Saturday, March 28, 2020
Where Is The Meaning Of Human Existence Located? According To Sartre Where is the meaning of human existence located? According to Sartre The word philosophy comes from Greek and literally means love of wisdom. Webster dictionary defines philosophy as a critical study of fundamental beliefs and the grounds for them. Both explanations of philosophy are correct and concrete, while where the meaning of human existence is located has no such concrete answer, but in this paper we will examine where Sartre believes it to be. Sartre's existentialism is a philosophy, which deals with man. It states that man is that which he makes of himself and that he has to make his own choices in a state of anguish. Man chooses in anguish, because he has no external guidelines to help him and must rely on his own morals and beliefs. Man chooses completely want he wants to do. His existence depends on this. And this is where I believe Sartre locates the meaning to mans' existence. According to Sartre mans' existence only takes on meaning through his actions. The Sartrian existentialist finds it extremely troubling that God does not exist because with Him vanishes all hope of finding values in an intelligible heaven. As Dostoevsky once said, If God did not exist, then everything would be permitted.(pg 22) Sartre claims this to be the existentialist starting point. This is the reason that Sartre talks about anguish, because one cannot find anything to depend upon either within or outside himself. It must necessarily follow that man is to be forlorn; he can't find anything to depend upon either internally or externally. He therefore lacks excuses. We cannot explain our actions in terms of or in reference to...given and specific human nature. (pg 23) This rules out of the possibility of predetermination. Man is free, man is freedom.(pg 23) For non-existentialists, passion and fate may be an excuse for their actions; but for existentialists, taking responsibility for one's choices is a central belief. Fate is overruled and passions hold no power. An existentialist will never view a great passion as a destructive agent, or blame fate for making a man commit certain actions. Again pointing to mans' existence being defined by his choices and actions. Since Sartre claims that existence precedes essence, an existentialist will also deny the support of an organized religion. As a result there is an absence of values. The existentialists' world is one of being forsaken and abandoned. In this sense, abandonment can mean that we ourselves decide our being. As an example we can consider the case of the man who was faced with a difficult decision the. The young man had two choices: To take care of his mother, or to go to England to join the freedom forces. The first option is a concrete and certain course of action. It is immediate, but directed to only one individual. The second choice of action is addressed to an infinitely greater cause, yet the outcome is rather uncertain. The Kantian ethic warns not to regard another person as a means, but rather as an end.(pg 25-26) In this case, for the young man to remain with his mother, he would be treating her as the end and the freedom fighters as the means. On the other hand, if he were to aid the freedom fighters, he would be treating them as the end at the risk of treating his mother as the means. This example shows how man cannot rely on values. Sartre in this case recommended to the young man to trust his instincts. Sartre's philosophy also deals with despair and the meaning of one's life. Marxists say, Your action is limited by your death; but you can rely upon the help of others. (pg 30) However, Sartre claims that he must confine himself to what he can see. Existentialists doubt that others will carry on their work after their death. An existentialist does not necessarily believe that the revolution will lead to the triumph of the working class. To carry this further, from the individual cases to the great collective movements, it is necessary for the masses to free themselves by once again going back to the idea that one must do
Saturday, March 7, 2020
Was the Bill of Rights Necessary essays In 1787, a group of men got together in Philadelphia to revise the Articles of Confederation under which the United States had been operating. When the Constitutional Convention decided to propose a federal government instead, they faced the enormous challenge of persuading the American people to accept the central government they had learned to distrust and fear. Many were hesitant to give up the Confederation that helped bring them through the American Revolution that brought them freedom from a great tyrant. Because of this, a great debate arouse between the federalists and the anti-federalists. The great question became, Is a bill of rights necessary? Without it, the United States constitution would have never lasted. Contrary to popular opinion, the United States Constitution does not give any rights to the people. As stated in the Declaration of Independence, a man's rights are given to him by his creator. The constitution merely exists to limit and restrain government powers. Publius states in Federalist 84, Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing; and as they retain every thing they have no need of particular reservations. (Publius, 1787, 8). Federalists believed that the bill of rights was not needed to protect the peoples rights and that the constitution was a bill of rights in itself (Publius, 1787, 12). Why forbid someone to do something, if they have no power to do it in the first place? The federalists argument did not satisfy the American people. It was their experience and belief, that government was by nature corrupt, and could never be trusted to stay within the constraints of the constitution. If man were perfect, we would not need a government to protect our rights. In history, government has been found to abuse their power, and abridge the public liberty (Brutus, 1787, 5). For this reason, men have always worked to create ways to keep their fundamental rights from being en...
