Notes for exam question Essay Example for Free

Notes for exam question Essay Chapter 1: social scientist have argued that issues of inequality, poverty and social exclusion cut across both social welfare and crime control domains, and noted that while some responses to these issues may become the focus of social welfare policies, others may become the focus of crime control interventions. Social justice then is neither the exclusive terrain of social welfare nor of crime control. The boundaries between these two domains tend to be mobile and porous. This idea was introduced by arguing that the neat distinction between the goals of social welfare (well being) and the goals of crime control (maintaining social order) break down on closer inspection. Chapter 1 section 4: crime control measures impact adversely on social welfare and produce justice struggles. State withdrawal from the direct provision of welfare services is accompanied by greater attention to antisocial behaviour of younger and poorer groups in society. Social welfare is oriented towards the creation and maintenance of social well-being through the provision of various social supports combating social inequalities by promoting redistribution and social inclusion and countering various social harms such as poverty and discrimination. The domain of crime control is more oriented towards the creation and maintenance of social stability, social order and security by addressing behaviours and activities of those who are perceived to threaten these in some way. Crime control and social welfare policies, there are many examples of entanglement between them. For example, countering antisocial behaviour may be defined as a social welfare matter in that it protects the welfare and well being of some against the disruptions caused by others. This example also raises wider social welfare questions, I.e how can societies support young people and others so that they do not conduct themselves in ways that are viewed as antisocial? The relationship between social welfare and crime control is dynamic meaning it is likely to change over time, and it is contested. Another example of how social welfare and crime control is entangled: protecting children from abuse- a role taken on by both police and social workers, acting in partnership but with rather blurred boundaries between the welfare and crime control functions. The entanglements between welfare and crime control take many different forms. Welfare states in its traditional form is considered by many commentators across the political spectrum to be in need of reform. Social scientists focus on creating social inclusion rather than on providing welfare Ideas about an underclass of marginalised individuals often black Afro caribbean or Hispanic have informed policies on crime preventions and crime control in countries such as the USA. Many studies are handing over more responsibility for tackling crime and antisocial behaviour to local communities, who in turn address crime prevention through a mix of welfare and control strategies. As environmental issues become more important in ensuring security and well-being, so attention is turning to new kinds of harm harms perpetrated not by those traditionally defined as problem populations, often on the margins of society but by the rich and powerful who perpetuate environmental and other kinds of crime. Many struggles for social justice, produced laws that have to be enforced through the institutions of criminal justice. On the other hand, some criminal justice measures including many of those now associated with anti terrorist measures are viewed as producing harms such as internment or the loss of rights for certain population groups. Chapter 1 section 36: dissent and protest against social injustice may be the subject or criminalising responses. The darling study for the Joseph row tree foundation shows an increasing inequality of wealth in the uk in the late 20th century when income inequalities grew rapidly. It also shows a greater degree of spatial segregation of wealth and poverty, with local areas increasingly dominated by wealthy or poor residents and a decline in social mixing. Poverty concentrates attention on one segment of society: those living below a certain level of income, or below a certain level of resources. Many studies of poverty tend to focus attention on poor people rather than the wider social structures which generate and reproduce poverty. In the process, then, such studies divert attention from the relationship between wealth and poverty, and the ways in which richer and more powerful groups manage to increase their wealth and hold on to it at the expense of poorer and less powerful groups. Much social investigation into poverty has in practice involved looking at the poorest people to see what was wrong with them, and is based on the assumption that there must be something about them that makes them different from us. In the 19th century, investigators went like intrepid explorers into the neighbourhoods where the poor lived in order to examine their habits, their ways of life, their culture and most frequently their character. The poor were associated with a range of social dangers from illness, through crime and vice, to the threat of socialism. This emphasis on statistical investigation has had a profound influence on the subsequent development of social research in the uk and how we come to know about and understand the social world. But the investigation and observation of the character and habits of the poor has also had enduring consequences, reflecting a persistent belief that the cause of poverty could be discovered there. 19th century investigations into moral failings of the poor merged into20th century concerns with their dysfunctional family life or their culture of poverty. The idea of a culture of poverty had mutated into a culture of dependency. All of these terms expressed the idea that poor people had habits, attitudes and ways of life that has passed poverty on across generations. Chapter 2 section 2: welfare states are involved in the maintenance of social order and stability by naturalising and normalising social inequalities Chapter 2 sections 2,34: welfare states prescribe certain ideas of behaviour. These may stigmatise certain categories of people in booths study, the poor; and in the 21st century, those who are not gainfully employed or who do not comply with norms of active citizenship. Welfare states also police adherence to norms of good conduct and may punish those who deviate from them. Punishments may range from measures such as the withdrawal of benefits and services to actual criminalisation. Chapter 3 section 3: care whether provided informally or through welfare states can involve the abuse, neglect and exploitation of vulnerable people. Some abuses are subject to criminal prosecution. Chapter 3 section 4: treaties, conventions, laws and workers rights are often ineffective in regulating safety and ensuring freedom from harm in the workplace. Trade unions have attempted to limit workplace harms by pursuing rights and legal safeguards, but there power has been weakened. In attempt to avoid legislative action, some companies are now developing voluntary codes of conduct based on the idea of social responsibility. Chapter 4 section 2: problem populations, in problem places such as the black population of new Orleans tend to be stigmatised, viewed as a source of harm, crime and social disorder Chapter 4 section 3: some of the case studies show how welfare policies that sought to solve housing problems in the past have had damaging consequences, leading to punitive and criminalising policies in the present. Chapter 5 section 2: global slums are sites of concerns about crime and disorder. They are also sites of emerging understanding about how slums can be a source of progress and development through self help Chapter 5 section 4: transnational institutions concerns with regulating environmental crimes are contrasted with restorative self regulatory and participatory models of development.

