How To Become a Great Self-Editor 7 Questions To Improve Your Writing - The Writers For Hire

HOW TO BECOME A GREAT SELF-EDITOR: 7 QUESTIONS TO IMPROVE YOUR WRITING We’ve said it before, and we’ll probably say it again: Editing is an essential part of the writing process. Every writer from the bestselling novelist to the complete novice can benefit from a thorough review by a critical, impartial eye. Of course, it’s hard to be critical and impartial about your own work. This is also true for every writer, which is why professional editors exist. This doesn’t mean it’s impossible to become a skilled self-editor. Like writing, editing is a skill: The more you practice, the better you get and the easier it is to approach your own writing with a set of fresh eyes. Want to sharpen your editorial skills? Here are a few questions to ask as you review your draft: 1. Is each sentence as clear as it could be? Each sentence in your writing should say exactly what you want it to say. Vague details, confusing descriptions, or meandering run-ons can cloud your meaning and confuse your reader.   Hands down, the best quick reference to concise writing is (still) Strunk and White’s The Elements of Style. 2. Are there any sentences that feel clunky or awkward? A good way to check: If you suspect that a sentence is a bit unwieldy, read it aloud. Nine times out of ten, you’ll know if you need to revise. 3. Have I varied my sentence length? Too many short sentences can make a piece of writing feel choppy. Too many long ones can feel rambly. Ideally, your writing should have a good balance of short and long sentences. 4. Can I eliminate any passive sentences? Passive sentences are almost always a no-go. Rewrite them. Here are a few examples:Passive:   â€Å"The book was written by a ghostwriter. Active: â€Å"A ghostwriter wrote the book† Passive: â€Å"The patient was examined by the doctor.† Active: â€Å"The doctor examined the patient.† Passive: â€Å"Each component is designed and built by an experienced engineer.† Active: â€Å"Experienced engineers design and build each component.† 5. Does every paragraph begin with an interesting sentence? The first sentence of each paragraph should make you want to keep reading. As you review each paragraph in your draft, look for opening sentences that surprise, raise questions, or build suspense.  Ã‚   6. Does every paragraph â€Å"flow† into the next? Look for a logical progression of ideas. Does each paragraph feel connected to the one before it? The one after it? Are there any paragraphs that seem like they don’t â€Å"fit† together? Any jarring or abrupt shifts in time, subject matter, point of view, or tense? 7. Does this â€Å"sound† like you wanted it to? When you started writi ng, you probably had an idea of the tone, or â€Å"voice,† you were aiming for. Read your writing aloud. Do you want your writing to sound more casual and conversational, like you’re chatting with a friend? Use lots of contractions, start sentences with â€Å"and† and â€Å"but,† and don’t be afraid of sentence fragments. Want something more formal? Stick to English-class grammar rules and sentence structures instead.

The conflicting responses, which the character of Shylock provokes in the audience Essays

The conflicting responses, which the character of Shylock provokes in the audience Essays The conflicting responses, which the character of Shylock provokes in the audience Paper The conflicting responses, which the character of Shylock provokes in the audience Paper Essay Topic: Play Written sometime between 1596 and 1598, The Merchant of Venice is classified as both an early Shakespearean comedy and as a problem play; it is a work in which good triumphs over evil, but serious themes are examined and some issues remain unresolved. In the play, Shakespeare wove together two classic folk tales, one involving a vengeful, greedy creditor trying to take a pound of flesh, the other involving a fight for the hand of a rich princess with a correct choice among three chests and thereby winning his companion. Shakespeares writing of the first tale centres on the Jewish moneylender Shylock who seeks a literal pound of flesh from his Christian opponent, the generous, faithful Antonio. In Shakespeares A Merchant of Venice, the character Shylock provokes conflicting responses in the audience. Throughout the play, Shylock is portrayed as being a greedy, malicious and bitter man, who is hated for his religion and his money lending. However, the audience is still able to recognise an injustice in the way he is treated. Shylock is shunned from society, principally because of his Jewish background. Therefore, the audience have conflicting feelings towards the character. Shakespeare achieves this effect through varying language techniques and dramatic devices. In this essay I will be looking at the different perceptions of Shylock and how Shakespeare controls them in order to answer the question; is Shylock a victim or a villain? The audiences perceptions of Shylock vary dramatically throughout the play. For example, Shakespeare portrays Shylock as being racist, selfish, profane and without integrity in Act 1 Scene 3, during Shylocks aside. Shylock tells the audience: I hate him for he is a Christian. This quote shows Shylock as being racist. Another quote from the aside shows the character as being without integrity: If I can catch him once upon the hip, I will feed fat the ancient grudge I bear him. This quote also shows him as being grudge bearing, ruthless and unforgiving. Passages such as this aside give the audience the perception that Shylock is the villain of the play. Shylock is petty in his hatred of Antonio, and this gives the audience a bad impression of the character. However, the audiences opinion of Shylock changes as the play continues. For example, the audience take a more sympathetic view to Shylock in Act 3 Scene 1. Shylocks To bait fish withal speech is a pivotal moment in the play, and subsequently, is pivotal to the audiences perceptions of Shylock. The speech shows Shylocks sensitive side and sways the audience into thinking that he has reason to be embittered and that perhaps Antonio, plus the other men on the Rialto are the villains of the play, and Shylock is indeed a victim. Certain quotes from the play, such as the comparisons between Christians and Jews: If you prick us, do we not bleed and fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons are particularly powerful moments in the speech and appeal massively to the audiences empathetic side. Overall, the audiences perception of Shylock swings from dislike to sympathy, and from contempt to understanding. Therefore, throughout the play it is hard to suggest whether Shylock is a victim or a villain. During Shakespeares time, anti-Semitism was very prominent. Christians hated Jews for their religious backgrounds and principally, the Jewish role in the death of Jesus Christ. Because of this hatred, many Jews were shunned from society and discriminated against because of their religion. For example, when a Portuguese Jew called Roderigo Lopez was accused of plotting to kill the Queen. During the trial, Lopez was called worse than Judas himself and of a religious profession fit for any execrable undertaking. However, far worse, the Judge himself referred to Lopez as that vile Jew. In The Merchant of Venice Shylocks character reflects the feelings harboured towards the Jews at the time. In the play, Shylock is not allowed to prosper and is particularly denied by Antonio, a wealthy Christian. It is this rivalry between Shylock the Jew and Antonio the Christian that provides the spine of the play. In my opinion, Shakespeare used this rivalry to write the play and in turn highlight the prejudice that was very strong at the time towards Jewish people. Speeches and sections of the play, such as Shylocks speech To bait fish withal portray the message that the Jews are spurned by