Wednesday, February 19, 2020
Principles of Management - Research Paper Example The employees stand to obtain a better insight into the functioning of the company, due to this initiative. Furthermore, employees obtain a better understanding of the lacunae in the performance of the company, which in turn could motivate them to seek methods for bettering the situation (Dossenbach 16). Subsequent to the evaluation of corporate performance, the employeeÃ¢â¬â¢s achievement in realizing individual goals can be scrutinized. This task should be so conducted that the employees are made to review their individual objectives and achievements. At this juncture, the employees should be encouraged to provide suggestions for improving their deficient areas. As such, suggestions for change that emanate from the employee, will be adopted voluntarily, in addition to engendering a sense of well Ã¢â¬â being and accomplishment (Dossenbach 16). It is essential to realize that human resources management is critically dependent on the motivation of employees. The individual and collective motivation levels of employees have an overbearing and direct influence on the persistence, level and direction of their efforts. This circumstance finds substantial evidence in the fact that the best performers in the corporate sector enjoy a workforce that is highly motivated (Gilley, Gilley and Quatro 129). In fact, the functions of human resources management are based on a thorough comprehension of the theory of employee motivation. As such, any motivational theory is founded on a fundamental understanding of the influence of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards on the motivation levels of employees (Gilley, Gilley and Quatro 129). Extrinsic rewards are basically motivational stimuli that are provided to employees as inducements for indulging in certain activities. Such rewards constitute valued consequences for completing a task in an exemplary manner. On the other hand, intrinsic
Tuesday, February 4, 2020
1. What is the purpose of the poem2. What does the poem mean and how does it reveal that meaning3. Which is more important for the poem, form or content Why is this question a concern at all for the reader - Essay Example was simply based on making a description of a wreath being given to someone, who the author indicated as most familiar of his ways, as a token of appreciation and praise. Upon closer evaluation, one could establish that the one being referred to by the author, who is acknowledged as Ã¢â¬Å"Of praise deservÃ ¨d, unto Thee I giveÃ¢â¬ (Herbert 2nd line) could possibly be God, the all omniscient and all knowing. Accordingly, one concludes that the purpose of the poem was to give honor and praise, possibly to God, who is all knowing and worthy of being glorified through the garland of flowers. The author seems to be expressing a problem in living his life. Through the verses: Ã¢â¬Å"My crooked winding ways, wherein I live,Ã¢â¬â Wherein I die, not liveÃ¢â¬ (Herbert 4th and 5th lines) indicate a predicament faced by the author in disclosing that he exhibited living in crooked and winding ways; contrary to the general expectations of people to live in straight or supposedly righteous ways. This fact was again evaluated using the following lines: Ã¢â¬Å"for life is straight, Straight as a line, and ever tends to TheeÃ¢â¬ (Herbert 5th and 6th lines). Finally, one arrived at the conclusion that the author could be sending the message to God through the following verses: Ã¢â¬Å"Give me simplicity, that I may live, So live and like, that I may know Thy waysÃ¢â¬ (Herbert 9th and 10th lines) Ã¢â¬â for who else could have the power to enable one to provide a simpler life than the omnipotent God and who else is most mysterious that God that people who sometimes express the need to know more of His ways to understand Him better. The poem was effectively structured by using words that are repetitive to give emphasis to the message being relayed. As one would observe, the last words in the most of the lines in the poem are used as starting words for the next lines: In rhetorical analysis, this is called anadiplosis, which means Ã¢â¬Å"a rhetorical term for the repetition of the last word of one line or
Monday, January 27, 2020
Charlotte Haze Literature is not solely a method of entertainment. It is also used to expand a readers mind by allowing them to enter a different world. To do so, a reader will often have to suspend their disbelief. It is very rare that one must question what he/she is reading. Vladimir Nabokovs Lolita is the confession of an erudite European intellectual with an obsessive desire for nymphets-girls between the ages of nine and fourteen who are, as he judges them, sexually aware. In Humbert Humberts confession, he admits to the years of molestation of a young girl referred to as Lolita (Dolores Haze). This confession is written by him while awaiting trial for a seemingly unrelated murder. At the end of the novel, Humbert states that the murder he committed was an act of love and he rationalizes not only his violence but his pedophilia. Although the confession seems free-flowing and a spur of the moment decision on the part of the narrator, how does Nabokov indicate that Humbert Humbert is an unrelia ble narrator through the use of literary devices and linguistic patterns in Lolita? Despite Humbert Humberts horrid crimes, his