oil to kerosene. However, with the emergence of the automobile use, gasoline was the by-product that brought immense wealth to this industrial group. By 1890, the Standard Oil already controlled almost 90 percent of America’s oil industry with little competition remaining. Rockefeller took this opportunity to set prices arbitrarily, leaving consumers with no choice but to pay for the set price (The Standard Oil monopoly, by the Linux Information Project." The Linux Information Project (LINFO) Home Page, n.d). Aside from the dreary effects that consumers had to live with, this went on too far as it did not only had many people’s businesses or jobs taken away from them because of the elimination of competition and the ruthless predatory tactics of the trusts but at the same time it was a business that used extensive fraud, political corruption, and physical violence to maintain its monopoly (A History Of U.S. Monopolies." Investopedia – The Web’s Largest Investing Resource, n.d). Thus, the U.S Department of Justice took on several efforts to break the monopoly. Some of which would be the enactment of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act that sought to limit monopolies and cartels. This act gave the government the power to shatter big companies into smaller pieces that would benefit not only one company or a group of people but the general public. However, this act only gave birth to the formation of domestic monopolies and was then used to differentiate between good and bad monopolies as seen by the government. In response to this, the Clayton Act was introduced that served as guidelines to whether mergers and acquisitions that were unavoidable should be allowed if they substantially lessened the competition in the market monopoly (A History

Plato and the Allegory of the Cave Essay Example for Free

Plato and the Allegory of the Cave Essay The son of a wealthy and noble family, Plato (427-347 B.C.) was preparing for a career in politics when the trial and eventual execution of Socrates (399 B.C.) changed the course of his life. He abandoned his political career and turned to philosophy, opening a school on the outskirts of Athens dedicated to the Socratic search for wisdom. Platos school, then known as the Academy, was the first university in western history and operated from 387 B.C. until A. D. 529, when it was closed by Justinian. Unlike his mentor Socrates, Plato was both a writer and a teacher. His writings are in the form of dialogues, with Socrates as the principal speaker. In the Allegory of the Cave, Plato described symbolically the predicament in which mankind finds itself and proposes a way of salvation. The Allegory presents, in brief form, most of Platos major philosophical assumptions: his belief that the world revealed by our senses is not the real world but only a poor copy of it, and that the real world can only be apprehended intellectually; his idea that knowledge cannot be transferred from teacher to student, but rather that education consists in directing students minds toward what is real and important and allowing them to apprehend it for themselves; his faith that the universe ultimately is good; his conviction that enlightened individuals have an obligation to the rest of society, and that a good society must be one in which the truly wise (the Philosopher-King) are the rulers. The Allegory of the Cave can be found in Book VII of Platos best-known work, The Republic, a lengthy dialogue on the nature of justice. Often regarded as a utopian blueprint, The Republic is dedicated toward a discussion of the education required of a Philosopher-King. The following selection is taken from the Benjamin Jowett translation (Vintage, 1991), pp. 253-261. As you read the Allegory, try to make a mental picture of the cave Plato describes. Better yet, why not draw a picture of it and refer to it as you read the selection. In many ways, understanding Platos Allegory of the Cave will make your foray into the world of philosophical thought much less burdensome. * * * * * * [Socrates] And now, I said, let me show in a figure how far our nature is enlightened or unenlightened: Behold! human beings living in a underground cave, which has a mouth open towards the light and reaching all along the cave; here they have been from their childhood, and have their legs and necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see before them, being prevented by the chains from turning round their heads. Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance, and between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and you will see, if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show the puppets. [Glaucon] I see. [Socrates] And do you see, I said, men passing along the wall carrying all sorts of vessels, and statues and figures of animals made of wood and stone and various materials, which appear over the wall? Some of them are talking, others silent. [Glaucon] You have shown me a strange image, and they are strange prisoners. [Socrates] Like ourselves, I replied; and they see only their own shadows, or the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall of the cave? [Glaucon] True, he said; how could they see anything but the shadows if they were never allowed to move their heads? [Socrates] And of the objects which are being carried in like manner they would only see the shadows? [Glaucon] Yes, he said. [Socrates] And if they were able to converse with one another, would they not suppose that they were naming what was actually before them? [Glaucon] Very true. [Socrates] And suppose further that the prison had an echo which came from the other side, would they not be sure to fancy when one of the passers-by spoke that the voice which they heard came from the passing shadow? [Glaucon] No question, he replied. [Socrates] To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images. [Glaucon] That is certain. [Socrates] And now look again, and see what will naturally follow if the prisoners are released and disabused of their error. At first, when any of them is liberated and compelled suddenly to stand up and turn his neck round and walk and look towards the light, he will suffer sharp pains; the glare will distress him, and he will be unable to see the realities of which in his former state he had seen the shadows; and then conceive some one saying to him, that what he saw before was an illusion, but that now, when he is approaching nearer to being and his eye is turned towards more real existence, he has a clearer vision, -what will be his reply? And you may further imagine that his instructor is pointing to the objects as they pass and requiring him to name them, -will he not be perplexed? Will he not fancy that the shadows which he formerly saw are truer than the objects which are now shown to him? [Glaucon] Far truer. [Socrates] And if he is compelled to look straight at the light, will he not have a pain in his eyes which will make him turn away to take and take in the objects of vision which he can see, and which he will conceive to be in reality clearer than the things which are now being shown to him? [Glaucon] True, he now. [Socrates] And suppose once more, that he is reluctantly dragged up a steep and rugged ascent, and held fast until he s forced into the presence of the sun himself, is he not likely to be pained and irritated? When he approaches the light his eyes will be dazzled, and he will not be able to see anything at all of what are now called realities. [Glaucon] Not all in a moment, he said. [Socrates] He will require to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper world. And first he will see the shadows best, next the reflections of men and other objects in the water, and then the objects themselves; then he will gaze upon the light of the moon and the stars and the spangled heaven; and he will see the sky and the stars by night better than the sun or the light of the sun by day? [Glaucon] Certainly. [Socrates] Last of he will be able to see the sun, and not mere reflections of him in the water, but he will see him in his own proper place, and not in another; and he will contemplate him as he is. [Glaucon] Certainly. [Socrates] He will then proceed to argue that this is he who gives the season and the years, and is the guardian of all that is in the visible world, and in a certain way the cause of all things which he and his fellows have been accustomed to behold? [Glaucon] Clearly, he said, he would first see the sun and then reason about him. [Socrates] And when he remembered his old habitation, and the wisdom of the cave and his fellow-prisoners, do you not suppose that he would felicitate himself on the change, and pity them? [Glaucon] Certainly, he would. [Socrates] And if they were in the habit of conferring honors among themselves on those who were quickest to observe the passing shadows and to remark which of them went before, and which followed after, and which were together; and who were therefore best able to draw conclusions as to the future, do you think that he would care for such honors and glories, or envy the possessors of them? Would he not say with Homer, Better to be the poor servant of a poor master, and to endure anything, rather than think as they do and live after their manner? [Glaucon] Yes, he said, I think that he would rather suffer anything than entertain these false notions and live in this miserable manner. [Socrates] Imagine once more, I said, such an one coming suddenly out of the sun to be replaced in his old situation; would he not be certain to have his eyes full of darkness? [Glaucon] To be sure, he said. [Socrates] And if there were a contest, and he had to compete in measuring the shadows with the prisoners who had never moved out of the cave, while his sight was still weak, and before his eyes had become steady (and the time which would be needed to acquire this new habit of sight might be very considerable) would he not be ridiculous? Men would say of him that up he went and down he came without his eyes; and that it was better not even to think of ascending; and if any one tried to loose another and lead him up to the light, let them only catch the offender, and they would put him to death. [Glaucon] No question, he said. [Socrates] This entire allegory, I said, you may now append, dear Glaucon, to the previous argument; the prison-house is the world of sight, the light of the fire is the