society, however, they also ask the question of why the Jews are hated when there are so many similarities between Jews and Christians? Therefore, I suggest that Shakespeare wrote the play to educate the audience about Jewish people and how they should not be discriminated against because of their beliefs. The relationship between Antonio and Shylock is very heated. This is highlighted in Act 1 Scene 3 when the bond is agreed between the two. Both men dislike each other and compete intensely for they are both in the money lending trade. Moreover, their hatred runs deep due to their conflicting religions. Antonio is a Christian, and Shylock is an orthodox Jew. My first impressions of Shylock are that he is a shrewd businessman with a ruthless attitude. He is strong willed and determined. I also see him as being bitter and resentful. This opinion is based on Act 1 Scene 3, when Shylock agrees the bond with Antonio. This is apparent throughout the scene and is portrayed by the way Shylock is running the situation. He makes it clear that he is in control and the bond is made to seem far more important to Antonio and Bassanio than it is to Shylock. This is a dramatic device used by Shakespeare that is used to create an image of Shylock. Quotes such as: Three thousand ducats I think I may take his bond show Shylock as being care free about a very large sum of money. Words such as may show that it is not necessary for Shylock to take his bond and consequently, he is in control. This, coupled with the characters demeanour throughout the scene paints the picture that Shylock is very clever, wily and assured with his finances. However, Shylocks aside in this scene conveys to the audience that all is not what it seems; Shylock is acting cool about the bond so as to seem carefree. The aside shows Shylocks darker, far more cynical side. As aforementioned, he speaks of his contempt for Antonio as he is a Christian, and perhaps more importantly, he is a moneylender, who charges no interest on his loans, therefore is Antonio is strong competition to Shylock. Because of this rivalry and the hostility between the two men, either would take delight in having any hold over them. The fact that Shylock has this bind in the early stages of the play tells the audience that he is a villain because he has control over another man once the bond is sealed. Moreover, Antonio is a gentleman and is seen as the hero of the play; therefore, his enemy Shylock must be the villain, particularly if he has a hold over Antonio that could threaten his life. Act 3 Scene 1 is a very instrumental part of the play when answering the question; is Shylock a victim or a villain? In this scene, Shylock reports the loss of his daughter to Solanio, Salarino and consequently the audience. Shylocks daughter, Jessica, has fled Venice and Shylocks care with Lorenzo and all of her fathers wealth. This clearly angers Shylock, however this anger is furthered due to Lorenzos religious beliefs he is a Christian. Shylock and his daughter are Jewish, the fact that Jessica should run away with someone who is not of Jewish background enrages Shylock. This is particularly the case as Jessica ran away with a Christian she ran away with someone whose religion had caused her father so much indiscretion and humiliation. In this scene it is ambiguous as to whether Shylock cares more for the money he has lost, or for the loss of his only daughter. For example, quotes such as: I say my daughter is my own flesh and blood show that Shylock is distraught over the abandonment subjected to him by his daughter. Jessica was all Shylock had, and for her to leave him must have been both deeply hurtful and angering. However, there are many quotes further on in the scene when Shylock is discussing his daughters plight with Tubal, who had been searching for Jessica that suggest otherwise. For example: I would my daughter were dead at my foot, and the jewels in her ear: would she were hearsd at my foot, and the ducats in her coffin this quote is a perfect example of how materialistic Shylock is and how he cares more for his money than for the one person in the world he had a real connection with. This quote in particular shows Shylock, as being a villain, as the audience would find it hard to relate to a man who wishes his own daughter be dead, let alone sympathise with such a person, no matter what has brought this wish to his mind. The language used here is extremely vivid. For example, I would she were hearsd at my foot, and the ducats in her coffin. Words such as coffin and hearsd are excellent expression used to really paint a picture in the audiences mind of Shylock being a heartless murderer. Shakespeare makes it this way so as to create a sense in the audiences mind of Shylock stood over his daughters lifeless body, with his riches returned to him. The effect of this on the audiences opinion of Shylock is that of Shylock being ruthless and overwhelmingly materialistic. Consequently, Shylock is seen as a terrible villain. This negative side to Shylocks character is also highlighted in Act 2 Scene 8, when Salanio speaks of how Shylock reacted to his daughters renunciation. Salanio quotes Shylock as saying: A sealed bag, two sealed bags of ducats, Of double ducats, stolen from me by my daughter, And jewels, two stones, two rich and precious stones, stolen by my daughter: justice, find the girl, She hath the stones upon her and the ducats. This quote shows how Shylock is frenetic about the loss of his daughter; however, he is inconsolable over the taking of his wealth and possessions. This shows Shylock to be obsessed by money, and greedy and selfish in his pursuit for wealth. However, half way through Act 3 Scene 1, Shylock has an infinitely poignant speech in which he outlines the prejudices faced by him. This speech confuses the audience over whether Shylock is a villain or a victim. In this speech beginning To bait fish withal Shylock outlines the prejudices facing him and how they have embittered him. This speech appeals to the audiences sympathy and makes the issue as to whether Shylock is a victim or a villain clouded. During the speech, Shylock compares the similarities and differences between himself and Antonio. When explaining why Antonio has shunned him he says: I am a Jew. This is a massively important moment in the play. Here, the audience is at the point where they are most sympathetic for Shylock as he argues that the reason as to why he has been treated badly is simply for his religious beliefs. Shylock is seen as the victim of racial discrimination, which in modern society is seen as utterly disgraceful. Shakespeare then continues to put forward Shylocks case against Antonio by using many figurative language techniques. For example, vivid imagery is used throughout the speech and this is highlighted by quote such as: I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions Here repetition is also used to highlight the fact that aside from their religious backgrounds there is nothing palpably different between Shylock the Jew and Antonio the Christian. Repetition is also used further on in the speech: fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is. This quote is an excellent example of the fantastic imaginary and persuasive language used by Shakespeare. In this quote the audience is on the side of Shylock, the audience realises that he is a victim of racism and can be forgiven for his misdemeanours. This forgiveness is strengthened by Shylock furthering his argument in a far more forceful way as Shakespeare writes an air of defiance into Shylocks persona: if you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? And if you wrong us shall we not revenge? This quote in particular shows that Shylock, and the entire Jewish race are but only human and in almost every way similar to their Christian counterparts. This has the effect on the audience of thinking that if Shylock is not