language and wordplay make for a more pleasant reading experience than one would expect. Through the use of characterization, diction, and comparison and contrast, Nabokov suggests that Humbert is unreliable and knowingly writes a tale that paints himself as a victim of circumstances. Characterization: As Humbert Humbert is the narrator of the novel, he characterizes the individuals in the story. No second opinions are presented; therefore the reader is given a one-dimensional interpretation of each character. There are clues in the novel that suggest Humberts descriptions are biased in his favour, including the rapid changes in the characters personalities and the tone in which they are described. Humberts descriptions of Charlotte Haze, in particular, change significantly as the story progresses. Charlotte, Lolitas mother and Humberts eventual wife in the novel, is a middle-class American housewife who aspires to be sophisticated and cultured. Her relationship with her daughter is strained as she focuses all her attention on accommodating her lodger Humbert Humbert, who finds her intolerable and simply wants access to Lolita (Dolores Haze). During the beginning of the novel and the beginning of their relationship, Humbert refers to Charlotte simply as the Haze woman. His disgust and aggravation is apparent even at the mention of her presence. When first describing Charlotte to the reader, Humbert states: I think I had better describe her right away, to get it over with. She was, obviously, one of those woman whose polished words may reflect a book clubbut never her soul; women who are completely devoid of humour (Nabokov 37). His dislike for Charlotte is made clear from the m oment she is introduced to the reader; however Humbert continues to point out her vulgarity and lack of sophistication. One night, while secretly fondling Lolita on the front porch, Humbert writes: [Lo] fidgeted a good deal so that finally her mother told her sharply to quit it and sent [her] doll flying into the dark (Nabokov 46). Charlottes behaviour seems over-the-top and disdainful. However, it is interesting that whenever Humbert has any inappropriate contact with Lolita, he follows quickly by writing of Charlottes contempt towards her daughter. After his contact with Lolita on the front porch, he quite sarcastically writes the following excerpt: [Lolita] had been spiteful, if you please, at the age of one, when she used to throw her toys out of her crib, so that her poor mother should keep picking them up, the villainous infant. Now, at twelve, she was a regular pest, said Haze. Her grades were poor. Of course, moodiness is a common concomitant of growing up, but Lolita exagerrate[d]. Sullen and evasive. Rude and defiant (Nabokov 46). Although expressing Charlottes frustration with her daughter, the speech is not a direct quote from Charlotte indicating that Humbert is paraphrasing what she has told him. This harsh-toned speech seems to be a convenient ploy on the part of the narrator to distract from the fact that he took advantage of a young girls trust for his own physical gratification. In fact, throughout the novel, Humberts abuse of Lolita is followed by negative dialogues from the other characters. Nabokov seems to suggest that Humberts confession is well thought-out and biased in his favour. It seems the narrator wants to justify his actions. After Lolita tags along to a shopping trip with him and Charlotte, Humbert quotes her mother as saying: It is intolerable that a child should be so ill-manneredwhen she knows she is unwanted (Nabokov 51). While they are driving, Humbert takes advantage of Lolitas proximity to hold, stroke, and squeeze [her] little paw all the way to the store (Nabokov 51). Humbert use s Charlottes contempt towards Lolita to justify his affection towards her. Although this physical contact is outwardly innocent, Humberts intentions are clearly pedophilic. It is by characterizing Charlotte as unmotherly and unkind that Humbert tries to gain the readers sympathy. He portrays himself as a father figure providing a mistreated girl with love. Before her death in the novel, Charlotte is portrayed as a brutal, unloving mother. However, after she is accidently killed, Humbert is free to parent Lolita. After he collects Lolita from the summer camp she was forced to attend, one notices the change in the tone he uses to address Charlotte. Lolita, since returning from camp, has remained troublesome and moody. After Humbert has consummated his relationship with the young girl, they engage on a long road trip including many pit stops and shopping trips. The teenage girl is not particularly enjoying their voyage and is understandably vulgar and upset. Humbert is quoted many times as saying: Charlotte, I begin to understand you! (Nabokov 149). Humbert narrates and characterizes other individuals in a way that will arouse sympathy for himself. Previously, when Humbert would engage in inappropriate contact with Lolita, he would deliberately point out her mothers unaffectionate nature to justify his touching her child. Now that Charlot te, the obstacle, has been overcome and Humbert regularly molests and abuses her daughter, he points out Lolitas insufferable qualities. He now understands Charlotte and points out that she was not as negative a person as she seemed. Humbert does this in order to paint himself as a tired father