Effects of corruption on firm performance Essay Example

Effects of corruption on firm performance Essay Example Effects of corruption on firm performance Essay Effects of corruption on firm performance Essay Transparency International where the index ranks 28 of the worlds largest economies according to the perceived likelihood of companies from these countries to pay bribes abroad. It is based on the views of business executives as captured by Transparency Internationally 2011 Bribe Payers Survey. The index shows that there is no country among the 28 major economies whose companies are perceived to be wholly clean and that do not engage in bribery. The results indicate that bribery is perceived to be common across all sectors. What is interesting and also surprising is that for the first time the Bribe Payers Survey was also asking business executives about bribing among companies and the finding was that the bribing among companies is almost as high as bribing of public officials across all sectors. This shows that corruption does not encompass only the public sector but is also a common practice within the private sector. So why are companies engaging private-to-private bribery? The answer is almost the same as for the public sector, to secure business and facilitate the functioning of hidden business cartels. Large companies have power toward suppliers and they can Nora to use tenet Innocence toward suppliers Dye management Dress. As corruption has more forms, bribery through offering inappropriate gifts and hospitality is also very common in private-to-private bribery. As stated by the Transparency International and what we agree with is that private- to-private bribery remains largely overlooked by researchers and policy-makers and that its impact is likely to be significant. Its consequences or effects are felt through: the entire supply chain, distorting markets and competition, increasing costs to firms, penalizing the smaller companies that cannot afford to compete on these terms and penalizing those firms with high integrity that refuse to compete on these terms. This not only prevents a fair and efficient private sector but also reduces the quality of products and services to the consumer. Bribery brings financial benefit in the form of negotiated contracts only at first glance. The corruption is harmful for the company in the long run so the answers why avoid corruption are: because the bribery diverts attention from the quality of the products to the value of made and future bribes, because with the first paid ribs the company starts to lose control (the next one will have to be higher), because the companies will not be able to complain if they do not get what they paid for, because the bribes violate the law and company is exposed to extortion, because it is hard to cancel a corrupt relationship, because serious consequences are at the stake (penalties, reputation , because sooner or later the consequences will be felt? That corruption reduces sales growth, firm competitiveness, lowers investment and employment growth and that corruption is quite unlikely to have any positive effects s confirmed in the Journal Assessing the Effects of Corruption and Crime on Firm Performance (Alexandra Gavin, 2001). The data used in the research is based on private sector survey conducted by the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank in 1999 where about 100 middle and top managers in 29 countries (20 of them from Latin American) were questioned about their perceptions on several areas of government performance, including predictability of policies, reliability of the Judiciary, problems with corruption, crime and public services. The results of the research show that the effect of corruption on the economic outcomes of the firms does exist. The results also indicate that corruption and crime substantially reduce competitiveness and that corruption and effective bureaucratic interference go hand in hand which is higher in firms that are more likely to pay bribes. Corruption raises operational costs and creates uncertainty since increased involvement increases chances to get caught. Corruptive acts like bribing, stealing Ana tenet AT government resources Dye puddle McCall cannot De alertly seen or nave direct effects on the firms, but it can have huge indirect effects. Public finances will deteriorate, creating uncertainty and raising the cost of credit. Infrastructure will crumble, public services will worsen and the general climate of business will suffer as well. Effects of corruption can be seen as slower economic growth which means that corruption is bad for growth and most empirical studies confirm that, than lower foreign direct investment which means that where corruption is high enough foreign investors will avoid the country and if corruption is not allowed but is present, than foreign investors will prefer to associate with local partners because of the importance of their knowledge about how to deal with present corruption so Joint- ventures instead of owned subsidiaries are preferred and if corruption is not a problem than foreign investors will prefer wholly-owned subsidiaries.