Indonesia And Burma Possess Similar Political Systems History Essay

Indonesia And Burma Possess Similar Political Systems History Essay Both Burma and Indonesias political landscapes are shaded with military domination since their independence. However, Indonesia has experienced democratization after the fall of Suharto and Burma remains aloof. We need to have a look at why Burma did not experience the political transformation and why Indonesia did. While we consider this, we also have to examine the political history and the elements that shape the systems. Geographical landscape Indonesia is geographically the biggest country in Southeast Asia and Myanmar is the second biggest. Indonesia also enjoys (rather suffers from) the biggest population size in the region. Scholars have noted that Indonesia has a potential to become a regional powerhouse given its geographic and demographic size but has not asserted to be so, mainly because of its failure for economic transformation which is also deterred by political instability. On the other hand, scholars have also mentioned that Burma could be an important country in the region if its doors were open and its political and economic reforms were introduced. Speculation are good to be made, however, in contrast, the practical situations are different. There are several elements that hinder both countries successes. Colonial periods The countries that became independent after the Second World War usually point their fingers to the western colonialists to justify their failure to implement modern state-building. The case is quite true with Both Indonesia and Burma. Both countries were colonialised by the western powers Burma by the British and Indonesia by the Dutch. The creation of Modern Burma was essentially the British creation and the Indonesia unavoidably by the Dutch. Both countries, as noted above, have failed to become successful both politically and economically after independence. I would like to assert here that it is true that the British and the Dutch made the geographical demarcations on the basis of their economic interests neglecting the composition of the diverse ethnic groups within the created regions. However, it is the fundamental fault of the domestic rule to accommodate the diverse ethnicities and to bring about a workable and economic-oriented political attitude. I would like to focus mo re about this later on when I further talk about Burma and Indonesia. Struggle for Independence and the rise of nationalism A similarity exists in the struggle for Independence in both countries. They experienced the surge of nationalism in the immediate pre-war period. Burma oversaw a peasant uprising in 1930. The event made an epoch in the struggle for social liberation leading up to nationalism. The leader of the rebellion, Hsaya San, was a member of a social group called YMBA (Young Man Buddhist Association). (Gravers 2005, p36) Even though there were some small scale outbreaks of the revival of nationalism previously in Burma, I totally agree that Hsaya San was a major inspiring figure in the struggle for liberation and the establishment of nationalism. Thus, we know that the rise of nationalism is comparably quite late in Burma. We can look at the Philippines and India to compare this trend. The same is true with Indonesia. The landmark in the nationalist movement in Indonesia happened in the immediate pre-war period. Brown noted as below: The Indonesia nationalist movement, emerging in the first decade of the century and a prominent part of the political and social landscape by the 1920s, had been remarkably successful. In the space of less than half a century, it had apparently not only defeated Dutch colonialism, but also succeeded in overcoming historical ethnic and religious differences between Indonesians. And these are the terms in which many Indonesians today view that movement. (Brown 2003, p105) Brown went on to say that the nationalist movement accomplished much in Indonesia. However, in the case of Burma, I just would like to say that the Burmese gained the independence from the British not with the assistance of firepower but with the situational timing and diplomatic negotiation. The evidence is the sheer lack of serious bloodshed with the British forces and the agreement of AungSan-Attlee. Political structures after Independence Burma gained independence from the British on the 4th of January, 1948. The first Burmese leader, General Aung San, visualized Burma as a plural society in which diverse political structures coexisted within a framework of overarching consensus. (Tarling 1999, p80) That was the reason why he promised the Shan and the Karenni the right to secede from the Union after ten years of independence unless they were satisfied with the Union. But after Aung San was assassinated, the structure was changed. Burma developed a Westminster style parliamentary system with the lower house possessing large amount of legislative power and accordingly the Prime Minister became exceedingly powerful. The upper house, containing the equal proportions of the different ethnic nationalities, was not granted overriding power of the lower house. Thus, the establishment of a federation failed. The powerful Prime Minister U Nu (also the first PM of Burma) tried to develop a political structure based on a synthesis of Buddhism and Socialism, with an especially heavy dose of the former. (Tarling 1999, p87) This structure was opposed by the ethnic minorities who are Christians. Socialists did not support this program as well. Along with this structure appeared several different kinds of revolts, particularly the communists and the Karen National Union. The rebels controlled large area in the countryside and the central government was confined within the Rangoon city limit. The deteriorating political situations paved the way to the military takeover of the country. Indonesia proclaimed independence on 17th August, 1945. However, proclamation of the independence does not mean a real freedom. The Dutch were eager to come to their former colony, so the Indonesians had to fight for their liberation. Sukarno and Hatta were appointed President and Vice-President respectively, and a system of regional based on a division of the Republic into seven provinces each headed by a nominated governor, was established. (Brown 2003, p159) The formal Dutch recognition of Indonesian independence came only in December 1949. The recognition established in the light of American pressure on the Dutch government and Indonesian Armys determined resistance. The seed of military domination in the politics of both countries thus was planted during the revolution periods. In Burma, the Army was formed in ally with the Japanese to fight off the British and the important role of the military was sustained in the continuous fighting in the internal revolts-the communists and the ethnic resurgence. Also in Indonesia, the Army played a big role in fencing off the Dutch during the Dutchs military launch and in addition to that, it pinpointed the two enemies within the state-the rise of communism and the formation of Darul Islam. It did not fail to struggle with them until they are toppled. Military takeover of the power Burma enjoyed a democratic state between 1948 and 1962. However, the time had come for a change. In March 1962, a military coup led by General Ne Win overthrew the elected government of U Nu, ushering in a period of military rule that has lasted more than 40 years. (Church 2006, p117) The main justification for the military coup given by General Ne Win was that the country was in tatters because of the selfish activities of the politicians, as a result of which, the Shan and other ethnic minorities were preparing to secede from Burma. One cannot imagine how many times the military leaders have repeated this same reason over the several decades since their takeover, in the newspaper, magazines and state-run TVs and radios. As a man who grew up in 1990s, I personally have heard of these kinds of statements over and over again and am just fed up with it. However, if one was a normal person who was not actually interested in politics and had no access to foreign media, he or she would pr obably just take it as true and real. Therefore this just serves as the militarys psychological warfare. Now there may arise some questions why one has to put so much blame on the Burmese military as long as it is doing good for the country. In fact, the Burmese military headed by General Ne Win at that time was not doing any good to the country. Let us first look at the economy. The military government fundamentally transformed the state economy from capitalist market to the socialist collectivism. The business enterprises were nationalized forcefully. No compensation was offered. The economy worsened acutely under military rule, with the expulsion of Indians and Pakistanis, the prohibition on foreign investment and the efforts of the one-party State to impose a command economy. In 1987, the United Nations gave Burma Least Developed Nation status, recognizing it as one of the worlds 10 poorest countries. (Church 2006, p117) There has been widespread analysis of Burmese economic development index despite the difficulties in terms of data collection and information retrieval. Scholars have pointed out that militarys mismanagement of the economy inexorably led to the demise of the economic structure. The state wanted to build an industrial proletariat while Burma is a state of little industry and to control all economic activities. At the same time it purged the administration of the civilian meritocratic bureaucratic elite who were the only civil servants capable of attempting to run a centrally planned economy. (Steinberg 2005, p 57) What the government did was, as Steinberg continued; replace the elites with military brass who did not have any economic competence. This kind of management ultimately led to the economic disaster. Now that we have seen how Burmas military economic mismanagement brought about the economic demise of the country, we turn to look at Indonesia and its militarys management of the economy. Here when we talk about the economic handling of the state, we look at the shift of political power from Sukarno to Suharto and his ambition to bring the country to the existing economic world order. We can compare U Nu and General Ne Win to Sukarno and Suharto. Even though they represent stark differences in some respect, the pattern could be tentatively drawn to the same phenomenon. However, the power change from U Nu to General Ne Win was witnessed as the move from economic development to all-round