putting up with his difficult daughters every whim. Humberts descriptions of Lolita also change, removing the characters likeability as the story progresses. At the beginning of the novel, Lolita is described as closely resembling Annabel, Humberts childhood love. Humbert explains that he is instantly captivated by her beauty: When I passed her in my adult disguise, the vacuum of my soul managed to suck in every detail of her bright beauty (Nabokov 39). Although Lolita is a mediocre American child, vulgar and even less polished than her mother, Humbert seems to view the girl through rose-coloured glasses. To him, she is not vulgar, but charming, not aggressive, but misunderstood by her wretched mother. Although Humbert does not appreciate Lolitas idolization of American pop culture, nothing much else is said with regards to her intellect. Interesting to note is Lolitas minimal dialogue in this part of the novel. She does not say much, except for her frequent arguments with Charlotte. In these arguments, Lolita is not portrayed as a de licate child, but rather a strong-willed, aggressive girl. I think you stink and this is a free country are some of the arguments made to her mother during their verbal fights (Nabokov 46). During one particular fight, Humbert writes: Later, I heard a great banging of doors and other sounds coming from quaking caverns where the two rivals were having a ripping row (Nabokov 48). Writing this, Humbert indicates that Lolita is able to hold her own against her mother. She is not the type to be trampled over or forced to do anything. By including dialogues and descriptions such as these, Humbert suggests that Lolita is a strong child who gets what she wants. In addition to describing her bad-temper, the physical contact between Humbert and Lolita is always said to be instigated by the girl. Humbert narrates: Presently an old gray tennis ball bounced over [Charlotte], and Los voice came from the house haughtily: Pardonnez, Mother. I was not aiming at you. Of course not, my hot downy darling (Nabokov 55). What to an average person would seem like a playful act derived from boredom, Humbert tries to illustrate as an act of seduction. Humbert portrays Lolita as a willing participant in his games, as shown in the following excerpt: Humbert Humbert intercepted [her] apple. In a sham effort to retrieve it, [Lo] was all over me. Every movement she made, every shuffle and ripple, helped me to conceal and to improve the secret system of tactile correspondence between beast and beauty-between my gagged, bursting beast and the beauty of her dimpled body in its innocent cotton frock (Nabokov 58-59). Although Humbert sits there almost inert during thi s encounter, and although Lolita comes to him, he instigates the situation by innocently taking her fruit from her. After her stay at a summer camp, Lolitas sexuality has changed drastically as the reader learns she has had her first sexual encounter. In this part of the novel, through direct quotes, Lolita is characterized differently. She is very teasing of Humbert: I did not [miss you]. Fact Ive been revoltingly unfaithful to you, but it does not matter one bit, because youve stopped caring for me anywayyou havent kissed me yet, have you? (Nabokov 112). Humbert then narrates: Lolita positively flowed into my arms (Nabokov 113). This is the first serious encounter the two characters have: a kiss Humbert narrates as having been Lolitas idea. Although Humbert describes the confidence with which Lolita engages in this behaviour, he also reveals that it was but an innocent game on her part, an imitation of fake romance. Having already lost her virginity to a young man at camp, Lolita initiates sexual intercourse with Humbert during their stay at a hotel. However, more than a romantic partner, Nabokov illustrates Lolita as a young girl in search of affection of any kind. Charlotte, not fitting the maternal archetype whatsoever, was jealous of the relationship between Humbert and Lolita. Having not yet learned that her mother is dead, and believing Humbert and Charlotte are still married, Lolitas contact and conversation with Humbert resembles a bitter act of rebellion against her mother who forced her to attend camp (an experience she describes as dirty and naughty despite her cool demeanor). Having sex with Humbert seems like more of a game to Lolita as she does not understand the severity of her actions. However, it is a way of betraying her mother, just as Charlotte betrayed her by sending her to camp. When Humbert reveals in a most insensitive way that Charlotte is dead, Lolita is truly heartbrok en. Humbert writes: At the hotel, we had separate rooms, but in the middle of the night she came sobbing into mine, and we made it up very gently (Nabokov 142). The quotation suggests that the two engaged in sexual relations once again, and although Humbert does not specify why Lolita was crying, it was most certainly due to the death of her mother and not the mild argument she had with him. The statement illustrates a young girl with no one to turn to except for the adult who victimizes her. Having lost her mother, her only remaining parent, Lolita turns to Humbert-her technical father. He uses her need for affection to gain control of the situation for his own physical gratification. Despite frequent dialogues and descriptions in which Lolita is shown to be unhappy