John Lennon`s Educational Tour Bus

John Lennon`s Educational Tour Bus John Lennon`s Educational Tour Bus John Lennon`s Educational Tour Bus John Lennon`s Educational Tour Bus The â€Å"John Lennon Educational Tour Bus† is an organization, which makes the dreams of young musical artists from the USA and Canada a reality. It was founded in New York City in 1998 by Brian Rothschild. Its mission aims at promotion music literacy among the talented students. A traveling bus, which is audio and video recording studio on wheels, helps this organization achieve all their aims. Students have the opportunity to produce, write, and record original songs, documentaries, and music videos just in one single day. They will be provided with such programs: Technology Expos, Essay Contests, Teacher Training, Assemblies, Documentaries, Concert Tours, 1 Day Music Video Production, Tours of the Bus, and High School Battle of the Bands. The best way to educate students about music The participants of this unusual program are extremely excited about it, as they are allowed to play music in their own way, using the high-quality equipment. Here you will be able to feel yourself like a real rock-and-roll superstar. Inside the big blue bus, you will have the drums, guitars, DJ station, keyboards, and basses – everything at your disposal. The students will also find a separate studio for editing and recording videos and CDs. It is unbelievable, that some students from Anaheim, California, managed to compose a song and produce a music video in a mere six hours. The organization and realization of the Bus`s work process John Lennon Educational Tour Bus makes stops at universities, schools, music festivals, concerts, and trade shows. A group of the young people has the opportunity to try itself at recording an original video and song. Students write the music and lyrics to a song, record it, mix it, shoot video, and produce a music video of their work. Then, the stuff of the Bus organizes the community celebration in order to screen everything that was produced on the Bus. Students can also participate in a Battle of the Bands and enjoy themselves, competing in the interesting and friendly way. The band, which wins, definitely receives its deserved prizes. Of course, communities and schools can make a request for the Bus, but you should remember that not every request can be accommodated because of their amount. Nevertheless, the staff of the Bus does its best to make students educated in music. Get a taste of the professional media production and music composition John Lennon Educational Tour Bus inspires not only the youth, but also the principals and teachers. It provides also a course at several universities, which is called ‘Come Together: Music and Video Production’. It was created in cooperation with the Digital Media Academy. Our young people need such kind of media education and music. Such original approach brings people together and shows students the power of themselves. The Bus is designed to provide schools, students, and communities with remote recordings, demonstrations, and performances. The studio sessions are customized for their interest, levels of experience, and needs. This Bus can produce live multicamera video productions. This organization partners different newspapers and magazines. You can see all its projects on Facebook, YouTube, and lennonbus.org. The Bus is divided into three studio environments, which can create one big studio. You can find here a Chromatte booth, an iso booth for acoustic recordings, a mixing and a recording booth. Apple computers, Yamaha keyboards, Yamaha Drums, Gibson and Epiphone guitars are available here. The Bus also deals with the professional recording industry, as many celebrities were inspired to record their songs on it.   Natasha Bedingfield, will.i.am and Justin Timberlake did it successfully. The Lennon Bus has also accompanied The Black Eyed Peas during their concert tours. The students` musical progress from the Bus` digital and instrumental resources is incredible. The experience of taking part in such wonderful program will be undoubtedly unforgettable for any student!

Personal statement for hematology oncology fellowship

For hematology oncology fellowship - Personal Statement Example It was relatively new and constantly changing field. I have often been asked by colleagues why I want to be an oncologist and I tell them that the decision to become an oncologist was influenced by my own personal experiences and interactions with oncologists when my mother was treated for cancer. I was with my mother during the entire treatment and I had close communications with the oncologists treating her. Based on those experiences I was able to have a sense of what I would want done for a clos relative. I understood how I would have preferred to be informed and treated. Furthermore, working as a clinical observer in a private hematology/oncology clinic helped me to have a closer look at the specialty. Having the privilege to be in an academic setting allowed me to have direct input from hematology/oncology consults. Working with a few brilliant physicians in this field during my residency has been truly enlightening and rewarding. It has played a big role in making up my mind i n this direction. I believe oncology is one of the few specialties in internal medicine where physicians actually possess the ability to actually cure patients. Although it is not possible to prolong every patient’s life, the very knowledge that I hopefully helped to maintain an optimal quality of life is a very satisfying thing.