sun, and you will not misapprehend me if you interpret the journey upwards to be the ascent of the soul into the intellectual world according to my poor belief, which, at your desire, I have expressed whether rightly or wrongly God knows. But, whether true or false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and is seen only with an effort; and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this visible world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in the intellectual; and that this is the power upon which he who would act rationally, either in public or private life must have his eye fixed. [Glaucon] I agree, he said, as far as I am able to understand you. [Socrates] Moreover, I said, you must not wonder that those who attain to this beatific vision are unwilling to descend to human affairs; for their souls are ever hastening into the upper world where they desire to dwell; which desire of theirs is very natural, if our allegory may be trusted. [Glaucon] Yes, very natural. [Socrates] And is there anything surprising in one who passes from divine contemplations to the evil state of man, misbehaving himself in a ridiculous manner; if, while his eyes are blinking and before he has become accustomed to the surrounding darkness, he is compelled to fight in courts of law, or in other places, about the images or the shadows of images of justice, and is endeavoring to meet the conceptions of those who have never yet seen absolute justice? [Glaucon] Anything but surprising, he replied. [Socrates] Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments of the eyes are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true of the minds eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye; and he who remembers this when he sees any one whose vision is perplexed and weak, will not be too ready to laugh; he will first ask whether that soul of man has come out of the brighter light, and is unable to see because unaccustomed to the dark, or having turned from darkness to the day is dazzled by excess of light. And he will count the one happy in his condition and state of being, and he will pity the other; or, if he have a mind to laugh at the soul which comes from below into the light, there will be more reason in this than in the laugh which greets him who returns from above out of the light into the cave. [Glaucon] That, he said, is a very just distinction. [Socrates] But then, if I am right, certain professors of education must be wrong when they say that they can put a knowledge into the soul which was not there before, like sight into blind eyes. [Glaucon] They undoubtedly say this, he replied. [Socrates] Whereas, our argument shows that the power and capacity of learning exists in the soul already; and that just as the eye was unable to turn from darkness to light without the whole body, so too the instrument of knowledge can only by the movement of the whole soul be turned from the world of becoming into that of being, and learn by degrees to endure the sight of being, and of the brightest and best of being, or in other words, of the good. [Glaucon] Very true. [Socrates] And must there not be some art which will effect conversion in the easiest and quickest manner; not implanting the faculty of sight, for that exists already, but has been turned in the wrong direction, and is looking away from the truth? [Glaucon] Yes, he said, such an art may be presumed. [Socrates] And whereas the other so-called virtues of the soul seem to be akin to bodily qualities, for even when they are not originally innate they can be implanted later by habit and exercise, the of wisdom more than anything else contains a divine element which always remains, and by this conversion is rendered useful and profitable; or, on the other hand, hurtful and useless. Did you never observe the narrow intelligence flashing from the keen eye of a clever rogue how eager he is, how clearly his paltry soul sees the way to his end; he is the reverse of blind, but his keen eyesight is forced into the service of evil, and he is mischievous in proportion to his cleverness. [Glaucon] Very true, he said. [Socrates] But what if there had been a circumcision of such natures in the days of their youth; and they had been severed from those sensual pleasures, such as eating and drinking, which, like leaden weights, were attached to them at their birth, and which drag them down and turn the vision of their souls upon the things that are below if, I say, they had been released from these impediments and turned in the opposite direction, the very same faculty in them would have seen the truth as keenly as they see what their eyes are turned to now. [Glaucon] Very likely. [Socrates] Yes, I said; and there is another thing which is likely. or rather a necessary inference from what has preceded, that neither the uneducated and uninformed of the truth, nor yet those who never make an end of their education, will be able ministers of State; not the former, because they have no single aim of duty which is the rule of all their actions, private as well as public; nor the latter, because they will not act at all except upon compulsion, fancying that they are already dwelling apart in the