and vulnerable, Humbert adds his own biased interpretations of Lolitas behaviour. She is characterized as a manipulative, able girl. If she is not bought certain things, if she is not allowed to go to certain places, Lolita withholds sex from Humbert. This is an unfavourable depiction of the young girl as her body is the only power she possesses. She has no money, and without Humbert, she cannot survive. In order to put herself in a position of power and achieve some sort of reward for her suffering, Lolita uses her sexuality-something Humbert describes as cruel, manipulative promiscuity. Killing Clare Quilty, the man with whom Lolita runs away, Humbert describes as an act of love for having forced Lolita into poverty. His possessiveness in this part of the novel indicates that he is defending his honour rather than hers. Humbert writes his confession in order to convince the reader that though he is g uilty, he was controlled by a force greater than himself. Through his dynamic characterization of the other characters, Humbert inadvertently reveals he is only interested in telling the story from a viewpoint that will allow the reader to sympathize with him. Diction: In addition to character development in Lolita, diction is also suggestive of Humberts unreliable narration. Throughout the novel, the reader is entranced by Humberts fancy prose style. It is the language used that makes the grotesque themes in the novel bearable. However, many recurring words and linguistic patterns used by Humbert betray the persona he wants to create. Although Humbert wants his confession to seem unbiased and unplanned, the first paragraphs of the novel indicate that his confession is directed to a particular audience-[the] ladies and gentlemen of the jury (Nabokov 9). He, himself, titles his work Lolita, as it is essentially the story of the young girl. However, the foreword written by the fictional Dr. John Ray titles it The Confession of a White Widowed Male. It is interesting that it is always during the most grotesque scenes in the novel that Humbert directly acknowledges the presence of the reader. When pondering whether or not to kill Charlotte, Humbert directly engages the reader(s): And, folks, I just couldnt! In silence I turned shorewardand still I could not make myself drown the poor, slippery, big-bodied creature (Nabokov 87). At times during the confession, Humberts writing becomes almost self-reflective-it seems he gets lost in his past experiences. Nonetheless, in the moments where his morals come into question and where his behaviour becomes criminal, he speaks directly to the reader. Humbert almost acts as his own lawyer, and in an eloquent persuasive tone, tries to sway the reader in his favour. Humbert also uses wordplay to foreshadow Clare Quiltys involvement and significance to the story. In the beginning of the novel, Humbert reads a review. Clare Quiltys name appears, alongside others, and plays are listed including The Little Nymph and Fatherly Love. Humbert says that Lolita could have appeared in a play called The Murdered Playwright, alluding to playwright Clare Quiltys murder. Quiltys presence is always felt in Lolita even before his character is introduced. This leads the reader to believe that Humberts narrative is not free-flowing, but rather serves a direct purpose: to gain sympathy from the reader for the murder he committed. In addition to the change in audience, the connotation and tone of the words used change depending on the situation. Besides Humberts descriptions of nymphets, every other character and experience in his confession is described with cynicism and irritation. Nymphets are introduced as fantastical beings: Nine and fourteen [are] the boundaries-the mirrory beaches and rosy rocks-of an enchanted island haunted by those nymphetsand surrounded by a vast, misty sea (Nabokov 16). This description seems out-of-character for Humbert, who otherwise presents himself to be (within reason) rational. Humbert also states that not all girls in this age range are nymphets. It is the slightly feline outline of a cheekbone, the slenderness of a downy limb [which identify] the little deadly demon offantastic power (Nabokov 17). Humbert chooses to coin the term nymphet instead of using the accepted term of underage girl. By stating that he is not attracted to all young girls, Humbert tries to separate him self from regular pedophiles. The magical tone that surrounds these descriptions makes it seem as though Humbert is not in self-control and submits to the powers of these mystical demons who drive him to abnormality. It is interesting to note that Humbert is very scientific and technical in other parts of the book using jargon such as pederosis and pseudolibidoes. The two different methods of speaking represent Humberts ability to change according to circumstance. While trying to explain his helplessness in the presence of Lolita (and other nymphets), Humbert betrays himself through his word choice. Although eloquent, his possessiveness jumps off the page. Whenever speaking of Lolita, seemingly arbitrary descriptions include possessive pronouns. This is demonstrated numerous times in the novel: How smugly would I marvel that she was mine, mine, mine (Nabokov 161). Constantly referring to the girl as my child, my Lo, my pet, Nabokov italicizes the pronouns to place emphasis on Humberts possessiveness. Furthermore, it