The Notions of 'Immortality' and 'Resurrection' in the Wisdom of Essay

The Notions of 'Immortality' and 'Resurrection' in the Wisdom of Solomon - Essay Example Moreover, the rift between the ‘righteous’ and the ‘wicked’ is a pervasive theme in the book which I would like to examine in detail here so as to understand the story line which leads to the phenomena of ‘immortality’ and ‘resurrection’. Therefore, to achieve this, the wider context in which the book was realized will also be analyzed. The final section will deal with the analysis of these concepts in the light of the Wisdom of Solomon and a conclusion is drawn thereof. ‘Immortality’ and ‘Resurrection’: A Conceptual Analysis There can be different interpretations of the word ‘immortality’ as put forth by Wright – â€Å"(a) ongoing physical life without any form of death ever occurring; (b) the innate possession of an immortal part of one’s being, e.g. the soul (which is itself in need of further multiple definitions), which will survive bodily death; (c) the gift from elsewhere, e.g. from Israel’s God to certain human beings, of an ongoing life, not itself innate in the human form, which could then provide continuity of mortal life, across an interim period, between the present bodily life and future resurrection; (d) a way of describing resurrection itself†.2 ‘Immortality’ and ‘resurrection’ are not to be seen as two opposing concepts.3The word ‘immortality’ can refer to ‘a state in which death is not possible’. Unless one is totally held by the Platonic notion of ‘immortality’ (as in point (b) above);4 ‘resurrection’ can also be seen as a variant of immortality, a form in which it is manifested. This point becomes clear when Paul discusses both resurrection and immortality in his first letter to Corinthians – â€Å"For this perishable body must put on imperishability, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When this perishable body puts on imperishab ility, and this mortal body puts on immortality, then the saying that is written will be fulfilled: ‘Death has been swallowed up in victory’†(1 Cor 15: 53-54). Here for Paul ‘resurrection’ is a new form of bodily life which is immortal and imperishable, that is there can be no more death. Hence he presents ‘resurrection’ within the purview of ‘immortality’. This point is stressed by Wright in the fourth meaning of immortality above i.e it being a way of describing resurrection itself. It was widely held by many Jews who believed in resurrection that there existed an ‘intermediate state’ between death and ‘bodily resurrection’. Many of them believed that the body did not go for a resurrection immediately after death. This state can be regarded as a state of immortality when one regards the ‘close ally’ nature of ‘immortality’ and ‘bodily resurrection’5 This state assumes that there is still a continuing state of existence with a unique personal identity until the physical embodiment is attained in ‘bodily resurrection’ which happens at a point of time in future. Many scholars believe that the way ‘Wisdom of Solomon’ teaches clearly about the immortality of the soul, it cannot do the same for the idea of resurrection. Boismard points out that in the Platonic idea there is no scope for resurrection and hence the idea is to be disregarded in the ‘Wisdom of Solomon

Conflicting perspectives Essay Example for Free

Conflicting perspectives Essay Before initial reading: The comments to the right are my thoughts and questions on phrases I have placed in the essay and how appropriate they would be. Analyse the ways conflicting perspectives generate diverse and provocative insights. All texts composed convey an agenda which is based on the composer’s context. William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, Jason Reitman’s satirical film Thank You For Smoking (2005) and George Orwell’s Animal Farm (1945) all use conflicting perspectives to convey their agenda by generating diverse and provocative insights. Conflicting perspectives are generated through the use and potential abuse of power, manipulation and the contrast between public and private personas and thus the responder is positioned to accept the perspective the composer has deemed to be valid. The use and abuse of power, the use of manipulation to gain power and the contrast between public and private personas are explored through the portrayal of conflicting perspectives. It can be seen that the responder is positioned to †¦.. the point you’re trying to make is that the use of conflicting perspectives allows for some ambiguity in the portrayal of these themes but you might then say that ‘ultimately we are positioned to accept that†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ and then you could specify exactly what. Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar demonstrates conflicting perspectives on the nature of power. Shakespeare utilised this play as a commentary on the political situation of the time regarding the monarch of Elizabeth I. Elizabeth had gradually increased her power at the expense of the aristocracy and House of Commons, giving rise to political disputes. Likewise, Caesar has been granted dictatorial powers in the Roman Republic but he is not presented to have misused his power. Instead, Caesar’s hubris is more prevalent this which is seen to be the catalyst for the potential misuse of power. Brutus is aware of this and his idealism for a Roman Republic leads him to join the conspirators, shown in his soliloquy in Act Two Scene One. Brutus uses extended metaphors of a ladder and serpents in order to question Caesar’s ambition in conjunction with power. Brutus states  that ‘young ambition’s ladder [cause him to] look into the clouds, [leading him to] scorn the base degrees by which he did ascend’. Brutus also considers Caesar ‘a serpent’s egg, which would grow mischievous, and kill him in the shell’. The imagery of killing before birth reveals that Brutus is willing to remove Caesar before any tyrannical tendencies take place, suggesting that the assassination was unjust. Brutus would later attempt to justify the assassination that ‘because [Caesar] was ambitious, I slew him’. The conditional language and use of logos in demonstrating a clear cause and effect convinces the audience at Caesar’s funeral oration that the assassination was just, based on the declarative mood in their reaction that ‘Caesar was a tyrant’. However an alternative perspective is displayed through Antony. Even with Caesar’s dictatorial powers he has not seen any way in which he has abused his position, forming the basis of his defence of Caesar in his funeral oration. He uses conditional language by questioning ‘if Caesar was ambitious’ and he uses logos in presenting Caesar’s lack of ambition. Antony draws on examples such as ‘he thrice refused [the crown]’ and when coupled with the rhetorical question ‘did this in Caesar seem ambitious?’ he questions the view of the responders by providing a logical response to Brutus’ ill-based accusations. Antony is able to demonstrate Caesar’s lack of ambition and hence Caesar’s just use of power for the good of Rome. As a result Shakespeare presents two conflicting perspectives on power which generates diverse and provocative insights into his context. George Orwell’s Animal Farm also evokes similar ideas but its context as an allegory for the Stalinist rule of Soviet Russia must also be considered. George Orwell explores the notion of the corrupting nature of power in his allegorical novel (or political satire) ‘Animal Farm’. The allegory is a criticism of Soviet Communism tracks the rise of Napoleon, representing Stalin after the overthrow of Mr Jones, representing the last Tsar of Russia, Nicholas II. and how his power is seen to slowly corrupt prompting in its abuse. At the beginning of the allegory/fable the animals are seen to be harbouring discontent against their autocratic ruler of Mr Jones through their plotting to overthrow humans out of their farm. Major states with a declarative mood that they should ‘remove Man from the scene, and the root cause of hunger and overwork is abolished forever’. This connotes that Mr  Jones has abused his powers in allowing the poor conditions for his working animals. After the animals have revolted against Mr Jones the original commandments of Animalism are created, calling for the equal distribution of power as ‘all animals are equal’. However Napoleon’s use of intimidation through brute force upsets the equality and with the exile of Snowball Napoleon is left in a position of absolute power. Napoleon’s guard dogs are used as a motif to symbolise his power as even after his initial deployment of his dogs against Snowball ‘the dogs growled so threateningly that they accepted his explanation without any further questions’. Napoleon’s power is also seen to corrupt him and he is ironically presented as to be simply a replacement for Mr Jones. Through reverting the name of the farm back to ‘Manor Farm’ Orwell perceives that the situation the animals are in do not differ from the reality of life under Mr Jones. Napoleon’s ‘transformation’ into a man is seen to represent this as the animals ‘look from pig to man, from man to pig, and from pig to man again, but already it was impossible to determine which was which’. The repetition and inversion of the order of ‘pig’ and ‘man’ highlight the confusion the animals have over their present reality. This illustrates the corruption of power in Napoleon and with this Orwell is suggesting that life under Stalin was no different than from Russia’s previous autocratic ruler of Tsar Nicholas II. Consequently Orwell’s use of conflicting perspectives over the issue of power in an allegory is able to provide a commentary of Orwell’s perspective of the nature of Stalinist Russia. Good – you clearly analyse and show the changed perspective of Napoleon but revise and consider how to clearly identify the conflicting perspectives. Julius Caesar demonstrates how a conflict between public and private personas can result in conflicting perspectives of characters. Act One Scene One introduces the idea of conflicting perspectives within personas with the Senators Flavius and Murellius and their perception of the commoners. The Senators clearly see the commoners as inferior with their descriptions as of them as ‘vulgar’ and ‘the basest metal’. This juxtaposes the positive diction used by them to describe the commoners as ‘good countrymen’ when they are in the public sphere, suggesting that the patronising tone used had the