Thursday, January 30, 2020
Leaving home Essay Example for Free
Leaving home Essay Note: I think u should define the authors definition of obligation and loyalty in the introduction or ur understanding of their definitions in terms of ur thesis cuz sometimes its hard to understand the difference b/w the two..and that shouldnt really happen cuz that is the focus of ur essay Red: corrections (make sure u read the sentence wit read stuff cuz the whole sentence had to change sometimes) Blue: comments Yellow highlight: erase those things (not needed) Leaving home is a difficult choice for any individual to make. A decision of this caliber contains conditions of no obligation, enforced obligation, and obligation in conflict with loyalty. Under these circumstances, a citizens loyalty to his/her country ceases to make sense, which is supported by Shklars article, Obligation, loyalty, exile. Judith Shklar, in her essay has evidently analyzed the argument of obligation, loyalty and exile, in regards to emigration. Though there are many unconditional matters to be questioned, the focus of this essay will be on the in my interest to structure (structure of wat, exile?) and define the chosen reasons for exile argued in Shklars article. In ordinary talk the two words loyalty and obligation are generally used interchangeably as if they were identical, but it is Shklars argument that it is important not only to keep them apart but to go on to make clear the distinctions between obligation, commitment, loyalty, allegiance, and fidelity. (Shklar, 182) This essay will support her argument and show how both obligation and loyalty are both principle elements that force a person to exile. Obligation is defined as rule governed conducts and political obligation specifically refers to laws and law-like demands, made by public agencies. (Shklar, 183) When thinking of obligation, one may connect it with loyalty. Many individuals come to the conclusion that obligation exists where there is loyalty, but another view argued by Shklar argues is that it is more rational to keep them separate. Through her extreme examples of exiles such as limiting case, Shklars arguments are adequate and evident. (I dont think u need this sentence, if u want it there, it needs to be reworded-try to maintain one tense-usually present tense) It is an individual right to feel protected by his or her own country, a right for a sense of belonging, and, most importantly, mainly a the right to be protected. With regards to obligation and exile, it is common practice to one would question the importance of justice. Injustice not only cancels obligations and undermines loyalties, however resilient the latter may seem; it also engenders the conflict between obligation and the effective ties that bind us. (Shklar, 197) Hence, if this statement is true,(dont say this ur trying to prove ur thesis, by saying if, ur argument weakens-ur arguments have to be strong) it is reasonable to conclude that justice arises with the presence of both obligation and loyalty. Unfortunately, it has become increasingly difficult to maintain justice due to the rise in swindle, cheating, and lying in government strategy. Betrayal to state and irrational obligation has become another reason why an individual would exile from his or her country. (this sentence doesnt really flow with the essay at this point, but maybe if u reword it, itl work-but seems like its another agrument in itself) Enforcement of law, where forced obligation becomes unbearable, may also lead an individual to exile. The author portrayed this reason of exile through an example of a French army man, Traifis. Traifis was accused of passing secrets to Germans and was convicted and charged accordingly. Through all of this, he still became loyal to obey (wrong word-wat r u trying to say?-protect?) his country, though in reality he was betrayed by his own state. The author finds it difficult to understanding how one could still be loyal to a country without feeling obligated. (this needs to be explained more-the definitions of the 2 cuz its hard to understand the difference at this point, or how they do/dont relate to eachother) His obligation ceased, and he signed up with the army again; this shows that his loyalty is greater than the feeling of obligation. This is a case which Shklar would describe as crazy. (dont need this sentence) It is important to note how Shklar stresses that obligation is a reasoned answer. If one cannot come up with a reasoned answer as to why he or she should obey, then there is no place for obligation to exist. (this is good to put in ur intro to describe the meaning of obligation in the eyes of the authorif not, put it in the beginning of this argument, itll help the reader understand ur argument better) An important point to note is that those who leave home do not necessarily disobey the state, but rather the state has disobeyed them. As ones right to feel safe is taken away, the insecurity drives the citizen away from his or her own land. Shklar uses more specific and extreme cases to strengthen her argument that it is the degree of injustice and cruelty that many ordinary people have been through in the past, and unfortunately many more are victims of same examples today. (u need a more strong concluding sentence and I think u should only uses this lsat point if u give an actual example from the article-if its just a point within her essay, dont say its a specific extreme case-maybe say that she is strong to point out that..) Government conduct is only one of the driving factors of exile, for emotional attachment plays a large part in an individuals actions as well. (this is to tie in the two arguments together, as for the beginning of the sentence, thats wat I understood of the first argument, if its wrong, then change it.jus wanted to give u a idea for a concluding sentence) The emotional attachment to loyalty varies that from obligation. Sklar points out that [t]he emotional character of loyalty also sets it apart from obligation. If obligation is rule driven, loyalty is motivated by the entire personality of an agent. Political loyalty is evoked by nations, ethnic