entirely different from the men on the Rialto and Antonio in particular, why do they hate him so? Shakespeare created this speech for the character to enthral the audience by creating two characters who oppose each other and who the audience can identify with. However as an alternative interpretation, I also believe that Shakespeare created this speech for the audience to give a voice to the Jewish community and perhaps give them a chance to persuade the Christian community to understand that Jews should not be discriminated against because of their beliefs, nor should any religious community. Shakespeare, in my opinion was not a racist man, nor was he afraid to shock an audience. I believe that Shylocks speech was designed to both add weight to the conflict between the two men and consequently the two religions and to add weight to the Jewish plight, which in the days of A Merchant of Venice was met with more than a little trepidation. Whilst the speech uses varying technical devices in order to enthral the audience in Shylocks plight, the language of the speech can be very ordinary. The language still naturally holds a Shakespearean tone and rhythm, however many sentences are distinctly colloquial. Shakespeare uses this effect in order to make the character seem human. This will help the audience to relate to Shylock. This, in turn, will encourage the audience to continue to question whether Shylock is indeed a victim or a villain, which will interest them further in the play. The structure of Act 3 Scene 1 is crucial as to whether the audience sees Shylock as a victim or a villain. The structure is worked so as Shylock is seen as a victim one minute and a villain the next. For example, Shylock is seen as a victim in his speech To bait fish withal yet is seen as a villain just minutes in the play later when he is conversing with Tubal about how Antonio has suffered misfortune with his fleet of ships, and is therefore subject to Shylocks clauses as written in the bond. When Tubal explains Antonios disposition to Shylock, he responds by saying: I am very glad of it, Ill plague him, Ill torture him, I am glad of it. This quote shows the villainous side to Shylock in full light. Shylock is cheered by the news of Antonios loss and looks forward to taking his pound of flesh without haste. This structure is one of the main reasons as to why it is unclear to the audience as to whether Shylock is a victim or indeed whether he is a villain. After Act 3 Scene 1, the audience will be unsure as to whether Shylock is a victim or a villain. Shylock will be seen as a victim of racism due to his speech to bait fish withal and how the Christians scorn him, for example the rudeness shown to him by Salario and Salarino in the scene. The audience will also feel sympathetic to Shylock, as the one person in the world he thought he could trust in has abandoned him with almost his entire wealth. However, the audience will also be aware that the character is materialistic, as shown by his response to his daughters fleeing. The audience will also feel that Shylock is viscous and a coward by how he is delighted by the news that Antonio must take the forfeit as written in the bond and Shylock can take a pound of flesh from him. These conflicting responses, coupled with the structure of this particular scene will make it impossible to decide whether Shylock is definitely a victim or definitely a villain. Another scene that contributes particularly to answering the question: is Shylock a victim or a villain? is Act 4 Scene 1 (the court scene). In this scene, Shylock is questioned as to whether he is certain he wants to take his bond, and with it Antonios life. This scene is very dramatic, however, the audience would be relaxed as they would expect Shylock to give in to the pressure placed on him and not take his bond, the audience expects Shylock to show mercy and not be the villain that he seems to be. However, this is not the case until Shylock is forced into negotiating the bond. It is necessary for Shakespeare to not allow Shylock to show mercy to Antonio, as this would be what the audience expects, which of course would make the outcome of the play rather predictable. Instead, suspense is maintained through Shylocks relentless demand of a pound of Antonios flesh. While the audience expects Shylock to capitulate, he does not. This begins to make the audience unsure of the outcome of the play and makes them anxious as to whether the hero, Antonio, will suffer the unthinkable. Portia also maintains suspense. Bassanios new love is acting as a lawyer for Antonio. She is particularly intelligent and is well aware that there are circumstances in the bond that mean Antonios life will ultimately be spared. However, she does not make these legislations known to the court for some time. She does this in order to give Shylock the opportunity to prove that he is not an unforgiving man by sparing Antonios life and by doing this suggesting that he is misunderstood and mistreated by the Christians. Portia waits right up until Shylock is preparing to plunge the knife into Antonios waiting torso before declaring her knowledge: Shed thou no blood, nor cut thou less nor more but just a pound of flesh: if thou takst more or less than a poundthou diest, all thy goods are confiscate. After Portia has declared this, the suspense is cleared. Shakespeare delivers this scene wonderfully, as the audience are certain that Shylock will surrender, until the knife is almost thrust into Antonios chest and Portia prevents the Christians death. The suspense is maintained throughout, and the audience are still unsure as to whether Shylock is a victim or a villain, which keeps them eternally interested in the play. A variety of dramatic devices are also used in Act 4 Scene 1. For example, the structure of the scene is used as a dramatic device. The scene is littered with long, drawn out speeches, made by the varying characters, particularly Shylock as he argues his case, and by Antonio who protests his innocence. The Duke and Portia also have large parts to play in this scene. The different characters tend to speak in turn throughout the scene, as one would expect from a court scene. This creates the sense of an argument. This coupled with some strong points from each corner make it very hard for the audience to conclude as to who is in the wrong. However, the underlying consensus will be that Antonio does not deserve to die for his misdemeanours. This argumentative structure is particularly prominent towards the beginning of the scene. Firstly, the Duke states the case against Shylock and for Antonio, with a speech that is centred on appealing to Shylocks guilty side, and is designed to make him see sense. The speech has a tone of superiority, even at a time when humility would be well advised, as Shylock holds al the cards. The very last line of the Dukes speech highlights this aloofness, when he spits: We all expect a gentle answer Jew. This quote is hugely effective in making the audience sympathetic towards Shylocks cause, as the reference to Shylocks religious beliefs are completely irrelevant to the running of this trial. Following this, Shylock has his chance to speak and does so by insisting that he will secure his bond, and take a pound of Antonios flesh: And by our Holy Sabbath I have sworn to have the due and forfeit of my bond. After both sides have stated their cases, the argument becomes more frantic with the characters remaining stubborn and continuing their argument in short bursts. For example, Bassanio argues with Shylock, suggesting that Shylock is inhumane with rhetorical questions, such as: Do all men kill the things they do not love? It is short and well-timed phrases or questionings such as these, which continue throughout the scene, making it difficult for the audience to conclude as to whether Shylock is a victim or a villain. As an alternative interpretation, these