sole purpose of gaining support from the commoners. However Antony is  the character that conceals the deepest division between public and private personas, demonstrating his Machiavellian nature. His public persona is presented toas supportive of the assassination by being supportive of the conspirators as he states that ‘it would become me better than to close in terms of friendship with thine enemies’. Give a bit more info of context. Who does he say this to? However his antithesis is indicated through his ‘hope that you shall give me reasons why and wherein Caesar was dangerous’. How? This is implied to be a signal of support from Antony towards the conspiratorshow? but it hid his inner motives of his desire offor conflict against the conspirators. His private persona is presented to be heavily opposed to the assassination and he calls for ‘havoc’ and ‘let slip the dogs of war’, with the violent imagery clearly stating his intention and perspective of the assassination. Mention that this is in a soliloquy before the oration and what we learn. His private persona is reflected in his funeral orations where he repeatedly implies his disagreement with the assassination but never explicitly stating his stance. Initially he states that he ‘comes to bury Caesar, not to praise him’, but this is juxtaposed with his questioning tone and use of rhetorical questions that serve the purpose of suggesting the lack of justice in the assassination. Eg? His private persona comes into full view by the conclusion of his oration where through pathos he calls the ‘stones of Rome to rise up and mutiny’. Link to the dogs of war comments.This perspective of encouraging mutiny is therefore in direct contrast with his interactions with the other conspirators. Explain where. As a result conflicting perspectives are shown also within the characters in order to generate diverse and provocative insights. Similarly, Jason Reitman’s satirical film Thank You For Smoking also projects similar ideas regarding public and private personas. The film is a satire onof the perception of cigarettes and tobacco but not to the extent in which it is condoned, due to the fact that no character in the film is seen smoking. Conflicts in private and personal personas are seen through the protagonist of Nick Naylor with his public support of cigarettes and questioning of its associated health issues, juxtaposed with his private persona where he openly admits to smoking-related health issues. This issue is displayed through Naylor’s criteria for winning an argument, that ‘I  proved that you’re wrong. And if you’re wrong, I’m right’extend this quote with film techniques used at this point. His public persona has a distinct lack of integrity as he provides false promises on the nature of his employer, the Academy of Tobacco Studies. This is shown at the beg inning of the film where on a talk show he promises ‘50 million dollars to encourage kids not to smoke’. This is done despite it being completely contradictory to the perspectives of his employer who asks him ’50 million dollars? Are you out of your mind?’ The anger of his boss on promising the sum of money is seen through the closeup of his face as well as his questioning tone. However Naylor’s private persona admits to the health issues associated with smoking. In a meeting with the MOD group (Merchants of Death, constituting people from America’s firearms, alcohol and tobacco industries) in the film they discuss deaths directly attributed to their industry in order to gauge America’s most hated industry. Naylor boasts that ‘my product puts away 475 000 a year’ and he gloats that the level of alcohol related deaths is miniscule in context ‘100 000 in a year? Wowee a tragedy. Excuse me if I don’t exactly see terrorists getting excited kidnapping anyone from the alcohol industry’. The unconcerned facial expression coupled with the mid-close up shots of Naylor displaying no emotion and the comparison of deaths to terrorism demonstrates the complete disregard of human life. You need to comment on the use of satire as a way to highlight the conflict between what is said on screen and the purpose of the film maker. This is exemplified by the fast transition of shots in the conversation indicating the competitiveness of the argument. This scene is a satire ?on the perceived lack of moral concern demonstrated by tobacco industry through its use of absurdist behaviour, mainly instigated by Naylor. Therefore Naylor’s contradiction between his public and private personas is also another medium used by Reitman in order to convey conflicting perspectives on his satire of the tobacco industry. Manipulation is one central concern in Julius Caesar which generates conflicting perspectives. Cassius is able to manipulate Brutus into firstly believing the idealism of his cause and thus joining the conspirators and enacting Caesar’s death. Brutus is presented to be an idealistic character as he ‘loves the name of honour more than I fear death’. The antithetical  language of ‘honour’ and ‘death’ demonstrates that he has cast himself as the honourable idealist, and when coupled with Brutus’ fear that Rome ‘chooses Caesar as their king’ Cassius is free to manipulate him into joining the conspirators. He uses hyperbole to