is interesting to look at the sentence structure. Whenever events take place involving other people, Humbert makes sure to unite Lolita and himself: Last night, we sat on the piazza, the Haze woman, Lolita and I. Even when writing, Humbert must remain close to Lolita, using punctuation to separate Charlotte from the two of them. Humbert tries to label Lolita as the seducer and instigator of their physical relationship: She played with and kept sticking to my lap (Nabokov 45). Descriptions of such scenes are never explicit, but when movements are described, they are always those of Lolita. Humbert leads the reader to believe he is just a pawn in Lolitas game. In another section of the story, he writes that [Lolita] struck Humbert, quite painfully (Nabokov 65). This is yet another example of Humbert purposefully showcasing Lolitas strength and willpower. Surprisingly, he refers to himself in the third person-something he does often when he bribes/seduces Lolita. It is unavoidable for Humbert to implicate himself in the novel, but when he narrates the more disturbing things he does, he never personalizes it, using Humbert instead of I or me. By doing so, Humbert defeats the purpose of a confession, not really acknowledging it was him who did anything wrong. Although Lolita is shown to sometimes be an hasty child, the words used to describe her when shes around Humbert always paint her as bold and aggressive. She is said to make Humbert nervous. When Lolita reproaches him for his lack of kissing skill, Humbert tells her to show [him] wight ray (Nabokov 120). It seems out-of-character for the eloquent Humbert to be so inarticulate. However, through the use of diction and punctuation, Nabokov suggests that Humbert does not directly quote characters in the novel. In one part of the novel, Humbert writes: Look, we need to go, said Lolitaor something along that line (Nabokov 76). Even though Lolita is clearly quoted, Humbert cannot be sure. This allows the reader to create distrust in Humbert, as he clearly changes dialogue. Many of the letters and conversations Humbert includes in the confession, he admits are paraphrased. Therefore, it is quite difficult to completely trust Humberts story as some of his bias has inevitably seeped through. Also interesting are the nicknames given by Humbert to other characters. Charlotte is also known as the Haze woman, cold big Haze and Lady Hum. Humbert reveals his own mercurial nature by changing the connotation of the nicknames depending on his mood. The fact that his opinions of other characters change so rapidly and so often indicate that Humbert is using them to better his image in the eyes of the reader. There are instances where Humbert seems disgusted with himself, describing his attraction to nymphets as a monstrous love(Nabokov 83). Immediately after he reproaches himself, Humbert goes on to support pedophilia: We are not sex fiends! We are unhappy, mild, dog-eyed gentlemen sufficiently well-integrated to control our urge in the presence of adults, but ready to give yearsof life for one chance to touch a nymphet. Emphatically, no killers are we (Nabokov 88). Humbert never apologizes for his behaviour, admitting it is only society that makes him feel deviant. Contrast Comparison: Nabokov uses contrast and comparison in Lolita to indicate Humbert Humberts biased narration. Humbert often defends his pedophilia-reprimanding societys hypocrisy. He compares his relationship with Lolita to many historical couples: American president Abraham Lincoln and his younger wife, Italian scholar Petrarch and 12 year-old Laureen, and poet Dante Alighieri and his 9 year-old companion. Humbert mentions these relationships as if to validate his relationship with Lolita. These men, whose women were often their muse, served great purpose to society. Humbert questions the confines the law puts on his people (pedophiles), as these men of great status improved the world while sharing his love of nymphets. It is important to note Humbert does not dwell on the age of these men or the time period they lived in (hundreds of years ago). In addition to this, Humbert makes a direct comparison between Annabel, his childhood love, and Lolita. Dolores Haze takes on multiple names: Lo, Lola, Dolly, Hot Little Haze, and Lolita. Humbert states that: in [his] arms, she was always Lolita (Nabokov 9). Later on in the novel, one discovers that Lolita is derived from combining Annabels name with the name Dolores. Annabel Lee and Dolores produce Lo-lee-ta. Although Humbert ridicules psychiatrists, he drops many clues (including this wordplay) that suggest that Annabels early death is the reason for his attraction to underage girls. A love taken from him during a fragile age leading to sickness-this image, he hopes, will arouse the readers sympathy. In the novel, Humberts love scenes with Annabel are somewhat explicit; they use many metaphors and symbols: I was ready to offer her everything, my heart, my throat, my entrails, I gave her to hold in her awkward fist the scepter of my passion (Nabokov 15). As he and Annabel are of the same age, Humbert can be more direct with the reader in these scenes. Conversely, Lolitas sexual scenes with Humbert are quick and do not describe any physical interaction. One assumes that Humbert does this to avoid arousing disgust in the reader. This indicates that Humbert formulates his