islands of the blest. [Glaucon] Very true, he replied. [Socrates] Then, I said, the business of us who are the founders of the State will be to compel the best minds to attain that knowledge which we have already shown to be the greatest of all-they must continue to ascend until they arrive at the good; but when they have ascended and seen enough we must not allow them to do as they do now. [Glaucon] What do you mean? [Socrates] I mean that they remain in the upper world: but this must not be allowed; they must be made to descend again among the prisoners in the cave, and partake of their labors and honors, whether they are worth having or not. [Glaucon] But is not this unjust? he said; ought we to give them a worse life, when they might have a better? [Socrates] You have again forgotten, my friend, I said, the intention of the legislator, who did not aim at making any one class in the State happy above the rest; the happiness was to be in the whole State, and he held the citizens together by persuasion and necessity, making them benefactors of the State, and therefore benefactors of one another; to this end he created them, not to please themselves, but to be his instruments in binding up the State. [Glaucon] True, he said, I had forgotten. [Socrates] Observe, Glaucon, that there will be no injustice in compelling our philosophers to have a care and providence of others; we shall explain to them that in other States, men of their class are not obliged to share in the toils of politics: and this is reasonable, for they grow up at their own sweet will, and the government would rather not have them. Being self-taught, they cannot be expected to show any gratitude for a culture which they have never received. But we have brought you into the world to be rulers of the hive, kings of yourselves and of the other citizens, and have educated you far better and more perfectly than they have been educated, and you are better able to share in the double duty. Wherefore each of you, when his turn comes, must go down to the general underground abode, and get the habit of seeing in the dark. When you have acquired the habit, you will see ten thousand times better than the inhabitants of the cave, and you will know what the several images are, and what they represent, because you have seen the beautiful and just and good in their truth. And thus our State which is also yours will be a reality, and not a dream only, and will be administered in a spirit unlike that of other States, in which men fight with one another about shadows only and are distracted in the struggle for power, which in their eyes is a great good. Whereas the truth is that the State in which the rulers are most reluctant to govern is always the best and most quietly governed, and the State in which they are most eager, the worst. [Glaucon] Quite true, he replied. [Socrates] And will our pupils, when they hear this, refuse to take their turn at the toils of State, when they are allowed to spend the greater part of their time with one another in the heavenly light? [Glaucon] Impossible, he answered; for they are just men, and the commands which we impose upon them are just; there can be no doubt that every one of them will take office as a stern necessity, and not after the fashion of our present rulers of State. [Socrates] Yes, my friend, I said; and there lies the point. You must contrive for your future rulers another and a better life than that of a ruler, and then you may have a well-ordered State; for only in the State which offers this, will they rule who are truly rich, not in silver and gold, but in virtue and wisdom, which are the true blessings of life. Whereas if they go to the administration of public affairs, poor and hungering after the own private advantage, thinking that hence they are to snatch the chief good, order there can never be; for they will be fighting about office, and the civil and domestic broils which thus arise will be the ruin of the rulers themselves and of the whole State. [Glaucon] Most true, he replied. [Socrates] And the only life which looks down upon the life of political ambition is that of true philosophy. Do you know of any other? [Glaucon] Indeed, I do not, he said. [Socrates] And those who govern ought not to be lovers of the task? For, if they are, there will be rival lovers, and they will fight. [Glaucon] No question. [Socrates] Who then are those whom we shall compel to be guardians? Surely they will be the men who are wisest about affairs of State, and by whom the State is best administered, and who at the same time have other honors and another and a better life than that of politics? [Glaucon] They are the men, and I will choose them, he replied. [Socrates] And now shall we consider in what way such guardians will be produced, and how they are to be brought from darkness to light, as some are said to have ascended from the world below to the gods? [Glaucon] By all means, he replied. [Socrates] The process, I said, is not the turning over of an oyster-shell, but the turning round of a soul passing from a day which is little better than night to the true day of being, that is, the ascent from below, which we affirm to be true philosophy? [Glaucon] Quite so.