ruins. On the other hand, Suharto inherited a bleak future in the countrys economy from Sukarno. Despite of it, he initiated economic transformation and subsequently the development. There are so many things Suharto did to promote the economic development. First, he tried to make sure the foreign investment come to the country. Tax collection was properly made. In 1967 a group of Indonesias major western creditors, including Japan, the United States and Australia, formed the Inter-Governmental Group on Indonesia (IGGI), an organization aimed at coordinating the flow of aid to Indonesia. (Brown 2003, p 219) Thus, Suharto transformed the economy successfully. He also tried to legitimize his military takeover of the country by showing economic growth. He brought about dramatic improvements in the living standards of most Indonesians. (Fuston 2001, p77) In Asia, Indonesia became an economic tiger along with Thailand and Malaysia. However, the economy contracted again after the fall of Suharto in 1997, in the wake of the Asian financial crisis. So, comparing the two dictators seems quite different in this economic sector. General Ne Win who was extremely corrupt and was intent on centralizing the power on his own hand, pushed the country into the bottom of the ground, whereas, General Suharto, despite his authoritative manner, lifted his country up to the desirable economic standard. People usually argue that economic development comes only in the light of political stability. This statement has credible source. In the case of Indonesia, the 1997 financial crisis and political instability brought down the Suharto regime and since then, the economy did not recover to the fullest extent. In Burma, political instability is usually interpreted as the ethnic tensions and armed resurrections. Ethnic Conflicts Burma is a country infested with ethnic conflicts. All the ethnic-controlled areas of the country are situated on the periphery of the state and they want to break away from the Union of Burma. Tin Maung Maung Than (2005, p 65) rightly points out that the nation-state in Myanmar is a post-colonial construction and the issue of national identity in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious setting has played a significant role in state building since independence. He also revealed the fact that ethnic conflicts take a shape of central political stage in Burmas political background. All major ethnicities in the country want to secede from the post-colonial formation of the state. This constitutes a huge problem in nation building. Like in Burma, there are ethnic conflicts in Indonesia. Academics put those conflicts in two types; vertical conflicts and horizontal conflicts. Vertical conflicts are those happened between the state and a particular group (ethnically, religiously or ideologically-motivated) within the nation-state. On the other hand horizontal conflicts are those happened within the society itself or intra-society. It occurs between at least two culturally or religiously differentiated communities under a single political authority. (Sukma, 2005, p3) According to this definition, both types of conflicts can be seen in Indonesia. However, more dangerous conflicts that are similar to Burmas case are vertical conflicts such as Aceh and Papuas struggle for secession. These two states exist in the extreme far ends of the archipelago; Aceh being in the west end and Papua in the east. This unique geographical location of the peripheral states resembles those states in Burma, which are trying to break away from the Union of Burma. Sukma asserts that the Aceh conflict began to take form as a secessionist conflict only in mid-1970s with the establishment of the Free Aceh Movement (GAM). If this is the case, their cause was much later than the ethnic conflicts in Burma; Karen National Union, for example, took up arms in 1949 to secede from the state. Although ethnic tensions played a pivotal role in Burmas political arena, most so-called pro-democracy opposition groups of the country tend to forget its role. Their main concern has always been the military domination and their chief aim is to push the soldiers into the barracks. The main justification of the military takeover of the politics, however, was and still is the disintegration of the so-called Union of Burma. The opposition groups, such as NLD (National League for Democracy) did not pay much heed into the above-mentioned cause of the military. Civilian democracy uprisings NLD was only formed after the 1988 democracy uprisings in Burma. Why did the uprisings happen? The reason was that people were most fed up with the arbitrary management of the economy by the army. I can still recall those days when suddenly we woke up in the morning and found that the money my parents have accumulated in life was declared useless by the military government. It must have been the most painful experience in life for my parents. They did not know how to go to the market and buy food and other necessary commodities. The government was, bluntly speaking, idiotic and brainless to declare the state currency worthless without any compensation. The worst is that it did it twice. Peoples anger poured out into the street. They were really fed up with the rationed food, commodities, closed economy, political suppression and so many other things. Once in a life time, people went into the street risking their lives under the shooting guns and shouted Democracy! Overnight, the whol e country was turned upside down. People from all walks of life joined the shouting. They walked hand-in-hand and demonstrated. That was a time when NLD was introduced with the head of Aung San Suu Kyi. People needed a leader to direct their cause. Students were at the forefront of the uprisings and they supported Aung San Suu Kyi. She and her party won the landslide victory in the 1990 election but she was not granted the power. Power was not a type to be granted in Burma. The power comes from the barrel of the gun for the soldiers. When the uprising was put down brutally, the students and the dissidents run into the ethnic controlled areas and made ally with them. Suu Kyi was placed under house arrest and the military went on ruling the country. Is it just impossible to bring down a military regime? Of course, yes. It is possible to kick a man out from the highest position. Indonesia is the case study. General Suharto was ousted at the wake of 1997 Asian financial crisis. General Suharto granted economic prosperity to the country but his era was marked with authoritarianism, corruption and nepotism. (Church 2006, p56) In 1997, because of the Asian financial crisis, there was a speculative bubble, and capital flight. The currency quickly crashed from around 4,000 rupiah to more than 12,000 rupiah to the US dollar. (ibid) There were massive public demonstrations. Some elements of the military organized chaos and violence against the Chinese community. The Jakarta elite turned against Suharto. The vice-president, Habibie, helped convince Suharto to step down. Military head, General Wiranto, reportedly refused to act against demonstrations. Suhartos hope of remaining in power was thwarted away. He was forced to resign. (Fuston 2 001, p79) Demonstrations in Burma also forced General Ne Win resign in 1988 while Suharto was also toppled in 1997. But in Burma, another military regime was introduced and it crashed down the demonstrations brutally, followed by the promise of elections and civilian rule. The second promise was not kept. On the while, in Indonesia, Suhartos fall and Habibies succession was seen as a transition to Democracy. Present days There is a real mess still going on in the present day of Indonesias politics as the case was in Burma. For Habibie, there was a force for him to make a change in the country. First, greater freedom of speech and assembly was ensured. Along with it, creation of political parties was allowed. An election was held in 1999. However, Habibie was not absolutely free from the shadow of Suharto and his followers. There came meetings and discussions among leading figures such as Abdurrahman Wahid, Megawati Sukarnoputri and Amien Rais, etc. In the elections, Megawatis party won and after series of negotiations, promises and double crosses, Wahid came to power. (Fuston 2001, p80) However political turmoil continued. Finally, in 2001, Wahid was removed by parliament and replaced by his vice president, Megawati. The summary of this chaotic period is that the political situation was not stable. So many things changed in a short period of time. Also in Burma, the military continued to rule the country with an iron fist. Since the victory of NLD in the 1990 election, little political and economic changed. There was a time the head of the Junta was replaced. General Saw Maung, the head of SLORC was ousted and took over by General Than Shwe. Still one man change did not mean a thing for the country. However, there was a short period of economic growth in 1995 and 1996 due to the open door policy. But as Tin Maung Maung Than noted in a seminar, the door was the spring door for Burma. It opened briefly but closed later on. Conclusion When we look at Indonesia and Burma, we have in fact to look at the whole Southeast Asia region. The political systems of the whole region are really messed up. We cannot actually say that they have functional intuitions. In Indonesia, the bureaucracy is extremely corrupt. Not less in Burma. Not less in Thailand. However, the governments want to claim that they are truly democratic countries. Of course, nobody wants to say that they are autocratic and authoritarian. However, in comparison, some countries are much better off than others in the region. Indonesia has better potentials than Burma in terms of economic and political development. They have experienced political transformation and long before that, the economic transformation. Even though they are fragile and volatile, they are still going on. Not in Burma. When we talk about Burma, we end up scolding the government because we cannot see a method to change the country. In fact, there is a way. That way can only come from the opposition groups stationed on the borders of Thailand and Burma. The opposition groups aggressively tightened up the rope of sanctions on the neck of the government hoping that it will kill the dictatorship once and for all. No way, the Chinese and the regional allies helped the dictators out of the loop of the deadly sanctions, leaving the country people with the effects of them. So there is no way out. Will dialogue be successful? It would have been successful if it had been the way.