rhetorical questions and short, snappy accusations, which Shylock has no chance to dismiss, may reflect the trial itself. The trial is certainly less than fair, and the pressure that the defending characters put on Shylock is also unnecessary. This is similar to the way Shylock is unable to defend himself from the threats and accusations sent his way. Overall, the structure of the scene makes it very hard for the audience to conclude as to whether Shylock is a victim or a villain. This is due to the opposing arguments being put forward in turn by each member of the scene, thus creating an uncertainty as to who is in the right, or wrong. These arguments are both equally convincing. However, overall, Shylock is made to be seem villainous by the structure of the scene as he is forced to remain stubborn and repel the opposition time after time as their case is argued often and in short and some long bursts, rather than Shylock denying their pleaful requests once only. Shakespeare has structured the scene this way in order for the audience to be unsure of who is in the right. The audience members will be able to identify with both sides of the argument, therefore they will want to follow the play further as the suspense is maintained as to who will prevail, and ultimately who will be the victim, and who will be the villain. As the scene unfolds, Shylock seems to be facing a battle that was lost before he began. The population of the courtroom is against him and his wishes. Shylock faces tremendous pressure from the defenders of Antonio, and Antonio himself, not to mention the Duke (the judge) also. While Shylock seems to be losing his battle, the audience feels ultimately that right has been done, in saving Antonios life, however, there is a sense of injustice as to how Shylock has been treated. Throughout the scene, Shylock is badgered by his opposition as they try to make him feel guilty for claiming what is rightfully his. This is highlighted by quotes such as: Not on thy sole, harsh Jew, thou makst thy knife keen. But no metal can, no, not the hangmans axe, bear half the keenness of thy sharp envy. Can no prayers pierce thee? reasons Gratiano, as he seeks to save Antonio by swaying the mind of Shylock and his conscience. Shylock continues to seek what is rightfully his, when Gratiano outrages: O be thou damned, inexcrable dog. This quote shows that Shylock is being treated awfully during the trial, and the trial is anything but fair. However, the audience will side with Antonio because they will believe that he does not deserve to die for his crime. However, the truth remains that Shylock has been denied the right to a fair trial and is being bullied by the many people who oppose him, just as they bully him on the rialto. This will endear the audience to Shylock, and will make him seem more of a victim than a villain for large parts of this scene. This is highlighted particularly at the beginning of the scene when the audience believe that he will relent and not exact his revenge on Antonio, and when the Duke opens the case with a speech that is very patronising and cruel to Shylock. For example, the aforementioned quote We all expect a gentle answer Jew is the last line in his speech, which will make the audience feel great sorrow for Shylock, as he is seemingly shunned due to his religious beliefs. Shylock is offered compensation in place of the money he has lost, three thousand ducats and more is offered his way in order to save the life of Antonio. However, Shylock denies this opportunity. This shows that Shylock is not as materialistic and greedy as his reaction to the loss of his daughter had suggested. His reasoning highlights this: If every ducat in six thousand ducats were in six parts and every part a ducat I would not draw them; I would have my bond. This shows Shylock to have some morals, he will stand by his beliefs, however, this is contradicted as his beliefs involve the murdering of a largely innocent man. Shylock is offered the money repeatedly throughout the scene. However, he denies it upon every occasion it is thrust in his direction. Antonio and his defence offer the money to Shylock repeatedly in order to appeal to his pocket, and his mind, and ultimately forfeit the bond. However, Shylock will not falter. This creates an opinion in the audience of Shylock being a villain. This is because Shylock must ignore the pleading of the Christians each time they remonstrate with him. This means that Shylock will deny Antonio many times, therefore the audience begin to realise that he is serious about exacting his bond, and taking the life of another, thus rendering him a murderer, and a villain of the highest calibre.

Family Life Education Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 1

Family Life Education - Assignment Example As the essay stresses the definition of social support is subject to a lot of debate. The definition of social support varies, the concepts behind the definition similarly diverse. Among the most common definition of social support include: the activity that involves resource provision; a positive outcome implied; social integration; and outcomes that involve a recipient feeling cared for. The concept of social support is however widely applied in many cycles including health behaviour, caregiver burden, and compliance. Sociologists, psychologists, and nurses for example have used the concept in assessing social networks; evaluating social relations; and linking illness outcomes to family assessments respectively. This discussion declares that the global war on terrorism has impacted on many people’s lives, military personnel and their families especially according to Huebner, Mancini, Bowen, and Orthner. Deployment of military personnel to the battle field has an effect on the personnel, their marriages, and their children. Children for example end up experiencing depression, loneliness, and bruised self esteem even as their parents under deployment are stressed up in the wake of imminent harm. Facing such challenging situations without the support of other people is often very tasking, the reason people need to engage external support. The family support system needs to be augmented by the community’s support for better results when dealing with stressful issues. Engaging the community in capacity building and supporting the family is characterised by two main elements; collective competence and shared responsibility according to Huebner et al (nd, p 219). Military men and wome n for example get a lot of support when they form formal and informal networks. Although the resilient informal support network are often preferred by members of society, their formal counterparts play a great role in providing grounds for their (informal support systems) establishment and growth (Huebner et al, nd, p 220). Research has shown that having positive view of community capacity directly impacted positively on depression. In the Air Force, a study showed that suicide rates reduced when members of the AF community engaged in interagency activities (Huebner et al, nd, p220). Also, at the national level, community capacity has notably helped in the establishment of stable social capital and conducive business environments. Community Engaged Parent Education The role of parents in the community and society at large has been one issue that has drawn a lot of concern. This is especially the case with the rapid changes that are taking place in the world today. As such, the paren ting landscape has undergone significant transformation causing the need for similar albeit adequate response in parent education as noted by Doherty, Jacob, and Cutting (nd). In the United States, the need for engaging the community in parent education finds its roots in the establishment of organized parent education initiatives. With time, parenting education started focusing on making the world a better place.