The Ultimate Tragic Hero King Lear English Literature Essay

The Ultimate Tragic Hero King Lear English Literature Essay King Lear, one of William Shakespeares greatest tragedies, depicts a society in grim circumstances. As with all tragedies, there exists a tragic hero  [1]  , one who possesses a fatal flaw that initiates the tragedy and all the sufferings that follow. In this play, the tragic hero is undoubtedly the title character, King Lear. The plot is driven by the power and consequence of losses, more specifically, the losses of Lear. In the course the play, King Lear, because of his flaws, loses his authority as a king, his identity as a father, and his sanity as a man. One loss builds on another, but moreover, his greatest loss, and what distinguishes this tragedy from all others, is his chance of redemption. Unlike other tragedies, there is no salvation for the tragic hero or any sign of optimism in the conclusion. This bleak portrayal of King Lear, through his losses, makes him the ultimate tragic hero, and the play an ultimate tragedy. The play begins with King Lears decision to divide his kingdom among his three daughters. This is the first sign of Lears loss the loss of authority. Wanting to abandon his responsibilities before his time, Lear claims, tis our fast intent / To shake all cares and business from our age, / Conferring them on younger strengths while we / Unburdened crawl toward death (I.i.38-41). It can be argued that his flaw is in his decision to prematurely abdicate the throne, going against nature. However, it is more crucial to realize that his major flaw is actually in his character, shown through his judgment in renouncing his power. Lear carries immense insecurity and egotism as he announces that he will offer the largest share of kingdom to the daughter who professes the greatest love for him. Goneril and Regan both proclaim in fulsome terms that they love him more than anything in the world, while Cordelia speaks from her heart in honest terms that she loves him exactly as a daughter should love her father. Valuing self-importance above all else, Lear is blind to the loyalty and love of Cordelia and instead, perceptive to the flattery of his two vile daughters. Furthermore, Lear is infuriated when Kent objects and protests to his decision: Thy youngest daughter does not love thee least, / Nor are those emptyhearted whose low sounds / Reverb no hollowness (I.i.153-155). This fatal flaw of insecurity and egotism induces Lear to make error in his judgment, resulting in the improper division of his kingdom and the loss of his two most loyal companions Cordelia and Kent. The consequences of this error build up throughout the play, leading to Lears ultimate tragic fall. Lears lost royal authority now transfers to his two daughters, Goneril and Regan, and they deceitfully use this power against him. Ironically, Lear also falls in status, to a level inferior to that of his own children. Goneril no longer loves him beyond all manner and Regan no longer is an enemy to all other joys as they have professed in the beginning (I.i. 61, 73). Instead, Goneril reprimands his father for the way his servants and knights have infected her home (I.iv.237). Regan follows suit, and insist that The old man and his people/ Cannot be well bestowed (II.iv.258). His daughters no longer even respect him. Lear has now lost his identity as a father, since he even confesses that [He] should be false persuaded / [He] had daughters (I.iv.227-228). Troubled and confused, Lear reveals his weakened sense of identity when asking Who is it that can tell me who I am (I.iv.224). Stripped of authority as king, Lear has now also lost authority as a father over his own flesh and blood. King Lears banishment from his daughters undoubtedly has tremendous psychological effect on him. He not only loses youth as he crawl toward death, but also loses sanity as his heartà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦break into a hundred thousand flaws and heà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦go mad (I.i.41, II.iv.284-286). With so much suffering already thrown upon Lear due to his tragic flaw, it seems that Shakespeare has now shown pity and decided to set the stage for a reversal of fate. Losing sanity has given King Lear the opportunity to discover the truth and the core of humanity. With disapproval of Regan and Goneril, Lear heads outside, where a wild storm takes place. In this time of chaos, Lear meets Edgar as Poor Tom and gains profound revelation of man and life. Seeing Poor Tom bare, at humans most natural state, Lear questions, Is man no more than this? and realizes that the unaccomodated man is no more but such a poor, bare, forked animal as thou art (III.iv.103-104, 107-109). He continues with disrobing himsel f, and at the same time, removing himself from any social constraints. It is at the extreme low point that Lear strips of his rationality and relies on his inner instincts to fully grasp his identity and regain his humanity. He now understands the deep love of Cordelia and the disguise employed by his other daughters. The real King Lear finally emerges. Although Shakespeare creates this turning point for Lear, he is actually paving the way for a greater tragedy. Lear loses everything he has authority, family, and sanity, but now he faces his greatest loss the chance for redemption. After the storm, Lear is finally reunited with Cordelia as he struggles to regain his sanity. Cordelia  never loses her love for her father even after he has disowned her, and after seeing him, she cries, O my dear father, restoration hang / Thy medicine on my lips, and let this kiss / repair those violent harms that my two sisters / have in thy reverence made (IV.vii.27-30). The mention of restoration signifies Cordelias ability to redeem Lear of his previous mistakes. When Lear wakes up, he admits, I am a very foolish fond old manà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦I fear I am not in my perfect mind (IV.vii.61,65). This reveals Lears new regained understanding of himself and his admittance to his faults, a sign