story in a way that keeps the reader on his side. Throughout Lolita, comparisons are made between older women and girls Humbert deems to be nymphets. Older women, no matter their role in Humberts life, are always unattractive, cruel and unintelligent. Valeria, Humberts first wife, is described as fat, dumb and completely inept. Charlotte Haze is also fat, disgusting and irritating. Young girls are always painted as desirable. The most beautiful language is used to convince the reader of the power of these nymphets. They are seductive, physically-tone, and delicate (Nabokov 17). Humbert tries to illustrate older women as revolting, so the reader will be able to empathize with his lifestyle. Younger boys, however, are never described in the same light as young girls. They are dirty, repulsive, and dangerous. Any boy Lolita speaks to, any waiter who comes into contact with her is described negatively. Humbert portrays himself as Lolitas protector, unwilling to let her be tarnished by these lowly creatures. This is how he sees Clare Quilty. He is the man who kidnaps his daughter and then abandons her. Before Humbert discovers that Quilty is the man Lolita runs away with, Humbert sets out on a mission to trace the fugitiveÃ ¢Ã¢â ¬Ã ¦to destroy [his] brother (Nabokov 247). In the final scenes where Humbert and Quilty are fighting, Humbert narrates: I rolled over him. We rolled over me. They rolled over him. We rolled over us (Nabokov 299). This is the only time in the novel when Humbert (indirectly) acknowledges his mistakes. Referring to Quilty as his brother, Humbert illustrates that they are one in the same. They both helped in destroying a young girl. This is the only moment of remorse shown in the novel, as Humbert quickly reverts back to condemning Quilty. Conclusion: Although readers often expect the narrator of a novel to be completely truthful, it is important to question the reliability of the narrator. In Lolita, Nabokov indicates that narrator Humbert Humbert has his own personal agenda and tells the story in a very biased way through the use of characterization, diction, and comparison and contrast. Why then is this novel so compelling to read? Why does the reader insist on being lectured by the corrupt Humbert and feeding into his lies? Although the narrator is biased in his assertions, Nabokov makes sure to include several clues to help the reader discover Humberts deception. Lolita is not simply escape literature, as it requires the reader to actively think about the story being told. By placing trust in the reader and stimulating their intelligence, Nabokov has created one of the literary masterpieces of all time.
Sunday, January 19, 2020
Summary The man in the iron mask is the continuing story of those famous musketeers who were introduced to us in The Three Musketeers Ã¢â¬â Athos, Porthos, Aramis, and dÃ¢â¬â¢Artagnan. While it has been more than twenty years since their great deeds were performed, the four appear to be just as strong and brave as then. When Aramis visited the prison, he saw a man whose face is hidden behind an iron mask. The prisoner has been entombed for eight years, but he is not a criminal and he is yet to commit a crime. But Aramis knows the secret of the prisonerÃ¢â¬â¢s identity, a secret that is so dangerous that its revelation could fall the King of France from his throne! Aramis is plotting against the King and he didnÃ¢â¬â¢t even told his friends. The motto of the Musketeers has been Ã¢â¬Å"All for one, and one for all.Ã¢â¬ Has Aramis betrayed his friends? Will they each prevail or is this the end of the four musketeers? Social/ Historical Context The story takes place in the early 16th century in France. The Man in the Iron Mask was a name given to a prisoner arrested as Eustache Dauger in 1669 or 1670, and held in a number of jails, including the Bastille and the Fortress of Pignerol (today Pinerolo). He was held in the custody of the same jailer, for a period of 34 years. The possible identity of this man has been thoroughly discussed and has been the subject of many books, because no one ever saw his face, which was hidden by a mask of black velvet cloth. In the late 1840s, the writer Alexandre Dumas elaborated on the theme in the final instalment of his Three Musketeers. Writing Style The story is narrative. Some words are hard to understand. It is a historical fiction novel. The mysterious prisoner was the central of the story. My Thoughts I only give 4 ratings even though I love the story because I have this feeling while IÃ¢â¬â¢m reading the novel that I want more. I wasnÃ¢â¬â¢t satisfied, and I donÃ¢â¬â¢t know why. This novel is one of my favorite books now, even though I wasnÃ¢â¬â¢t super satisfied of the story. I love to read Alexandre Dumas novels. I really like his works especially Ã¢â¬ËThe Count of Monte CristoÃ¢â¬ because of its fast-paced and action-packed plot. He wrote his novels well and itÃ¢â¬â¢s not boring. Dumas has a skill in creating complicated and interesting plots that will keep you biting your nails. And the most important thing is that you can get a moral lesson from his novel. I really love the characters in this story because their personalities didnÃ¢â¬â¢t change. I love the quotes written in the story. Their friendship in this story is so precious. They work together and help each other. I really like their motto Ã¢â¬Å"All for one, and one for allÃ¢â¬ .