Shawshank Redemption movie review Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Shawshank Redemption movie review - Essay Example In this movie, there is not just a story line, but it has a deeper meaning to the scenario. There is a saving appeal in the title ‘the Shawshank Redemption’. According to the Webster’s Dictionary, redeem means to free from what distresses or harm (Analysis of the Shawshank Redemtion). There is an initial sense of salvation as to what Shawshank might be. However, later in the movie this sense is discovered. According to that sense, the title is an oxymoron. How can it be possible that a prison provides redemption? However, full meaning of the title is gained by the end of the movie. Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins) is a successful banker and the leading character of Shawshank. He is a man who is convicted for murdering her wife and her lover. Due to this murder, he shipped to a maximum-security prison in Shawshank, Maine, for two consecutive life sentences. Shawshank is a depressing and harsh prison, where brutality from the prisoners and the guards is a common place. A ndy becomes friends of a guy who had a fair taste of the prison after spending many years behind the bars. This was Ellis Boyd ‘Red’ Redding (Morgan Freeman). Red is aware of all the ways of smuggling items in the prison for other prisoners. After other prisoners brutalize Andy, Red realizes that he is an unusual person (Brundage). Morgan, as the new recruit who is most likely to crack under the pressure picked up Andy. Soon enough, Andy realized the harsh realities of the prison. The warden was a corrupt, Captain Byron Hadley (Clancy Brown), who led sadistic guards. The inmates were lesser wild than the animals, who would insure their dominance through rape or beatings. Andy had proclaimed his innocence in the beginning of the movie. Throughout the time he was in prison, he does not crack, but he has the hope of his innocence. Apart from being innocent, Andy was smart too. He was always doing something or the other. He helped one of the notorious guards with a tax prob lem in return for which he got chilled bottles of beer for his people who worked in the party. This is how he got the guards and other prisoners on his side (The Shawshank Redemption ). Andy improved the prisons library for those who wanted to study. In a matter of few years, Andy gained the respect of the guards and other prisoner in a matter of few years. Andy was an optimist who would never lose hope. He would also give hope to the other prisoners. He accepts that fact that life has many possibilities, but to fulfill them all, he needs to be free. This movie is the best example of art and music. It is about a man who does not give up on hope, the only thing that cannot be taken away from the external forces. Andy and Shawshank are two things the viewer completely is enveloped with. The first glimpse of the prison you get a fair glimpse of how grim the life can be- because of its utterly gothic structure that assaults you with a sense of foreboding. A prison life is composed of ro utine and debasement. It is Andy’s smartness, which allows him to prevail behind the bars. He wins over the guards and the wardens through his skills of banking. He keeps and eye on most of the staff of the prison (The Shawshank Redemption (1994)). Andy is raising funds for his undertaking. He is very patient about it and is steadily writing weekly letters to the state officials until he gets what he is expecting. Slowly and carefully, ‘the Shawshank Conspiracy’

Dysfunctional Families in Today’s World Essay Example for Free

Dysfunctional Families in Today’s World Essay Children are supposed to grow up together with their parents. A family environment helps them not to feel depress(ed). They learn that their feelings and needs are important and can be expressed. Children growing up in such supportive environments are likely to form healthy, open relationships in adulthood. Family dysfunction can be any condition that interferes with healthy family functioning. In most families, there occurs some periods of time where functioning is impaired by stressful circumstances. These stressful events could be a death in the family or a parents serious illness, among others. But for healthy families, the moment the crisis is over, then normal functioning resumes. In dysfunctional families, however, problems tend to be chronic. The children then do not consistently get their needs. As a result, the negative patterns of parental behavior tend to be dominant in their childrens lives. Healthy families are not families who never argue or have disagreements. These families may have yelling, bickering, misunderstanding, tension, hurt, and anger but not all the time. In healthy families, emotional expression is allowed and accepted. Member of the family can freely ask for and give attention. Rules tend to be made explicit and remain consistent, but with some flexibility to adapt to individual needs and particular situations. Healthy families allow for individuality; each member is encouraged to pursue his or her own interests, and boundaries between individuals are honored. Children from healthy families are consistently treated with respect, and do not fear emotional, verbal, physical, or sexual abuse. Parents can be counted on to provide care for their children. Children are given responsibilities appropriate to their age and are not expected to take on parental responsibilities. Finally, in healthy families, everyone makes mistakes; and most importantly, mistakes are allowed. II. The rise of dysfunctional families and its impact in society There are many types of dysfunction in families. Some parents choose to under-function. They leave their children to fend for themselves. On the other hand there are some parents who over-function. These parents seem to never allow their children to grow up and be on their own. Others are inconsistent or violate basic boundaries of appropriate behavior. Below is a brief description of some types of parental dysfunction along with some common problems associated with each. Deficient Parents Deficient parents hurt their children more by omission than by commission. Frequently, it is because of a chronic mental illness or a disabling physical illness that contributes to parental inadequacy. Parental emotional needs tend to take precedence over the needs of the children. The children, on the other hand, are often asked to be their parents caretakers. Thus, children tend to take on the adult responsibilities at a young age in these families. They are robbed of their own childhood, and they learn to ignore their own needs and feelings. Because of this experience, where these children are simply unable to play an adult role and take care of their parents, they thenoften feel inadequate and guilty. These feelings continue into adulthood. Controlling Parents Unlike the deficient parents described above, controlling parents fail to allow their children to assume responsibilities appropriate for their age. Often, the controlling parents are driven by the fear of becoming unnecessary to their children. These parents then continue dominating and making decisions for their children, even if they are already well beyond the age at which this is necessary. This fear leaves them feeling betrayed and abandoned when their children become independent (Forward, 1989). On the other hand, these children of controlling parents frequently feel resentful, inadequate, and powerless. Transitions into adult roles are quite difficult, as these