of the first step towards redemption. At this point, after all the turbulence, the audience takes a sigh of relief, feeling positive and seeing hope for Lear. Unfortunately however, this play does not leave any traces optimism. In the final act, Edmund captures Lear and Cordelia as his prisoners, and orders both to be killed. Lear escapes, but Cordelia, his loyal and loving daughter, dies. Lear finally realizes only Cordelia can give him a chance which redeem all sorrows that ever [he] have felt (V.iii.272-273). Her death breaks the last thread between Lear and happiness. He expresses his deepest sufferings and declares his sorrows when sees Cordelia has gone foreverà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Shes dead as earth (V.iii.265-267). With nothing left, not even the future and possibility for redemption, Lear loses the only possession that remains his life. King Lear is truly a tragic hero because he was so close to happiness after much torment, yet he is still unable to achieve salvation, and instead, he is subjected to complete deterioration, both mentally and physically. Is this the promised end? Kent, Lears loyal servant, questions at the end of the play (V.iii.270). Indeed, this is the tragic end of King Lear, a play displaying a world of corruption. King Lear, due to his tragic flaw of insecurity and egotism, makes an initial mistake that soon snowballs into a series of losses, including the loss of authority, identity and sanity. Just as he is about to redeem himself, he is deprived of that chance as he losses the only one capable of restoring him Cordelia. The play ends with the ultimate downfall of the tragic hero, as Lear dies in a state of grief. In this way, King Lear portrays not only the tragedy of a society, but more importantly, the tragedy of a man. Even though Lear has undergone much transformation and realized the meaning of humanity, the bleak society he lives in does not warrant him the opportunity for redemption. Through revealing his losses, King Lear illustrates the journey of the title character, an ultimate tragic hero.

Native Son Essay: Analysis of Setting, Major, and Minor Themes

Analysis of Setting, Major, and Minor Themes  of Native Son  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚           The major themes of Native Son are environment, racism,   black rage, religion, Communism, determinism and freedom.   A minor theme is the relationship between men and women.   Ã‚     One of the major themes of Native Son is the effect of environment on behavior and personality. Thus, setting is  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   especially important in the novel. The story takes place in Chicago in  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   the late 1930s, when the United States had still not recovered from  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   the Great Depression. Jobs are scarce, and Bigger and his pool-hall  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   friends are among the many unemployed. Richard Wright was influenced  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   by the literary school of naturalism, whose adherents tried to observe  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   and record their world, and especially its more unpleasant parts, with  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   scientific accuracy. Wright knew Depression-era Chicago well and  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   drew heavily on his first-hand knowledge. In many respects, the  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Chicago of Native Son is an accurate representation even in its  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   details. For example, Ernie's Kitchen Shack at Forty-seventh Street  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   and Indiana Avenue was modeled on a real restaurant called The Chicken  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Shack, located at 4647 Indiana Avenue and owned by a man named Ernie.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Two aspects of Bigger's environment influence him especially  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   strongly- his confinement to Chicago's black South Side ghetto and his  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   glimpses of the dazzling white world, of which he feels he can never  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   be part. Bigger's family shares a rat-infested room, but, when he sees  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   an airplane flying overhead or views the glamorous life portrayed in a... ...eds. Conversations with Richard Wright. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1993. Kinnamon, Keneth. The Emergence of Richard Wright: A Study Literature and Society. Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1973. Kinnamon, Keneth, ed. New Essays on Native Son. New York: Cambridge UP, 1990. Macksey, Richard and Frank E. Moorer, eds. Richard Wright: A Collection of Critical Essays. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1984. Margolies, Edward. The Art of Richard Wright. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1969. Miller, Eugene E. Voice of a Native Son: The Poetics of Richard Wright. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1990. Rampersad, Arnold, ed. Richard Wright: A Collection of Critical Essays. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1995.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     

The Age of Empire: American Imperialism at the Close of the 19th Century