Analysis On Bharati Mukherjee English Literature Essay

Analysis On Bharati Mukherjee English Literature Essay In turn, Mukherjee lays claim to an America that is both constantly transforming, and transformed by, the new immigrant. As the title of her short stories collection The Middle Man and Other Stories (1988) suggests, each protagonist from a different part of the world functions as a mediator of cultures, negotiating the two-way transformation (Mukherjee, AUP 141) of either an expatriate or immigrant experience in America. That the collection won the National Book Critics Circle Award undeniably affirms the appeal of such a Maximalist narrative strategy professing to give an equal voice to each immigrant group. On further analysis, however, it is clear that Mukherjees representation of a fluid American (trans)national identity influenced by diversity is ultimately predicated on the foregrounding of differences. Despite Mukherjees call for America to go beyond multiculturalism in its treatment of new immigrants, her own postcolonial immigrant subjectivity-inevitably shaped by her elite British and American educational background-remains aligned with white hegemony, which continues to hierarchize its immigrants on the bases of ethnicity, class and gender. After all, Mukherjee specifically reveals in Jasmine that [e]ducated people are interested in difference (33). Keeping Mukherjees explicitly stated literary agendas in mind, this chapter will attempt to examine the ironies in Mukherjees postcolonial subjectivity in the novel Jasmine and the two short stories A Wifes Story and The Tenant, both from The Middleman and Other Stories collection. Radical alterity of India From the vantage point of a successful female intellectual in America, Mukherjee disavows India precisely because its repressive patriarchy severely limits womens opportunities in life, insofar as the sanctity of womens lives is largely disregarded and constantly endangered. However, feudal compliance was [precisely] what still kept India an unhealthy and backward nation (Mukherjee, Jasmine 77). This necessitates that Mukherjees heroines break the vicious cycle of being locked into arranged marriages that technically seal their fates with violent subjugation. In Mukherjees short story The Tenant, Mayas claim that [a]ll Indian men are wife beaters (99) may be an exaggeration, but the more disturbing revelation is that the grooms mother was absolute tyrant of the household (Mukherjee, Jasmine 147) in India. Indeed, generations of Indian women have also been physically abusing female subordinates deemed to have transgressed patriarchal norms. Yet, when meted out to any woman who defends or is interested in the pursuit of an education, such domestic violence is clearly a violation of basic human rights, unjustified to an America that champions the inalienable rights of every individual to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In Jasmine, Jyotis mother suffers strikes from her husband because she supports Jyotis aspiration to continue her studies and become a doctor. In the short story A Wifes Story, Pannas mother is beaten by her illiterate mother-in-law because she enrolled in French class at the Alliance Franà §aise. The fact that even these Brahmin wives are not spared the rod underscores that physical violence against women cuts across the entire caste system, denying all women personal and professional progress. These scenarios emphatically portray the radical alterity of India, insofar as it becomes utterly incomprehensible to Americans who privilege individualism and gender egalitarianism. Aligned with these values, Mukherjee attempts to consolidate her status approval from the American market by positioning herself not as [an] advantaged inside[r] of Asian culture but as similarly disadvantaged as [her] Anglo readers in finding that Asian component bizarre, distasteful, and difficult to comprehend (Shirley Lim, AG 161) as well. As Mukherjee reveals, it is necessary to give Jasmine a society that was so regressive, traditional, so caste-bound, genderist, that she could discard it (IMC 19) in exchange for a rebirth in America. In exposing the oppression inherent in Indias patriarchal structure, Mukherjee situates her decolonizing impulse as one that embraces emancipation in America, a land that seemingly affords women endless opportunities to attain self-actualization. Beyond pervasive domestic violence, even sectarian violence in post-independence India is targeted at women at some levels. In Jasmine, the Khalsa Lions are a Sikh fundamentalist group that conflates political and religious agendas to commit terrorist attacks against its detractors. Because Prakash does not believe that the sovereignty of modern India should be jeopardized by religious differences, and because Jasmine is deemed whorish (Mukherjee, Jasmine 65) for being Prakashs modern Hindu wife, they both become victims of the Khalsa Lions bombing. The death of Prakash, a progressive Indian man who serves as Mukherjees mouthpiece for rejecting feudalism, is significant. It convinces Jasmine that there is nothing else redeeming about strife-ridden and regressive India, and that her only alternative is to go alone to America, without job, husband, or papers (Mukherjee, Jasmine 97) to complete Prakashs mission. Jasmines conception of this mission is to commit sati, the traditional but now illegal Hindu ritual of widow self-immolation, at the Florida International Institute of Technology where Prakash had earned a place to study. However, Gurleen Grewal points out that despite Jasmines apparent antipathy toward Indian cultural life, her commitment to the extreme practice of sati ironically suggests otherwise (Born Again American 189). This contradiction is unfathomable even to Indian readers, let alone American ones. After all, Prakashs respectful and relatively egalitarian treatment of Jasmine does not necessitate that she make such a violent sacrifice. This calls into question Mukherjees purpose for narrativizing Jasmines single-minded resolve to commit sati and make America the place [she] had chosen to die, on the first day if possible (Jasmine 120). Compared to mere domestic violence against Indian women, sati symbolizes a classic instance of Orientalism that depicts Indian cultural inscrutability in a more sensationalistic manner to justify Mukherjees disavo wal of the old country. Jasmines intended transplantation of this archaic practice to modern America is thus a powerful juxtaposition that exposes the cultural incongruity in her nascent immigrant subjectivity. In order to effectively negotiate the crossing over from India to America, this incongruity undeniably requires ironing out. Violence in America Ironically, rape marks Jasmines entry into America, indicating that violence is never far from the threshold of the postcolonials consciousness (Dayal 78) regardless of her physical location. In terms of identity politics, the rapist Half-Face, a Vietnam War veteran, represents a masculine America whose aggression toward a feminized Asia presupposes the latters passive submission. Yet, Jasmines incarnation as Kali-a Hindu goddess possessing destructive violence-to murder Half-Face epitomizes the paradigm, as Rita DasGupta Sherma notes, that the female subjects alignment with a powerful goddess can serve to subvert conventional power structures (cited in Kafka 94). Importantly, that Jasmine decidedly aborts the mission of self-immolation only after she kills Half-Face is Mukherjees narrative strategy to reinforce the necessity of annihilating disempowering cultural practices associated with the old country in order to remake oneself (Jasmine 29) in the new world. With the killing of H alf-Face, as Timothy Ruppel argues, Jasmine passes from innocence and enacts a radical break, suggesting a form of resistance that is contingent, disruptive, and strategic (187). Indeed, this violent initiation rite has effectively bestowed upon Jasmine an assertive self-agency and self-reliance necessary for survival in America. Recalling that back in India Jasmine could only beseech the policeman to kill Prakashs murderer, her phenomenal capability to kill the perpetrator of her rape in America is an irrevocable transformation. In the end, Jasmine only executes a symbolic sati, burning the suitcase containing Prakashs suit and her own white widow sari in the trash bin. The completion of this ritual signifies Jasmines desire of traveling light in America, in spite of its