groups, churches, parties, and by doctraines, causes, ideologies, or faiths that form and identify associations. (Shklar, 184). Thus, loyalty is deeply affective and not primarily rational. (Shklar, 184) These are all characters that enhance a persons beliefs and values, and are very essential to ones personality, and, most importantly, affect the persons judgment regarding loyalty. The above mentioned characteristics also give the individual a sense of identity (if this is a quote from the article, it needs to be referenced). As the author argues, political loyalty may survive, but not obligation to obey the law. That is why I assumed that exiles have no obligation to the country that expels them illegally and unconstitutionally, demonstrating how loyalty exceeds obligation. (Shklar, 190) If the state refuses to oblige to citizens responsibility, then in return the citizen is not obligated'(dont use quotes-maybe italisize or bold for affect-only try to use quotes for direct ones, otherwise it gets confusing) to obey its state. The tension of loyalty arises as the terms nationalism, betrayal, fear of its own state, and most importantly exile, are questioned. The physical and emotional abuse of state being the push factor of your exile, makes ones belonging to his/her own country meaningless, and makes the other side (wat is the other side?) seem more prominent. If one is loyal to a country, one may choose to stay, though on the other hand, obligation would not last as long as loyalty. Though it may seem easier to exile (maybe u should use flee the country or something, exile doesnt seem to fit) without feeling obligated to his or her state, but the choice is still difficult to make. When loyalty is questioned, one becomes very pessimistic of his or her own conclusions, as loyalty is a feeling that is not reasoned, but is not irrational. Leaving home is not an easy choice for any individual to make, this point has been now stated several times in this essay and has a stronger meaning than one may think. (I dont think u need this sentence to start of this paragraph) Leaving home can be described by the word exile, which can be defined as: someone who involuntarily leaves the country of which he or she is a citizen. (Shklar, 187). Exile can be caused by poverty, fear, war, betrayal of politics and/or injustice. All these elements in ones mind can be judged by the religion of obligation and loyalty. Suffering the threat of exile can sometimes be worse than a soldier taking off to fight in war. My parents also faced a great obstacle which lead them to face the fear of exile. The life story of my parents that has taken place from country to country, Pakistan to Norway, and Norway to Canada. At a young age, my parents moved from Pakistan to Norway in hope for a bright future. Though they were both loyal to their home country, they felt no obligation to stay and change its unstable political state. My mother joined my father after he had established a business and home, and as years passed they both became good citizens of Norway, and my mother joined the government working for the immigration department. Aside from their own professions, they were both journalists working for their own small community in the city of Oslo. As they worked closer with the state, the feeling of belonging became more uncomfortable. This was a kind of state which did not appreciate your religion and/or culture. Hence, Norway can be described as a very nationalist country. At the age of seven, I was sent to live with my aunt in Pakistan to start school there. It was not the knowledge of math or science that was better, but the knowledge of my religion and culture that was very important to my family. Living in a Caucasian (another word for white) society, my parents were scared that I would not be able to interact with the people that surrounded me due to the difference in our religious and cultural beliefs. As the separation (separation from wat?) was starting to become difficult, my parents were forced to search for another solution. As a child, I cannot recall finding it very difficult to fit it (use another word for fit in-its too casual), but as years passed, I realized the ugly truth of being an outcast, and started noticing little incidents where I was treated different then the rest of the group. My parents had always known this reality, but chose to stay silent, thinking it may be ignored. It became more visible when my teacher started behaving different. I was a good student, and when my participation was greater than the rest of the group, I was simply asked to leave the class. As I left, I left with great pain and humiliation. My parents were well settled with a prosperous business and a good life within our home, though the outside reality of life was very constrained. Though they were fortunate in wealth, they were less fortunate in freedom of expressing their own identity. The struggle to seeking an ethnological society led to a search for a better land, where freedom to be oneself was considered as an important right. This is how I ended up in POL81A at the University of Toronto. My parents packed up everything they had worked hard for over the last twenty-four years and migrated to Canada. Being able to attend Friday prayers at mosque or celebrate Eid with joy or simple things like being able to say I am Muslim, were characteristics that mattered the most for my family. Being able to live in an environment of tolerance, acceptance and multiculturalism is like living in peace after war. It is important to note that my parents always obeyed the state, but they lost their loyalty as they lost their identity. The restricted conditions which forced my family to hide their identity, forced us to exile into a strange country, but in hope for a promised land. Politics has formed its behavior into a universal religion, where its faith depends on loyalty and obligation. Comments: ur last argument was very well written.and made up very well might I add 🙂 neways, I hope my comments help, cuz sometimes I really didnt no how to change some if without really knowing wat the article was about. Good luck!