adults frequently have difficulties making decisions independent from their parents. When they act independently these adults feel very guilty, as if growing up were a serious act of disloyalty. Alcoholic Parents Alcoholic families tend to be chaotic and unpredictable. Rules that apply one day do not apply to another one or to the next instance that you happen to be part of. Promises are neither kept nor remembered. Expectations vary from one day to the next. Parents may be strict at times and indifferent at others. In addition, emotional expression is frequently forbidden and discussion about the alcohol use or related family problems is usually nonexistent. Family members are usually expected to keep problems a secret, thus preventing anyone from seeking help. All of these factors leave children feeling insecure, frustrated, and angry. Children often feel there must be something wrong with them and this is the reason that makes their parents behave this way. Mistrust of others, difficulty with emotional expression, and difficulties with intimate relationships carry over into adulthood. Children of alcoholics are at much higher risk for developing alcoholism than are children of non-alcoholics. Abusive Parents Abuse can be verbal, physical, or sexual. Verbal abuse such as frequent belittling criticism can have lasting effects, particularly when it comes from those entrusted with the childs care. Criticism can be aimed at the childs looks, intelligence, capabilities, or basic value. Some verbal abusers are very direct, while others use subtle put-downs disguised as humor. Both types are just as damaging. Definitions of physical abuse vary widely. Many parents, at one time or another, have felt the urge to strike their child. With physically abusive parents, however, the urge is frequent and little effort is made to control this impulse. Striking a child has much to do with meeting the parents emotional needs and nothing to do with concern for the child. Often, parents erroneously justify the abuse as a process of discipline that is intended to help the child. Physically abusive parents then create an environment of terror for the child. This is particularly worse since the violence is often random and unpredictable. Abused children often feel anger. Children of abusive parents have tremendous difficulties developing feelings of trust and safety even in their adult lives. While parents may justify or rationalize verbal or physical abuse as discipline aimed at somehow helping the child, there is no rationalization for sexual abuse. Sexual abuse is the most blatant example of an adult abusing a child purely for that adults own gratification. Sexual abuse can be any physical contact between an adult and child wherein that contact must be kept secret. The demonstrations of affection that occurred then such as hugging, kissing, or stroking a childs hair that can be done openly are quite acceptable and even beneficial. When physical contact is shrouded in secrecy then it is most likely inappropriate. Sexual abuse happens to both boys and girls. This act is perpetrated by both men and women. It cuts across lines of race, socioeconomic level, education level, and religious affiliation. In most cases, sexual abuse is part of an overall family pattern of dysfunction, disorganization, and inappropriate role boundaries. Responsibility for the sexual abuse in all cases rests entirely with the adult. No child is responsible for being abused. Most sexually abused children are too frightened and scared of the consequences for themselves and their families. In most cases, they do not risk telling another adult what is happening. As a result of this bottling-up, they grow into adulthood carrying feelings of self-loathing, shame, and worthlessness. They tend to be self-punishing and have considerable difficulties with relationships and with sexuality. When problems and circumstances such as parental alcoholism, mental illness, child abuse, or extreme parental rigidity and control interfere with family functioning, the effects on children can sometimes linger long after these children have grown up and left their problem families. Adults raised in dysfunctional families frequently report difficulties forming and maintaining intimate relationships, maintaining positive self-esteem, and trusting others; they fear a loss of control, and deny their feelings and reality (Vannicelli, 1989). There is a great deal of variability in how often dysfunctional interactions and behaviors occur in families, and in the kinds and the severity of their dysfunction. However, when patterns like the above are the norm rather than the exception, they systematically foster abuse and/or neglect. Abuse and neglect inhibit the development of childrens trust in the world, in others, and in themselves. Later as adults, these people may find it difficult to trust the behaviors and words of others, their own judgement and actions, or their own senses of selfworth. Not surprisingly, they may experience problems in their academic work, their relationships, and in their very identities. In common with other people, abused and neglected family members often struggle to interpret their families as normal. The more they have to accommodate to make the situation seem normal, the greater is their likelihood of misinterpreting themselves and developing negative self-concepts (e. g. , I had it coming; Im a rotten kid). III. The relationship between religion and dysfunctional families Dysfunctional family members have common symptoms and behavior patterns as a result of their common experiences within the family structure. This tends to reinforce the dysfunctional behavior, either through enabling or perpetuation. The dysfunctional family usually suffers from a variety of issues that may require the help of trained professionals. This is in addition to prayer and other spiritual disciplines. Some of those issues include: (1) Individual personality differences and personal issues; (2) Unresolved issues from the past; (3) Marital and family problems due to domestic violence and abuse, infidelity, and poor communication; (5) Financial problems and poverty; (6) Separation/divorce resulting in grief and loss and abandonment issues, depression, and sometimes a lack of financial support; (7) Mental and physical health problems; and (8) Spiritual disconnection. Any of the aforementioned problems can create high levels of distress, and failure to seek help can be lethal. Furthermore, when a major trauma strikes, families are rarely prepared to deal with it, and if they are unaccustomed to seeking outside help, family members may never recover emotionally. Many people stay away from connecting with God in a Christian community because they feel they are not good enough. Maybe they are overly critical of themselves, or maybe they know they have not lived the way God would want them to live. They may be afraid that Christians in church will judge them and reject them, and so they stay away. They say, God couldn’t really love someone like me. God must be angry with me. They could also be very adept at meeting the perceived expectations of others through self-denial. Denial, repression, splitting, and a false sense of self are often well-developed defense mechanisms. The black and white thinking expressed in such conflicting pairs of opposites as God vs. devil, church vs. world, sin vs. righteousness, leads to repression of anything that might possibly be construed as unacceptable. Constant self-monitoring and rigid self control, along with confession of every sin in prayer, are