exaggerate Caesar’s status and he juxtaposes images of him being both a ‘Colossus’ and a ‘sick girl’ in order to prove his weakness to Brutus. Cassius also appeals to his idealistic nature. His monologue contains the epistrophy epistrophe ‘one man’ that reveals Caesar’s true power, that only ‘one man is Rome’. This position is different to the democratic Roman Republic that Brutus represents and admires and he is slowly manipulated to join the conspirators. Manipulation is also seen to demonstrate the power of language, seen through the differing funeral orations of Brutus and Antony. Initially the commoners are irate onabout Caesar’s assassination and the declarative mood presented through ‘we will be satisfied’ highlights their anger but it also serves as a point of juxtaposition. Brutus’ use of logos convinces the crowd that he ‘loved Rome more’ than Caesar through posing rhetorical statements that question the loyalty of the commoners and Caesar’s supposedly true nature. Immediately following his oration the commoners immediately affirm that ‘Caesar was a tyrant’, with this declarative statement juxtaposing heavily with the sentiment displayed in the first line of the scene. However the crowd are manipulated again by Antony to subscribe to his point of view. He adopts a questioning tone throughout his oration in inquiring onabout the validity of Brutus’ statements in order to not directly oppose Brutus but let his audience question their own perspectives. He repeats the phrase ‘Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honourable man’ but the repetition of the phrase combined with the logos in his argument in proving Caesar’s lack of ambition therefore hint at the invalidity of Brutus’ argument. Further on in his oration Antony also uses metaphor to describe Brutus, that he was ‘Caesar’s angel’. This image is contrasted with the assassination, the ‘most unkindest cut of all’ and this contributes to the sentiment of betrayal with Brutus that assists in manipulating the audience. By the conclusion of the speech the commoners are united with one common purpose, shown in the stage direction in that all the commoners state ‘We’ll mutiny [against Brutus]. Anto ny’s rapid manipulation of the crowd demonstrates the power of language  and how it can be used to shape perspective. The manipulation of the animals in Animal Farm also conveys similar sentiment. Orwell utilises a cyclical structure of the allegory in order to demonstrate the power of manipulation instigated mainly by the antagonist of Napoleon and his spokesperson of Squealer. Orwell’s use of the text as an allegory of Soviet Russia creates a chilling context for the reader due to the fact that manipulation was repeated in Stalin’s rule of Russia, leading to the subjugation of the citizens of the Soviet Union. The pigs of Napoleon and Snowball quickly establish themselves as the superior class in the new ‘classless’ society of Animalism. Their superior intellect immediately allows them to create a simplified maxim for Animalism, which was to be ‘four legs good, two legs bad’. The sheep, representing the uneducated class, immediately begin to circulate this simplified form of Animalism and their attitude is reflected in the sheep ‘bleating this onfor ho urs on end’. The onomatopoeia exemplifies the repetitive nature and submissiveness in accepting this maxim and thus of the commands set by Napoleon throughout the allegory. Motif as well? The commandments of Animalism is used as a vehicle to demonstrate the manipulation of the animals. The commandments are changed repeatedly throughout the allegory to manipulate the common animals and their ‘poor memory’ as well as their naivety contributes to their ultimate acceptance of the new norm. The first notion of this manipulation is done when the pigs move and reside in the farmhouse. The new commandment reads ‘no animal shall sleep in a bed with sheets’, with the ‘sheets’ clause added. The character of Clover demonstrates the naivety of the animals in general as she ‘had not remembered if it mentioned sheets, but as it was there on the wall, it must have done so’. The high modality of ‘it must have done so’ contrasts her failure to rememb er the commandment. Squealer’s immediate entry in justifying the change in the commandment is another example of manipulation as he uses his intellectual superiority and logos in order to influence his listeners. He states that a bed ‘is simply a place to sleep in’ and not a physical construct and his argument juxtaposes the affirmation at the establishment of Animalism that the commandments were ‘unalterable laws’. The death of the character of Boxer also reveals the extent of Napoleon’s manipulation. Boxer is a follower of Napoleon throughthe adoption of the motto ‘Napoleon is always right’ which, when combined with his hardworking nature, should warrant great care and respect from the pigs. However when Boxer falls ill he is taken to the ‘horse slaughterer’ to be killed in exchange for money. This reality, witnessed by the animals, contrasts the explanation of Squealer in that ‘the van had previously been the property of the knacker, and had been bought by the veterinary surgeon’. By the conclusion of the allegory Napoleon’s power has become increased to such an extent