Tuesday, January 21, 2020
Self-Discovery in Shakespeares King Lear :: King Lear essays
Self-Discovery in King Lear                 Halfway down                Hangs one that gathers samphire, dreadful trade!                Methinks he seems no bigger than his head:                The fisherman that walk along the beach                Appear like mice.      Although this quote from Shakespeare's King Lear is made by Poor Tom to his unknowing father Gloucester about the terrain far below them, it accurately summarizes the plight of the mad king. Lear is out of touch with his surroundings, riding high upon the wave of power associated with the monarchy: even those closest to him are out of reach, viewed with a distorted lens. It is through this lens of madness that Lear views his friends and family, and thus he is stripped of everything before he can realize the folly of his judgment. Reduced to a simple man, Lear is forced to learn the lessons that God's anointed is already supposed to know. This is the purpose of the secondary characters of King Lear; they serve to show the many complex facets of Lear's complex personality, as they force him to finally get in touch with his self-conscious.      For example, the Fool, oddly enough, acts as the voice of reason for the out-of -touch King. He views events critically and thus seems to foreshadow situations that an ignorant Lear is completely oblivious to. This is evident in act 1, scene 1, when a prodding Fool asks the king if he knows the difference between a bitter fool and a sweet fool. When Lear admits that he does not, the Fool attempts to lay it all out in front of him:                 That lord which councelled thee                To give away thy land,                Come place him here by me;                Do thou for him stand.                The sweet and bitter fool                Will presently appear;                The one in motley here,                The other found out there.      The Fool attempts to show the king the folly of his ways. He is essentially calling Lear a bitter fool, insinuating that his foolishness will be the cause of such bitterness. This comment is taken lightly, but only because the Fool is a satire of the king himself, and thus is the only one allowed to criticize him. Lear has a preconceived notion that he will be able to give up all of his land and his throne, and yet still somehow hold on to the power that he is so accustomed to.      Alas, the king does not listen. He continues to believe he still has the power that he has long since conceded. He does not believe that by deviding the
Monday, January 13, 2020
School play – “Heroin Lies”
Drugs and the use of drugs is a common problem with young people in society. The two productions I will be comparing in this essay both run on the theme of drugs. Our play performed in class is called â€Å"Heroin Lies†and this will be compared to â€Å"Junk†a book and then tv programme also running on the theme of drugs. â€Å"Heroin Lies†the play was written by Wayne Denfhy in 1991, compared to â€Å"Junk†written by Melvin Burgess in 1996, and as research I read the original book as I felt it would help me to compare to â€Å"Heroin Lies†. In our performance of â€Å"Heroin Lies†I play the part of ‘David' who is the father of heroin addict Vicky. I had to take up the role as a strict father who wanted his family to be strong and was very dissapointed in his daughter Vicky when she admitted to taking the drugs, however he shares a mutual respect with his other child Jason, who also featured in out perfomance. I watched and read some shows and books to try and find different aspects of fatherhood to make my perfomance spot on, I also made diagrams of my character and would write different aspects of their life around the diagram to try and get to know the part I would be taking up and thei characteristics. To help me in my work I looked for information in many different places, such as the library where I would read books on heroin so that I would feel knowledgeble to the work we were studying. I also went onto the internet and watched tv programmes where I would be able to watch a performance by an actor playing a Dad that could enhance my performance as I would try and learn the way the actors I watched would move and talk etc. In addition to this I would also watch the actions of my own dad to see if any of his characteristics would help me when rehearsing for the part of David. To help me with undertand â€Å"Junk†I read the book as research for more background information on the story and characters. â€Å"Heroin Lies†is basically a story of a normal family getting pulled apart and ruined down to the daughter ‘Vicky' taking heroin. The four main parts are David (Father, played by myself), Jean (Mother), Jason (Son, brother of Vicky) and Vicky (Daughter and heroin addict). As the plot continues throughout the play, Vicky ends up dying at the end,this saddening the auidience and most notably the three remaining members of the family. The play targets drugs and young people just givig into them, â€Å"Teenage pressures†¦ that the excuse eh?