Imperialism is a process by which countries attempt to extend their power into new spheres by leveraging their military, economic, cultural, and political power over another land. The roots of imperialism have differed through the ages. Some countries have sought imperialism by conquest, pillaging and plundering another land for pure exploitative economic gain. Other countries have conducted imperialism by colonization, slowly infiltrating and eventually assuming control of another land over time by force.For much of European history after the renaissance, the European continent entered an â€Å"Age of Imperialism† that saw British, French, Spanish, Portugese, Dutch, and German expansion across the far reaches of the globe. America, however, was a late addition to the scramble for imperialist expansion. Not until the late 19th century did the fledgling North American power attempt to move beyond its borders in pursuit of bolstering the national interest.Over the course of seve ral decades, however, America removed the shackles of isolationism and became an aggressive expansionist power primarily in Latin America and the Philippines. While this policy was not uniformly popular, it is important to understand because it drastically influenced and shaped American foreign policy for the 20th century. During the late 1800’s, America engaged in overseas expansion in three main areas: Spanish-America, the Philippines, and several Pacific islands. These campaigns were ideologically motivated by the philosophical underpinnings of the Monroe Doctrine.This foreign policy standard, developed by President James Monroe in 1823, stated that the Western Hemisphere was distinctly the domain of the United States and that American â€Å"exceptionalism† would allow the United States to exclusively deal with affairs of the Western Hemisphere (Oklahoma College of Law, The Monroe Doctrine). This principle was the foundation of a series of events that eventually pro mpted the United States to invade foreign sovereign nations. Racist thought also perpetuated public support for these imperialist invasions.The so-called White Man’s Burden, which had justified so much inhumanity by European powers was also raised by proponents of American expansionism. This theory held that because White men were â€Å"civilized† in contrast to their colored counterparts, it was the ethical duty of Europeans and European descendants to forcibly civilize the â€Å"uneducated† and â€Å"inferior† races of the world. Coupled with the Monroe Doctrine, politicians combined with sensational journalists (often referred to as â€Å"yellow journalists†) to drum up support for American excursions abroad (American Library of Congress).The first major front in the eventual military expansionism that ensued was in Cuba and other parts of Spanish America. This campaign, known as the Spanish-American War, was Cuba. Here, Americans sympathetic to the plight of the Cubans, legitimized a show of force with the U. S. S. Maine, which was eventually sunk near Havana, prompting an outcry for war. The war in Cuba raged on in the aftermath of that incident, with Congress issuing a declaration of war. Unlike Cuba, which was more of a conflict between two â€Å"White† powers, American imperialism in the Philippines developed into a far more systematic form of colonialism.American became an occupying power that asserted its dominance and applied its customs and language on the native population. Indeed, during the course of the war, American brutality was substantial, with an estimated 200,000 Filipinos dying from the conflict, largely in the festering disease-ridden concentration camps. Additionally, many Americans were reported to have carried out war crimes against the local population—shameful acts that were exposed and documented by the Lodge Committee report (Miller, 184).Similarly, America extended its reachâ€⠀with many negative results—in Guam, Samoa, Hawaii, and other Pacific islands. These particular conquests mark the height of American imperialist expansion at the close of the 19th century. Even though the Monroe Doctrine and the White Man’s Burden theories garnered sufficient support from the public to carry out the imperialist campaigns popularly, dissent against the newfound expansionism did exist. The major opponent of imperialist policies in America was the Anti-Imperialist League.This organization, which prided itself on its founding ideals of liberty and equality for all persons, regardless of race or geographic location, sought to end American imperialist expansionism. As they argued, America’s militarism against the defenseless indigenous populations was nothing more than â€Å"criminal aggression† (Modern History Sourcebook). The League had a substantial impact on the national debate over imperialism, as it had cultural superstars like Mark Twa in on its side.Nonetheless, however, even as the League successfully highlighted some of the bankrupt practices of American expansionism, the campaigns were nonetheless carried out. The impact of American imperialism during the late 1890s reverberates still today. The Monroe Doctrine has now been replaced by a series of new foreign policy strategies, including the most recent addition of the Bush doctrine, which authorizes preemptive attacks anywhere in the world to ensure American security. Our occupation of Iraq currently has its roots and its legacy embedded in the deployment of troops under President McKinley.This fact highlights why early American imperialism is so important to understanding our current foreign policy; it is a continuum rather than a series of isolated events. And now, just like then, anti-imperialist groups are being heard throughout the country. Only time will tell how effectively they will be at steering our government from continuing the imperialist legacy started at the close of the 19th century. Works Cited: Miller, Stuart C. â€Å"Benevolent Assimilation†: the American Conquest of the Philippines, 1899- 1903. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982.340 p Modern History Sourcebook. â€Å"American Anti-Imperialist League, 1898. † Available online from: http://www. fordham. edu/halsall/mod/1899antiimp. html. Accessed 17 January 2009. â€Å"The Monroe Doctrine. † University of Oklahoma College of Law. Historical Documents. Available online at: http://www. law. ou. edu/ushistory/monrodoc. shtml. Accessed 17 January 2009. â€Å"The World of 1898: The Spanish American War. † The Library of Congress, Hispanic Division. Available online from: http://www. loc. gov/rr/hispanic/1898. Accessed 18 January 2009.