that even the commandments of Animalism are shown to reflect the changes in that ‘all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others’. The paradoxical nature of this statement juxtaposes the original idealistic thinking based behind the creation of Animalism and demonstrates the extent of the manipulation of the animals. The animals are not aware that they are living in conditions very similar to life under Jones which forms the basis of Orwell’s cyclical structure of the allegory. The bending of the truth by the pigs as well as the willingness of the animals to accept this reality highlights the vast extent and impact of manipulation. Thus manipulation is another medium in which conflicting perspectives can be revealed. Composers of texts use conflicting perspectives in order to generate diverse and provocative insights into their context. These perspectives are shown to favour one side and they can provide an insight into the opinion of the composer on issues affecting their context. This is seen in Julius Caesar, Thank You For Smoking and Animal Farm where the composers, through their portrayal of power, public and private personas and manipulation that form the basis of conflicting perspectives. This is excellent overall. However, there are things you can do to improve. The analysis of AF is almost longer than Caesar. You must mention the end of Caesar in your analysis. There doesn’t seem to be at least one quote from Acts 4 or 5. Find a couple and use them. In the first body paragraph on power, use quotes for Antony from elsewhere in the play, not just the oration. Eg comment on the deification of Caesar at the start and how stage directions are used by Shakespeare to contrast the views of the commoners/Antony/ and Cassius/Brutus and others. Give an example of where we  see Caesar’s hubris ‘northern star’†¦ and contrast that with his humility elsewhere. Shakespeare is always offering contrasting views and creating ambiguity. However, comment also on how we are finally positioned at the end of the play. If discussing Brutus’s hubris, mention the tragic structure. Contrast the way this character is presented at the beginning, middle and then the end when we see the consequences of both his idealism and hubris when he fights with Cassius and dies and then the final comments by Antony. When writing about Antony, consider the way he is presented as loyal, then angry and vengeful about the murder of Caesar, then pitiful, then scheming and manipulative. Take quotes from a range of places throughout the whole play to give the reader a better understanding of the narrative arc of this character. The final paragraph on AF could be edited. It is very long and veers away from the idea of conflicting perspectives in the middle and becomes an analysis of the novel. Throughout the discussion, you could make links between it and Caesar to remind the reader of your point. Email if you have questions.

One Big Happy Family :: essays research papers

The story that I chose to write about was "One Big Happy Family," by Anndee Hochman. The story is about a young woman whose family life seemed to be the American dream, for those of us looking in from the outside. Her family owned a house in the city like most of us and a house on the beach. The house on the beach was unique with its architecture anomalies, which made the house more a mix and match of parts than like her normal home in the city. The whole family, including relatives from afar, would gather there during the summer to spend time with each other. When in actuality behind her family’s unity, was a demand for conformity to her family’s way of life and thinking. The author finally realized that in order for her to find happiness she had to look within herself and learn to listen to her feelings. Once she learns this lesson, she will be able to break the bounds of her family’s conformity and find the peace of mind that she has always longed fo r. Several of the stories throughout this chapter discuss different myths of "One Big Happy Family," however it all seems to come back to the individual, and what they believe in. Anndee’s house is unique with its red picket fence, a bathroom with two doors, bedrooms surrounded by paper thin walls, and no bedroom doors. Also a glass panel window that was built into a wall that separated the living room from the kitchen. An added feature left behind from years of construction and now disregarded but adding to the overall character of the house. These unique fixtures and anomalies were what made the trip to the house worth the voyage each year from the city. They were thrust into an alien environment completely different from what they were used to. The whole house was set up with unspoken rules that they all abided by without question. The rooms were assigned to a particular family member, group, or couples. The topics of conversation were predictable and planned to the point that they all knew what would be acceptable answers and replies to each topic they discussed. After reaching adulthood Anndee began to develop her own opinions and thoughts that did not necessarily coincide with her family’s view. Anddee began to explore her own sexuality and discovered that she preferred the company of women to that of men.