often considered the only means of avoiding divine condemnation. In the literalism characteristic of fundamentalism, an evil thought or feeling is regarded as just as sinful as an evil act. Impulses and feelings may be considered demonic in origin. In truth, religion can play a part in furthering the dysfunction of families. For one who has a dysfunctional family, its teachings of obedience, respect for authority and quiet compliance further enforce the debilitating situation. But when you dig deeper into what religion is, you will see clearly what God wants. Religious Institutions throughout history have used fear, control and manipulation to build kingdoms made by man. They have left many wounded or dead in the battlefield of Satans kingdom. Religion is a powerful tool of the enemy. An extreme example of this is The Taliban and Bin Laden. Religion teaches obedience to law. And Christ teaches grace. But the scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. Galatians 3:22-23. Learning to trust wholeheartedly in God, and depend on Him to break free from whatever bondage, will bring emancipation from these bondages, and make an impact in our broken society. The church should be the one institution where the spirit of fear does not exist and coercion and manipulation are not practiced. IV. Healing dysfunctional families Two centuries ago there was relatively little dispute over the existence of God, or the societally beneficial effect of popular belief in a creator. In the twentieth century extensive secularization occurred in western nations, the United States being the only significant exception (Bishop; Bruce; Gill et al. ; Sommerville). Theists often assert that popular belief in a creator is instrumental towards providing the moral, ethical and other foundations necessary for a healthy, cohesive society. Many also contend that widespread acceptance of evolution, and/or denial of a creator, is contrary to these goals. As he helped initiate the American experiment Benjamin Franklin stated; â€Å"religion will be a powerful regulator of our actions, give us peace and tranquility within our minds, and render us benevolent, useful and beneficial to others† (Isaacson: 87-88). Changes in family life have transformed our society in the last thirty years. One of the biggest has been the virtual disappearance of the male-breadwinner lifestyle and the emerging dominance of the dual-earner couple. Working wives and mothers face questions about the effects of their choices on their childrens welfare and their own health under the strain of the second shift, while their husbands confrontand respond to in a variety of waysnew opportunities to construct a masculine identity not focused exclusively on breadwinning. Leaders in education, business, and government debate what policies should be in place to help people manage their work and family lives and who should bear the cost of work-family management. Changing patterns of family formation and disruption have also created widespread concern and vociferous policy debates. High divorce rates raise questions about the effects of divorce on childrens well-being and future success and how to make blended families work. The problems facing single-parent families have become a focus of policy makers, religious leaders, and the national media. Debates about homosexual unions have led to battles over gay and lesbian marriage in a number of states and many local controversies over what legal rights should be extended to homosexual partners. Delayed marriage and childbearing mean that more American households comprise single adults and childless couples, and remaining childless throughout life has become much more common, fueling concern among some about the decline of the family. All of these changes have led to an increasing pluralism in family life and a new consensus that there are many kinds of loving, caring families. Most people spend some portion of their adult lives outside of a nuclear family, forming and reforming family-like connections periodically over the course of their lives, causing many to rethink long-held assumptions about the necessity of marriage and parenting for adults happiness, security, and well-being. But this pluralism is intensely contested and debated for both moral and social philosophical reasons. Not everyone agrees about what constitutes the good family and what kinds of families are morally legitimate. Many people see the family as the bellwether of our society and find the rapid and numerous changes in family life over the last few decades to be troubling. Some even argue that a devaluing of family life, and especially of lifelong, heterosexual marriage, inevitably leads to a decline of the nation. These debates also focus on questions of resources and inequality. Who has access to the rights that marriage confers? Why does divorce lead to a reduction in women and childrens standard of living, and what can be done to change that? Making Changes Changes in family life have been a central concern for religious leaders, activists, and local communities of faith. Throughout American history, religion and family have been intertwined and interdependent institutions. Congregations, parishes, and synagogues have provided an important context for families to spend time together and have shaped the religious education and moral development of children and youths. Sociologists have long noted that marriage and parenthood make religion more important to people and increase their participation in local congregations. Sometimes, children who come from dysfunctional families continue in their roles because they are waiting for their parents to give their permission; to change. Like most people, parents in dysfunctional families often feel threatened by changes in their children. As a result, they may thwart efforts to change and insist that the children change back. Some specific changes one can do are: (1) Identify painful or difficult experiences that happened during your childhood; (2) Make a list of your behaviors, beliefs, etc. that you would like to change; (3) Next to each item on the list, write down the behavior, belief, etc. that you would like to do/have instead; (4) Pick one item on your list and begin practicing the alternate behavior or belief. Choose the easiest item first; (5) Once you are able to do the alternate behavior more often than the original, pick another item on the list and practice changing it, too; (6) Believe in God’s grace that he will heal all the painful experiences in your list (in no. 1) and pray His love will help you change all the behaviors listed and free you from bondage. References: Bishop, George. (1999). â€Å"What Americans Really Believe, and Why Faith Isnt as Universal as They Think. † Free Inquiry 19(3): 38-42 Bruce, Steve. (2001). â€Å"Christianity in Britain, R. I. P. † Sociology of Religion 61: 191-203. Forward, S. (1989). Toxic parents: Overcoming their hurtful legacy and reclaiming your life. New York: Bantam Books. Gill, R, C. Hadaway and P. Marler 1998 â€Å"Is Religious Belief Declining in Britain? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 37: 507-16 Isaacson, Walter. (2003) Benjamin Franklin: An American Life. New York, Simon Schuster. Meeting the Needs of Dysfunctional Families Catechist, January, (1993) Sommerville, C. (2002) â€Å"Stark’s Age of Faith Argument and the Secularization of Things: A. Commentary. † Sociology of Religion 63: 361-72 Vannicelli, M. (1989). Group psychotherapy with adult children of alcoholics: treatment techniques and countertransference. New York: Guilford Press.