†(David, scene 15). Throughout the play, family arguments, monologues all add to the theme of drugs as they are mainly arguments about how Vicky has let the family down. Another key theme is the one of giving in, as thats how Vicky takes the heroin in the first place as she gives into her friend Mandy. â€Å"Junk†is alike to â€Å"Heroin lies†in many ways, its also a story of drug abuse and young people giving in and getting addicted to heroin. Its set in Bristol in the 1980's. Its a story of young lovers Tar and Gemma both running away from home to live together but end up with drug users who get the two of them into drugs such as heroin. Tar is very different to Vicky and Gemma as his parents dont really care that he has left and wouldnt care to find out he does drugs, whereas Vicky and Gemma both has protective paresnts that are devasted to find out that their daughters do drugs, although Gemma's dont really ever find out. Again like â€Å"Heroin lies†Gemma starts drugs down to peer pressure and giving into friends, â€Å"I got something in here that might change your mind†– Tar says to Gemma as he waits to give her a cigarette. Our performance is set in the present day, compared to â€Å"Junk†which was set in the 80's. I feel that the 20 year gap between the two productions is hard to tell as drugs have been, and always will be a danger to society and in both we can feel the dangers of heroin taking and the affect its having on characters such as Gemma, Tar and Vicky. Some characters are alkie to one another on both plays, in â€Å"Heroin Lies†Vicky is alike to the part of Gemma from â€Å"Junk†, I think this is because they are around the same age, they both gave in to taking heroin and they are both from working class families who are bitterly dissapointed in them becoming drug addicts. Also its evident that in both plays the father roles played by David in â€Å"Heroin Lies†and the father in â€Å"Junk†are alike as they both command the relationships with their wives and they are both feeling that they are in control of the situations regarding Vicky's drug problem, and Gemma running away from home, although really neither of them have any control in the matter whatsoever â€Å"He asked you to stay out all night with him!†(Gemma's father to Gemma when she tells of how she wated to stay out with Tar). Many of the viewers may be able to relate to the parts of Vicky, Gemma, Tar, Jason David, Jean etc, as they too may have been in a similiar situaion. This shows how effective a play can be with this sort of relevance and social histroical content. The members of our performance are all young and we cn relate to the arguments with the parents, therefore making it a lot easier to act as we can relate to real life issues. This may be alike to the actors and actresses in the tv programme of â€Å"Junk†as they were around the same age as the people in my group and myself. The theme of drugs and heroin usage is a strong theme to use as a stimulas in our performance and the original of the book and play. In our play we used many theartre skills to master the script we were given. We have used real life issues from our own lives to use in the performance as we feel that it would give us a better understanding of the words we were saying, this meaning better acting, giving off a better performance to the audience. I used research from the internet as did other member of the group. Mainly used for the work on our characterisations. We have used props and we have rehearsed our stage direrctions to perfection so that it symblises real family life yet letting the audience see all of the characters and their emotions clearly. Also we used monlogues and hot seating where people would ask us questions and we would answer in character, this helped us and the fellow memebers of the group understand each character with a better undertsanding. In conclusion comapring my groups peformance of â€Å"Heroin Lies†and the book â€Å"Junk†I feel that they share many similarities and few and far between differeces. The main themes and characters were alike in both productions, even the storylines had its similairites! I have learnt a lot from this whole experience, I learnt not only about heroin and the usage and affect it can have on families, but I learnt how to put that into a performance. Its been a great experience overall, and I have enjoyed working on this project a lot! Also out of it I have read two very interesting different pieces of work, that have left an everlasting impression on me.
Sunday, January 5, 2020
Immigration The Fundamental Aspect Of American Growth
Immigration: The Fundamental Aspect of American Growth Luis Herrera First Period AP Government February 19, 2015 Immigration: The Fundamental Aspect of American Growth All great empires in history have been rooted in a specific, defining set of characteristics, traditions, values, and perspectives that fuel society towards unity and comradery. This central set of practices and perspectives evolves with along with the people it pertains to and creates a culture that effects all aspects of the society: the education, the economy, and the government. The American government maximizes this evolution of characteristics, traditions, values, and perspectives largely because of its root in immigration. The United States’ foundation as a†¦show more content†¦For this reason, literacy tests were given to immigrants and those who could not pass English reading and writing were denied admission into the U.S. (Tichenor). During the First and Second World War, the American people had a very negative world view of immigrants seeking home in America. This resulted in two acts being passed restricting the entrance of immigrants. The Emergency Quota Act established a quota of 350,000 per year admitted into the country. The National Origins Act further enforced the quota by lowering it to 150,000 based on the origins of immigrants entering the U.S. (Tichenor). These laws restricted immigration into the U.S. many years after the Second World War, nonetheless the nation reopened its gates in 1965 by annulling the previous acts. Up until the late 1900s, much of the controversy about immigration was regulating the amount that entered the country, however the conflict soon became the means by which immigrants ended up in the U.S.: legally or illegally. Because of this dispute, the American government began greater monitoring and control of U.S. borders (Pinto). Immigration Reform and Control Act was passed in 1986, increasing the size of the U.S. border patrol service as well as reorganizing and simplifying the process of deportation of illegal immigrants (Pinto). In 2005, Congress passed the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Il legal Immigration Control Act, which stated that a 700-mile
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)