Multiculturalism vs. Melting Pot Essay

Before I begin discussing these two topics, we must fully understand what they mean. The definition in the dictionary states that, multiculturalism consists of, relates to, or is designed for the cultures of several different races. Whereas the word melting pot is not a term used in the dictionary. For the purpose of this assignment I will make up my own definition for both these terms. Multiculturalism to me is defined as abundant amounts of cultures in one area. Or it is simply a society where many different types of people with diverse cultural backgrounds, religion, and traditional values and beliefs cohabit peacefully with one another. It is the unification of diverse cultures, multilingual talents, and the ability to accept one another. (Although this may not actually happen) Others see it as the union of all creeds, colors, religion that is free from prejudice, an open minded group of people who are able to step beyond themselves and explore each others interests while keeping their own interests and lastly allowing oneself and others the flexibility to be able to express one’s thoughts and definition of culture that is free from ridicule. The term multiculturalism is usually used in reference to Canada more than it is to the U.S. However if we take a closer look, America is also multicultural, but they believe in the melting pot idea. Multiculturalism does not mean the same thing to everyone. Before we can address the advantages or disadvantages of a multicultural society, we need to understand these differing viewpoints. Melting pot: The word melt can mean to be dissolved. The image that I get when I think about this term, is a group of many different; diverse people that are being assimilated or dissolved into one people, the American people. It is where newcomers melt into the American way of life. Basically  it is viewing yourself as an American first, and then your ethnic background second. This is the exact opposite idea from that of multiculturalism. However some multiculturalists consider the â€Å"melting pot† a metaphor for oppressive assimilation. To them, the only way you can melt in the pot is by assimilating–becoming similar to–the dominant or â€Å"hegemonic† white culture. Strengths and Weaknesses: Multiculturalism: First we must understand that no nation is born multicultural. It is the people and way of life that determine this factor. Multiculturalism was set up as a national symbol for Canadians and fulfilled the need for a distinctive Canadian identity. As a political tool multiculturalism has several uses. The meeting of different life views, cultures, beliefs, religions, ethnic habits, etc. Diversity is about accepting the whole person including the culture he or she brings – the customs, gestures, dress, voice quality, patterns of speech, hairstyles etc. Differences are okay to have. Multicultural diversity is what results of centuries of immigration. All Canadians, including the Native People, can trace their origins to an immigrant past. Only about 16% of today’s Canadian citizens were born outside of Canada. By recognizing multiculturalism as a fundamental characteristic of Canadian identity and national heritage, Canadians of all cultural origins have the opportunity to contribute to the common goals of equality, sharing, social justice and economic prosperity. It also maintains ancestral ethnic and cultural ties while simultaneously feeling a part of Canada. Culture helps people understand life; from the different types of background and races is how we educate ourselves and look at things from a different perspective. Given these strengths and advantages, it does not indicate that there are no flaws in this system. The following reasons are a perfect example of this. In the unpleasant world of practical politics, multiculturalism encourages quotas over competition. That is the problem: On the one hand, they want all heritages and groups to be equal. On the other hand, they want some to be more equal than others. Canada is a multicultural nation, but unfortunately both racism and prejudice still exist. When looked at, you are viewed in terms of some group category: race, ethnicity, class, gender, nationality, etc One cannot take up multiculturalism and expect students to see each other as individual human beings. Historically, diversity has torn nations apart. Finally a successful multicultural society is one that learns to appreciate the needs of others and not just their own cultural needs. Melting Pot: The idea of a ‘Melting Pot’ is to provide an environment where new ideas can be advised and advanced, where people can invite others to share their influential thinking, where people can discover others working in similar areas and with whom they may wish to begin teamwork, where public and private exchanges can occur as we all try to move forward in our thinking and experience. With this idea we are more patriotic to the Country that we live in, like in America people consider themselves American above all. It is a way of understanding American identity. Puts everyone as an equal person by bringing them together as one culture, because they are know as an American. Causes America to put up a flag of all the cultures represented. America is a melting pot because all different cultures are represented here. Immigrants from all over the world gather together in the â€Å"land of opportunity† to share their ideals, however this is not always good and it has flaws just like the multicultural system. We are all different, inside and outside, to be melted away means to take away something. By being in a melting pot system we don’t have the chance to educate ourselves and our children about history, and the different cultures, which they should obviously know about. Although the immigrants are considered as an American in this system, they know that when asked who they are, they should respond with the answer: â€Å"I am American.† However inside they realize that their background is not really an American, because they were not born in America. I think that some Americans (those born in America, feel challenged by the other people.) We often forget about who we are, because in this system it is considered second.