Existentialism :: essays research papers

Existentialism Existentialism is a concept that became popular during the second World War in France, and just after it. French playrights have often used the stage to express their views, and these views came to surface even during a Nazi occupation. Bernard Shaw got his play "Saint Joan" past the German censors because it appeared to be very Anti-British. French audiences however immediately understood the real meaning of the play, and replaced the British with the Germans. Those sorts of "hidden meanings" were common throughout the period so that plays would be able to pass censorship. Existentialism proposes that man is full of anxiety and despare with no meaning in his life, just simply existing, until he made decisive choice about his own future. That is the way to achieve dignity as a human being. Existentialists felt that adopting a social or political cause was one way of giving purpose to a life. Sartre is well known for the "Theatre engage" or Theatre 'commited', which is supposedly commited to social and/or political action. On of the major playwrights during this period was Jean-Paul Sartre. Sartre had been imprisoned in Germany in 1940 but managed to escape, and become one of the leaders of the Existential movement. Other popular playwrights were Albert Camus, and Jean Anouilh. Just like Anouilh, Camus accidentally became the spokesman for the French Underground when he wrote his famous essay, "Le Mythe de Sisyphe" or "The Myth of Sisyphus". Sisyphus was the man condemned by the gods to roll a rock to the top of a mountain, only to have it roll back down again. For Camus, this related heavily to everyday life, and he saw Sisyphus an "absurd" hero, with a pointless existance. Camus felt that it was necessary to wonder what the meaning of life was, and that the human being longed for some sense of clarity in the world, since "if the world were clear, art would not exist". "The Myth of Sisyphus" became a prototype for existentialism in the theatre, and eventually The Theatre of the Absurd. Right after the Second World War, Paris became the theatre capital of the west, and popularized a new form of surrealistic theatre called "Theatre of the Absurd". Many historians contribute the sudden popularity of absurdism in France to the gruesome revelations of gas chambers and war atrocities coming out of Germany after the war. The main idea of The Theatre of the Absurd was to point out man's helplessness and pointless existance in a world without purpose. As Richard Coe described it "It is the freedom of the slave to crawl east along the

John Donne’s Love Poems Essay

John Donne is one of many poets of his time who wrote love poetry. The thing that sets him apart from the others is that he manages to successfully subvert the traditional conventions to his own ends. Each of the secular poems â€Å"The Flea†, â€Å"The Sunne Rising† and â€Å"A Valediction Forbidding Mourning† shows Donne’s verbal dexterity, manipulation of the conventional form and the use of a variety of textual features. For the secular love poem â€Å"The Flea† the conventional form is that the flea is to be used as a symbolism of love. Donne subverts this form and uses the flea for the key point to his argument and to symbolise sex/marriage. In the poem Donne conveys meaning through the rhyming and structure. In each of the three stanza’s the first six lines hold three sets of two rhyming couplets that symbolises the couple (the male and female lover). At the end of stanza’s there is set of three rhymes that is slightly indented which symbolises the union of the flea with the couple. Donne uses hyperbole in line 1, stanza 2 â€Å"†¦three lives in one flea spare†¦Ã¢â‚¬  and again in line 7, stanza 2 where he begins the argument that in killing the flea she commits murder, suicide and sacrilege. This extreme argumentative, exaggeration creates a flow and pace throughout his sustained arguments. The use of religious terminology eg. Cloistered, three live in one flea -holy trinity, sacrilege etc. helps to add an authority from god to the poem and it also elevates the language. Donne also uses repetition line 1, stanza 1†³Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Marke but this flea, and marke in this†¦Ã¢â‚¬ Ã‚  to create a commanding, direct address to the audience. It gives the poem an imperative tone. In this poem the use of rhetorical questions conveys an argumentative tone and in stanza 3, lines 1 and 2 the use of emotive imagery changes the pace of the argument and makes it more personal. Another secular poem, not unlike â€Å"the Flea†, that Donne subverts is called â€Å"The Sunne Rising†. This poem is a â€Å"dawn poem† and the conventional form for such a poem is that the minstrel or lover is sitting outside by the girl’s house serenading the situation of the two lovers as the day breaks. Donne manipulates this form as he places the lover in the girls room and instead of serenading the sun, he curses it. Donne conveys meaning through the structure of the poem. In each stanza the lines are indented or left normal according to what the line talks about. If the lover is talking about things outside the room then the lines are indented. If the lover talks about something inside the room then the lines are left as normal. This creates an expectation as to what will happen in those lines. The last two of the last three stanzas’ has a rhyming couplet symbolising the two lovers. The use of monosyllabic words creates an intense, assertive, masculine tone. The extreme hyperbole and metaphor from stanza 4 lines 1 and 2 â€Å"†¦She is all states, and all princes, I†¦Ã¢â‚¬ supports the tone set by the arrogance used. The pun in line 10, stanza 3 â€Å".. and thou shalt heare all, here in one bed lay†¦Ã¢â‚¬ Ã‚  assists with a flow for the poem and the argument. â€Å"A Valediction Forbidding Mourning† is yet another diverse secular poem by Donne that has been subverted, just as † The Flea† and the † Sunne Rising† had been. The conventional form for a farewell speech is that it should be emotional. Donne manipulates the form by not indulging outbursts or saddens and emotion. The long vowels used eg â€Å"virtuous men†¦twere profanation† subdue the poem and give it a slower pace. The quiet opening of the poem displays alliteration using ms, ns and ss. The light vowels eg. men, friends, breath,  meet etc. go further in subduing the poem. In this poem Donne uses many similes to make his point. In the first stanza he likens the lover’s departure to a death of a virtuous man. This begins his argument convincing his lover that a scene isn’t needed, that their love is beyond separation. Donne contrasts â€Å"the dull sublunary lovers† with his relationship in order to further his argument and create flow for the poem. He also likens their love to gold, the most valuable of the metals. This simile is used to further show the value of their love and to further the argument. The likening of the lovers to a compass is both a paradox and a hyperbole that catches the audience’s attention and creates a startling image. This clever analogy dazzles the audience by its wit and pushes the argument into its last stages. The last analogy of their love is to a circle drawn by the compass. It suggests continuity, perfection, renewal and marriage and finishes the argument with the idea that like the circle that doesn’t end neither will their love. Even within a conventional form it is possible for a clever poet to subvert the conventions. John Donne has done that in three of secular love poems â€Å"the Flea†, â€Å"the Sunne Rising† and â€Å"A Valediction Forbidding Mourning†.