Baby with the Bathwater Essay

Red Rock Community College’s adaptation of Christopher Durang’s play Baby with the Bathwater, directed by James O’Leary, concluded its 8-show run with a sold out finale performance on Sunday April 23rd, 2005. When the lights came up on the bassinet in the otherwise darkness of the stage, the image more or less stands for everything that follows ? childhood, loneliness and abandonment. It seems that an icon of the entire human experience, not just the implied infancy, is being presented. When the lights come up even further, the bassinet gives way in significance to a married couple standing over it: John (Kyle LaBoria), the father that coos at â€Å"Daddy’s little baked potato,† and Helen (Amien Conway), the mother who object to him calling their baby a vegetable. Durang had an interesting way of making illogical disconnections seem perfectly logical. A good example of this is Nanny. Sweeping onto the stage with demonic energy and a warped tinge of Mary Poppins, Nanny (Nancy Thomas) good-naturedly offers bad advice for child rearing and in the next breath optioning Dad for â€Å"quickies in the kitchen. † I found Nanny to an existentialist theme in making comments like â€Å"There’s no such thing as right and wrong. There’s just fun. † Thomas brought maturity to the otherwise young cast and seemed to thoroughly enjoy her role. Nanny could have been overly campy, but Thomas kept it believable and entertaining and captured the subtle domineering nature of the character. Whereas Nanny was consistent from beginning to end, I have to convey my disapproval with LaBoria’s portrayal of John, the dad. LaBoria aptly depicted the fragility and weariness of a new parent, but failed to reach any depth or humor. I think it would have been better if John had been placed with a more deer-in-the-headlights feel. I saw John more villainous in this rendition and wished for more of a victimized appeal. This out-sized tale deserved better framework. The set was drab and too simplistic for this type of play. Being set in the 80’s, I expected more of a tacky retro aesthetic that would have supported the outlandish play with equally drastic visuals. Maybe the intent was to keep the focus on the actors by neglecting the backdrop? Either way, it did no justice. Director James O’Leary presence throughout the play was rather absent to me. He did make good use of stage movements and employed the full range the stage offered, but I am left here with lackluster feelings. I feel the momentum of the play was non-existent, only offering a general malaise of sub par perspective. While watching the play, I could sense a more implicit complexity wanting to get out. After all, most of Durang’s satires appear flat, but actually has a great possibility for much depth. O’Leary failed to tap into the contents true substance. My attention was finally sparked in Scene 4. Up to this point, Daisy has been spoken for. Getting a glimpse at the character through the personal dialogue of psychoanalysis offered an emotional grasp heretofore vacant. The use of lighting in this scene, alternating sides to provide division of time and mounting individual awareness, was good. After the lights came up and people began to file out, I reflected and acknowledged my approval for the play itself, but remained incensed towards the performances. I felt that I would have gotten more out of it in reading the script and foregoing the actual presentation. This interpretation would not receive a recommendation for me.