apparent violence, to wholeheartedly attune herself to the speed of transformation, the fluidity of American character and the American landscape (Mukherjee, Jasmine 121, 138). American Orientalism Although the Orientalism that Edward Said posits does not deal with an Other situated in the West, Yasuko Kase suggests that the Asian American functions as the Other in what she calls American Orientalism (795). Mukherjee also portrays her female protagonists as Asian objects (of desire) subjected to the white gaze, although each of them responds to this exoticization differently. In A Wifes Story, Panna Patels immediate reaction to the line-[Patel women] look like theyve just been fucked by a dead cat (26)-in David Mamets play Glengarry Glen Ross is to leave and write the playwright a letter. With her people and, in particular, her gender made the butt of a racist joke in America, Panna confronts the ambivalence of her visible minority status: Its the tyranny of the American dream that scares me. First, you dont exist. Then youre invisible. Then youre funny. Then youre disgusting. Insult, my American friends will tell me, is a kind of acceptance. No instant dignity here. A play like this, back home, would cause riots. Communal, racist, and antisocial. The actors wouldnt make it off stage. (Mukherjee, AWS 26) Recognizing that she is an Asian female, Panna understands that American Orientalism manifested in cultural productions, even at its crudest, is best taken with a pinch of salt. In comparison, the violent intolerance expected in India toward such derogatory remarks seems to reflect a Third World barbarism and lack of restraint. Having successfully, albeit only temporarily, broken free from the oppressions in India to pursue a doctorate degree in America, Panna assumes that postcolonialism has made her the[] referee (Mukherjee, AWS 27) of both worlds because of her transnational mobility. However, to believe that this is an achievement great enough for David Mamet to be a little afraid (Mukherjee, AWS 29) of South Asians in America, instead of being condescending in his Orientalist representation of the latter, is overly delusional on Pannas part. Mukherjee is evidently being ironic here, but it is perhaps necessary for Panna to dismiss American Orientalism in order to recuperate the dignity of her Indian identity, considering that she is only an expatriate for whom the return to India remains a very real possibility. However, Jasmine, the illegal immigrant in the novel Jasmine, responds to the hegemonic exertion of American Orientalism in a strikingly different manner. To be sure, Yasuko Kase suggests that critics should not be too quick to accuse Asian American writers who appear to accommodate American Orientalism of being unauthentic or selling out (797, 797) without first evaluating how this may be a survival strategy for minority groups. Significantly, Jasmine realizes that Orientalist binaries deployed to stereotype her are assets, rather than liabilities, that facilitate her transition into American life: Bud courts me because I am alien. I am darkness, mystery, inscrutability. The East plugs me into instant vitality and wisdom (Mukherjee, Jasmine 200). Empowered by her exotic sexuality that successfully mesmerizes the white American male, Jasmine quickly gains entry into the American middle class. Jasmines foreign femininity serves to domesticate racial difference (Bow, Betrayal 30) in th e Ripplemeyer household, where the wheelchair-bound Bud is physically and emotionally reliant on her, inasmuch as Jasmine astutely panders to Buds desires by facilely switching her role between caregiver and temptress (Mukherjee, Jasmine 36). Indeed, Gurleen Grewal highlights that Jasmine readily complies as the exotic Other [because] this compliance is her ticket to the American Dream (Born Again American 191). More importantly, however, this compliance entails the conscious silencing of aspects of the old country that unsettle the American. As a quick stud[y] (Mukherjee, Jasmine 29) of the process of assimilation, Jasmine recognizes that America ultimately has the upper hand in deciding what it finds fascinatingly or frighteningly exotic about the Asian female, in turn dictating which fragments of her Indian identity she should discard. While this (re)affirms the hegemony of the metropolitan center in which Jasmine now finds herself, it is also Mukherjees means of asserting unapologetically that any form of lingering entanglement with the old world is tantamount to the immigrants betrayal of America. Effectively, then, Mukherjee strategically resorts to Orientalism to prove how un-Oriental she is (Ma 14) and how the immigrant ought to embrace America wholeheartedly. Just as Bud and Mrs. Ripplemeyer are uncomfortable with Jasmines stories of poverty and backwardness in India, so Jasmine also remains uncritical of Bud assuming the white mans burden-originally the Wests rationalization for colonizing and civilizing the backwaters of the East-to save Asia. It is ironic that Jasmine seems genuinely unaware of Buds Orientalist impulse in adopting Du, a Vietnamese refugee. If Bud symbolizes an American nation whose foreign policy is indicative of its positioning as the current imperium of the world, then his interventionist act clearly enacts the extension of Americas neocolonial grasp to an Asia-as represented by Du-that is in need of social uplift by American standards. This is evident from Bud feeling gratified, but not that impressed (Mukherjee, Jasmine 155) when Du exhibits a creative affinity with the American technology made available to him. However, Jasmines idealistic naÃÆ' ¯vetà © leads her to believe that it is [e]xtravagant love tugging at Buds conscience to atone (Mukherjee, Jasmine 228) for his comfortable American life that Asia is deprived of. Jasmine romanticizes Buds altruism in part because her tumultuous immigrant experience makes her envy the straightforwardness of Buds middle-class life. Nevertheless, Rajini Srikanth is perplexed that Mukherjee finds it necessary for American writers to probe into the severity of global injustices simply because she is complacently confident that American institutions can effectively redress these injustices (211). This idealistic view of America explains why Mukherjee ultimately skirts around the political implications of Buds humanitarian deeds, leaving Jasmine to celebrate the impacted glories of individual consciousness (Mukherjee, OBAW) instead. Consequently, Mukherjees unquestioning appropriation of (American) Orientalism reveals her complicit alignment with an i mperialist attitude that continues to view the West and the East in the Manichean allegory of binaristic oppositions. Further, through deploying the trope of abject suffering in the old country to accentuate the validity of the Asian immigrants self-actualization in the United States, Mukherjee over-valorizes the recuperative and salvific modernity (Walter Lim 10) of America. In A Wifes Story, Charity Chins uncle is a first-generation Chinese American who escapes the Wuchang Uprising of 1911 into the safety of America. Yet, the ellipses between his initial arrival and his eventual success as a gift store owner in New York can hardly be satisfactorily accounted for by Pannas reductive evaluation that though he doesnt speak much English, he seems to have done well (Mukherjee, AWS 31). Just as Amy Tan has elided the first-generation Chinese American mothers adaptation in America in the novel The Joy Luck Club, Mukherjee is also silent about the conditions of successful assimilations (Grewal, Indian-American Literature 100) in her portrayal of some Asian immigrants. It seems that Mukherjees idealization of the American Dream supersedes any critical need to examine how the underclass immigrant without the relevant symbolic and cultural capital copes with the demands of America. Similarly, Jasmines explanation that Dus doing well [in America] because he has always trained with live ammo, without a net, with no multiple choice [in Vietnam] (Mukherjee, Jasmine 214) also postulates an assumed cultural superiority that the First World abundance of America is a panacea for Third World deprivations. Yet, Mukherjee fails to address how suffering in the Third World, in effect, transnationally translates into the form of racial discrimination in America. Rather, Jasmines claim that prior suffering must count for something (Mukherjee, Jasmine 32) seems to imply that suffering is a prerequisite for the immigrants civic legitimacy in America. While Rajini Srikanth contends that this is a dangerous and morally untenable position of endorsing discriminatory practices as aà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦rite of pa ssage to share in the nations founding ideals (212-3), the trope of abject suffering in the Third World helps Mukherjee ratify the narrative of Asian immigrant desire that America offers salvation and unlimited opportunities for the Third World immigrant seeking liberation. Repudiating Purity of Culture In her short story Two ways to Belong in America published in the New York Times in 1996, Mukherjee highlights the crucial difference between herself and her sister Mira. While both of them have lived in America for decades, Miras retention of Indian citizenship is a clear sign that she is in America to maintain an identity, not to transform it (Mukherjee, TWBA). Mukherjees quarrel with such resistance toward assimilation finds vivid expression in Jasmine through her portrayal of the Vadhera household, Jasmines initial host family in the Punjabi ghetto of Flushing, Queens. The self-sufficient ethnic enclave constructs an artificially maintained Indianness for the immigrant to comfortably bunker oneself inside nostalgia (Mukherjee, Jasmine 145, 85) in order to safeguard Indian culture. Such conscious alienation illustrates a coping strategy to mitigate the underlying difficulty of immigrant life in ethnic ghettoes that Mukherjee, however, chooses to overlook in favor of foregrounding Jasmines transformations in America. Significantly, the revelation that Devinder Vadhera, once Prakashs professor in India, now depends on the menial labor of sorting imported human hair for a living elicits not sympathy, but shame, from Jasmine. It convinces Jasmine all the more that the green card is her passport to the pursuit of happiness, and that if she remains stuck in this neighborhood, she will be doomed to die from unnamed, unfulfilled wants (Mukherjee, Jasmine 148). Here, the allusion to Betty Friedans 1963 social commentary The Feminine Mystique, in which she diagnoses the sense of emptiness and entrapment felt by suburban housewives across postwar America as [the] problem that has no name (20), is clear. By conflating Jasmines underclass predicament with that of middle-class American women, Mukherjee seems to suggest that Jasmine, at this point just a newly arrived illegal immigrant, possesses the same sensibility that stands her in good stead to achieve the kind of lib eration that her American sisters have enjoyed since the success of the womens movement. Jasmines decision to leave the Vadheras conveniently eschews any serious debunking of the American Dream, which discriminates on the basis of social class. Jasmines dramatic elevation from a village girl to a professional (Mukherjee, Jasmine 175) caregiver is unquestioningly celebrated as the miracle of the American Dream. In stark contrast, Mukherjees representation of the Vadheras bears no empathetic critique of the grim reality of deprofessionalization plaguing many South Asian immigrants, whose professional credentials acquired back home are either not translatable to or devaluated in the American context. Instead, Mukherjees disavowal of India is fleshed out equally, if not more strongly through her dismal portrayal of the Vadheras as cowardly Indian immigrants resistant to change. Effectively, then, the Vadheras are scapegoats for Mukherjee to emphasize that honorable survival requires res ilience, curiosity, and compassion, a letting go of rigid ideas about the purity of inherited culture (BM 456), harkening back to her conviction that immigrants ought to embrace their American identity. On the other hand, living on the cutting edge of suburbia (103) but similarly bunkered inside nostalgia are the Chatterjis in Mukherjees short story The Tenant. Immune to the deprofessionalization which debases Devinda Vadheras American life, Rab Chatterji is a Physics professor while his wifes nephew Poltoo is a postgraduate student at Iowa State University. Their personal success makes them Americas model minority from which other lesser minority groups are expected to learn, but Grewal points out that [a]mong the insidious effects of this pronouncement are the stereotyping of an Asian character' (Indian-American Literature 98) that, I posit, does not extend beyond the Asian immigrants economic value, or the lack thereof, to America. The notion of model minority already presupposes the hyphenated identity of the Indian immigrant, even if s/he is already a naturalized American. This clearly runs counter to Mukherjees identification of herself as an American without hyphens (Mukherje e, BM 460). For this reason, Mukherjee satirically exposes all the Chatterjis Indian traits that make them undeserving American citizens. Mukherjee first repudiates Dr. Chatterji, who only wants to live and work in America but give back nothing except taxes (Mukherjee, TT 106). Dr. Chatterjis valorization of Indian Standard Time and criticism of Americans constant race against time further exemplifies an absurd sense of Indian superiority that puts him on a pedestal of three thousand years plus civilization, sophistication, moral virtue, over people born [in America] (Mukherjee, TT 102). In line with Mukherjees own distaste for the uneasy aggregate of antagonistic them and us' (Mukherjee, BM 459), Maya, the female protagonist, cannot relate to Dr. Chatterjis ridiculous rhetoric. In turn, the Chatterjis retention of Brahmin demeanor precludes them from embracing American multiculturalism and hybridity at any meaningful level. Although they live in a middle-class neighborhood accommodating people of different colors (Mukherjee, TT 103), the only sign of multicultural interaction is Mrs. Chatterji perfunctorily playing ball with a Korean or Cambodian child next door at best. Beyond that, the Chatterjis have neither the open-mindedness nor desire for any more intimate interethnic mingling. That Poltoo is contemplating marriage outside the Brahminic pale-to a Negro Muslim (Mukherjee, TT 103, 106) at that-thus threatens to contaminate the purity of the lineage. Mrs. Chatterji is counting on divine intervention to avert this disaster, while leaving the locked-up Poltoo feeling crazy, thwarted, [and] lost (Mukherjee, TT 105). The perverse repression of Poltoos desires is both antithetical to the American ideal of free will and anachronistic in the American modernity of progress. Mukherjees representation of how this so-called model minority functions in America thus easily makes the Chatterjis a more dishonorable bunch of Indian immigrants than the Vadheras, at the same time that it makes a highly charged statement of her own rejection of a hyphenated American identity. Beyond Multiculturalism Moving beyond her harsh critique of Indian immigrants who resist assimilation, Mukherjee attempts to consolidate her status as an America writer by strategically expanding the scope of her literary project to wage a crusade against multiculturalism. Rather than encouraging unhyphenated assimilation, multiculturalism, as Mukherjee argues, emphasizes differences between racial heritages (Mukherjee, BM 459) and discounts how the experiences of new Americans from non-traditional immigrant countries (Mukherjee, IW 28) also constantly contribute to the American socio-cultural fabric. The ambition to create a postethnic America culminates in Mukherjees assertion: To reject hyphenization is to demand that the nation deliver the promises of the American Dream and the American Constitution to all its citizens. I want nothing less than to invent a new vocabulary that demands, and obtains, an equitable power-sharing for all members of the American community. (BM 460) There is, first and foremost, no question about Mukherjees representation of the United States as the ultimate end of Asian immigrant desire. Yet, despite Mukherjees high-flown rhetoric of eradicating multiculturalism, her literary representation of immigrants who are not of South Asian origins only further reinforces this hegemonic structure and reaffirms the existence of an immigrant hierarchy where differences are emphasized and [identities are] fixed into a static notion of alterity (Ponzanesi 47). This jarring discrepancy is vividly highlighted in Jasmine when Jasmine is quick to set her own Americanization apart from Dus, in spite of their common desire to assimilate. Jasmine claims that [her] transformation has been genetic; Dus was hyphenated (Mukherjee, Jasmine 222), as though this is validated just because she is pregnant with Bud Ripplemeyers child, whereas Du is merely an adopted Vietnamese refugee. More importantly, it implies Jasmines identification with the hegemonic Orientalist inclination to be so full of wonder at how fast [Du] became American, only to marginalize him as a hybrid (Mukherjee, Jasmine 222, 222) whose assimilation into American society can never legitimately be considered full-fledged. As Verhoeven posits, the politics of ethnic representation is ultimately no more and no less than the privileging of the ethnic self over the ethnic other (n. pag.). Given that Mukherjees immigrant subjectivity is inextricably tied to her own elite background as a Brah min and as an intellectual in American academe, it is perhaps inescapable that ethnocentricity also features in her depiction of immigrants who are not from South Asia. At the expense of Du, then, Jasmine gets away as a very special case (Mukherjee, Jasmine 135), considering that other characters readily validate her full assimilation. The unqualified relegation of Du to the peripheries as a Vietnamese-American underscores Mukherjees double standard in the treatment of both characters. By simply using the word hyphenated (Mukherjee, Jasmine 222) to conclude the formation of Dus American identity and by referring to Chinese Americans as Orientals (Mukherjee, AWS 29) in her short stories, Mukherjee thus posit[s] a system of easily recognizable forms of identity and difference' (Roy 129) that precisely reflects and endorses the exclusionary underpinnings of multiculturalism. Indeed, such a position from which Mukherjee entertains the immigrant issues of class and ethnicity renders her quest for an equitable power-sharing for all members of the American community (Mukherjee, BM 460) untenable. Ultimately, then, Mukherjees Maximalist approach toward the immigrant experience in American literature is self-defeating. The difficulty undeniably involved in representing all immigrant groups accurately and authentically makes the credibility of Mukherjees following claim suspect: Perhaps it is [my] history-mandated training in seeing myself as the other that now heaps on me a fluid set of identities denied to most of my mainstream American counterparts. That training, in our ethnic- and gender-fractured world of contemporary fiction, allows me without difficulty to enter lives, fictionally, that are manifestly not my own. Chameleon-skinned, I discover my material over and across the country, and up and down the social ladder. (IW 29) Albeit apparently inclusionary, Mukherkees Maximalist credo merely inherits the exclusionary connotations (Chanadry 434, 434) of multiculturalism as far as her literary representation of non-South Asian immigrants is concerned. Even with the best of intentions to propose an alternative model to multiculturalism, Mukherjee, by virtue of her own elite immigrant status, is not exempt from the tendency to reinscribe the minority group immigrant back into the hegemonic rhetoric of difference and otherness. Conclusion Finally, the spotlight is ultimately focused on the individuality of the Indian immigrant in fashioning her own life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the free country' (Mukherjee, Jasmine 239). The immigrant subjectivity that each female protagonist advantageously adopts is aptly encapsulated by Jasmines declaration: I am not choosing between men. I am caught between the promise of America and old-world dutifulness (Mukherjee, Jasmine 240). While Mukherjee justifies the disavowal of the old world by means of the Manichean allegory that juxtaposes India and America in binaristic oppositions, the more important revelation is that the postcolonial immigrant is also free to reject aspects of America exemplifying failed idealism (Mukherjee, TT 108). If the female immigrants search for a fluid yet empowering American (trans)national identity depends partly on the (white) male with whom she is romantically involved, then wheelchair-bound Bud and armless Fred symbolize a freak (Mukh erjee, TT 112) America that must be abandoned as well. Maya is sure that Freds world will not end with her departure, while Jasmine feels potent (Mukherjee, Jasmine 12) in saving Bud by not marrying him. Through this reversal of power, Mukherjee aligns her female protagonists with a sense of hegemonic benevolence toward the inferior. With Jasmine choosing Taylor for his world, its ease, its careless confidence and graceful self-absorption (Mukherjee, Jasmine 171) and Maya choosing Ashoke Mehta for his adoration of idealism and abhorrence of smugness, passivity, caste system (Mukherjee, TT 109, 109), it is evident that Mukherjees literary agenda is ultimately underwritten by her inclination to embrace and valorize an ideal America that is capacious of fulfilling the immigrants desires. (4682words, excluding subheadings (18))

Salvador Dali’ Essay -- essays papers

Salvador Dali’ Domenech was born on May 11, 1904 in the small farming town of Figueres in the Catalonian region of Spain. It was here in the foothills of the Pyrenees where Dali spent his youth, that many of the ideas, inspirations, and images repeated in his paintings have their roots. As a young boy Dali attended the San Fernando Academy of Fine Arts in Madrid. At the academy Dali studied many different painting styles and became quite proficient at them. Many of his earlier works include impressionist, cubist, and realist techniques. As Dali matured, these interests were transformed into his own surrealistic style. The first recognition of Dali’s talents came with his first show held in Barcelona in 1925. He became known globally when three of his paintings, including The Basket of Bread were on display at the 3rd annual Carnegie International Exhibition in Pittsburgh in 1928. It was also this year that Dali joined a group of painters led by Andre Breton known as the surrealists. Soon after this Dali met Gala Eluard when she was on a trip with her husband Paul Eluard. Gala became Dali’s lover, business manager, and primary inspiration. Dali soon became the leader of the Surrealist movement, until he was expelled from the group during a trial in 1934 due to political clashes during WWII. After this expulsion Dali slowly moved away from his surrealistic style and moved into his classic period. His new interests in the Catholic Church, science, and history are evident in these works. Some of his most well known works from this period are The Hallucinogenic Toreador, The Discovery of America by Christopher Columbus, The Sacrament of the Last Supper, and The Ecumenical Council. Many of these classical works were done on large canvases 14 feet high. In order to paint these huge canvases, Dali removed a section of his floor and set up a system of pulleys so he could raise and lower the canvases between the two floors. Dali’s wife Gala died in 1982 and he was faced with a deteriorating health in his own life shortly after. In 1984 Dali was injured in a fire in his home in Pubol, Spain. In 1986 a pacemaker was implanted into Dali, and he died from heart failure on January 23, 1989. During his life, Dali was responsible for thousands of works, which varied from oils, watercolors, drawings, graphics, sculptures, jewels, and fashion designs to ... ... a woman in a yellow boat located close to the bottom center of the painting represents this invasion. The large flies flying past this bay are symbolic of Dali’s common joke that even the notorious flies of the region could not drive away the tourists. Just above the bay, the bull appears. Dali painted the bull using the tentacle of an octopus. In the seats is a glowing bust of his wife Gala. The frown on her face is because she hates bullfights. In the back of the arena are many doors around the perimeter. Every door but one has a statue standing near it. These statues give the doors manmade and earthly qualities. The one door in center without the statues actually has an angel at each side. These angels represent a passage to heaven. This is where the bull or the toreador exits when one of the two is killed in the fight. In the bottom right corner is boy standing with a whip behind his back. This is Dali himself watching over the scene. The images in this painting are very different from the melting figures and objects from his surrealistic period. This classic period brought about much more realistic figures, while still having that twist that Dali is famous for.

Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock Essay: Inability to Love

Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock - Inability to Love    T. S. Eliot's "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" is not a poem about love, at least in any traditional sense. Rather It is a collection of the fragmented thoughts of a man without self-esteem. Far from being about love, it is about one man's inability to love (himself or the world around him.) It is the cynical statement of a man who does not believe good things will ever happen to him, or that the world has anything to offer him. The title is bitterly ironic; Prufrock does not love any body, least of all himself, (no matter how much he might aspire to the ideal of romance and passion), nor does he believe that any one could ever love him. His own life is devoid of love, so in his bitterness he brands his work a "love song". Although the poem addresses the reader directly, saying, "Let us go then, you and I,"1 Prufrock is really just talking to himself. His is a tale of shame and insecurity that he would never dare share with another human being. The epigraph graphically illustrates this; being a passage from Dante's "Inferno".... "If I thought my reply would be to someone who would ever return to earth, this flame would remain without further movement; but as no one has ever returned from this gulf, if what I hear is true, I can answer you with no fear of infamy."2 When one considers the poem in the light of this prologue, one must see that Prufrock is basically telling the tale of his isolation and living hell, but without shame because he believes his words will never be heard. He speaks to himself, and poses questions to himself as many do when they are grappling internally with issues and problems of their own. I wish to discuss two main thread... ...nse it is indeed a song about love, but it is not a "love song" in the traditional sense. "The Lovesong of J. Alfred Prufrock" is not radio friendly mainstream love. Bibliography Eliot, T. S., "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock", in Leonard, John, Ed., Seven Centuries of Poetry in English, Third Ed., Melbourne: Oxford, 1994, pp.128-31. End Notes 1 Eliot, T. S., "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock", in Leonard, John, Ed., Seven Centuries of Poetry in English, Third Ed., Melbourne: Oxford, 1994, pp.128-31, l. 1. All subsequent line numbers refer to this text. 2 Leonard, p. 128. 3 ll. 13-14, 35-36. 4 ll. 32-33. 5 ll. 38, 45, 122. 6 ll. 45-46. 7 l. 122. 8 ll. 97, 110. 9 l. 55. 10 ll. 73-74. 11 l. 34. 12 l. 51. 13 l. 60. 14 l. 81. 15 l. 85. 16 l. 84. 17 ll. 87, 99. 18 ll. 129-131.

Boeing-Case Study Essay

The key elements of the resistance to change described in the Perrier case are: Lack of communication and the companies inability to inform the employees of what changes affected production at Perrier, the company made excessive changes, the company introduces a series of changes and the people felt the changes were unnecessary, and they were unsure if they would still have the required skills to continue to work for the company. Perrier has made quite a fair amount of changes in a short period of time and they will need to be aware that some people may not agree to the change and might not work to their full potential. Most of Perrier’s employees did not think the changes were necessary for the organization to grow. There were some employees who thought Perrier’s conducted unnecessary changes to impact their normal workload. The latter change was considered as the lack of conviction that change is needed. There was also the Perceived Negative Effect on Interest -this resistance to change will be affected by people’s perceptions of the likely effect of the change on their â€Å"interests†, a term that can cover a wide range of factors including their authority, status, rewards(including salary), opportunity to apply expertise, membership of friendship networks, autonomy, and security. The employees at Perrier were concerned with the implication of the change for themselves and how it may affect their own interests, rather than considering effects for the success of the business. 2. Construct a change management strategy for dealing with this situation. In so doing, identify what approach (es) to managing resistance you recommend and provide a clear justification for your choice. An article by Kotter and Schlesinger provides the classic description on managing the resista†¦

Should we adopt the Euro?

In recent years there has been much debate as to whether the benefits outweigh the costs of adopting the Euro currency. This argument, often a fierce and personal one, has covered the front pages of newspapers for a very long time, and continues to rage on today. But what are the arguments, and should we really join the Euro? Let us start off with the benefits of joining the Euro. One large benefit would be the ease of which one would be able to check different prices across Europe due to one, single and only currency. This would mean that a great deal of time spent on checking, and comparing different prices in different countries with different currencies, would be a lot shorter. So, as a result, international trade and purchasing would be much easier and more time could be spent elsewhere. Another great benefit of the adoption of the Euro is the greater competition that it would induce in the market; the pressure to lower inflation and increase productivity would lead to the need for more innovation in the markets, thus creating a healthier and an ever-growing economy. This would mean that the chance of falling into a recession would be lower, employment would be higher, and incomes would as well. A third benefit is the encouragement of foreign companies to invest in the Eurozone. In due course, more money would be pumped into the economies of Europe and therefore generally Europe would be richer, especially the countries that adopted the Euro. Finally, joining the Eurozone would cause Britain to join a large group of countries that could, when working together, play a large role on the stage of world politics, with the voices of smaller countries in the Euro able to have a say on various topics. On the other hand, there are some strong arguments against joining the Euro. A rather surprisingly popular, if a little stupid, reason put forward is patriotic one – the centuries-old tradition of having the monarch's face on bank notes and coins would be ridden of if the country were to join the Euro, replaced with less patriotic images of Europe. This view is, quite unsurprisingly, not held with very high regard among those for joining the Eurozone. Another argument against adopting the currency was the 20% devaluation of the pound sterling in 2008-10, resulting in not such a bad recession. It was possible that if the UK had been in the Euro at the time, the general economic situation would be a great deal worse than it already is. A third argument against joining the Euro the problem of one Eurozone country's economy failing resulting in more damage to the other countries that use the Euro. This means that if a small country's economy failed, then the effects on other Eurozone countries would be greater due to the reliance on other countries in the Euro. In conclusion, I feel that, while the patriotic argument is quite weak, there isn't much use in joining the Euro, especially when its present situation is so bad considering the recession we find ourselves in. Perhaps, though, in a few years the UK may adopt this single currency, and instead of asking what the costs and benefits are, we must ask ourselves: â€Å"will it last? â€Å"