Saturday, January 11, 2020
The text Ã¢â¬Å"Experiencing CitiesÃ¢â¬ by Mark Hutter deals with micro sociology and symbolic interaction theory. This means the way people experience the urban world in relationship to their everyday lives. This would include the interaction with others that would create meaning for them from the physical and human environment of the city. The exercise was to pick up certain aspects of micro sociology and use my life experiences as examples to show my understanding of this theory. The text uses perspectives from other social science disciplines in studying the city. Some of these included urban history, art, architectural history, urban geography and environmental psychology. Global urbanization is discussed in the last chapter, which to me helped me to understand where I am in the context of the world. I am a twenty-one year old, female student. I attend college full-time, work full-time and live with my parents in New York City. I am single and have no children and hope to obtain my degree in Social Sciences. First I would like to discuss symbolic interactionism and the self in society. Functionalism, conflict theory and evolutionism tend to be macrotheories that direct the sociologist toward large-scale phenomena, their relationships and changes in them. To use an example from my life would be the terrorist acts that happen on 911. This is a macrosocial phenomenon but at the micro level it affected me and my family, the family members of the victims and New York City. On the Macro level it affected the United States, and on a wider picture it also affected the globe. Symbolic interactionism, like exchange theory, is a micro orientation. It is a theoretical map that directs the sociologist in quests to understand how individuals interact in face to face relationships, relationships that are the foundation of social life. Unlike exchange theory, symbolic interactionism does not stress concepts of rewards and costs. Instead it is an emphasis on the human self, symbolic communications and interaction between persons based upon symbolic communication. The self is the process that is made up of the interaction of two self-aspects. These are Ã¢â¬Å"IÃ¢â¬ and Ã¢â¬Å"MeÃ¢â¬ . This is the knowing of self, the self asking and revising questions in the present or the Ã¢â¬Å"IÃ¢â¬ . Then there is the self-aspect composed of past experiences and conscious identity, the Ã¢â¬Å"MeÃ¢â¬ . The Ã¢â¬Å"IÃ¢â¬ is the self-aspect that exists in the present, which notes the world around it, that questions, that is impulsive, and that suggests my behavior. The Ã¢â¬Å"meÃ¢â¬ is based on past experience and is judgmental of my impulses. The Ã¢â¬Å"IÃ¢â¬ is my creative self; the Ã¢â¬Å"meÃ¢â¬ is my social self. For example I am basically a night person; I am working on this exercise at midnight. Being a night person I believe that the best way to be sure to have a good morning is to sleep through most of it. Because of this I have always tried to have my classes scheduled for afternoon or evenings, when possible. But last quarter I found to my horror, that due to a series of circumstances, I was forced to take a course that met on MondayÃ¢â¬â¢s at 8 a. m. This is a time of day I have rarely seen and when I have seen it, it was not because I was up very early, but because I was up very late. When the alarm clock rang at 6:15, the immediate impulsive action of my self arising in my Ã¢â¬Å"IÃ¢â¬ was to pull the plug on the alarm and go back to sleep. I would have done so, had not the Ã¢â¬Å"meÃ¢â¬ aspect of my self reminded me that would be a bad idea. As the socially aware, judgmental self-aspect, it reinforced me of the need to get up, shower, and eat so I could meet my responsibilities as a student and my goals. But I was still very tired and my Ã¢â¬Å"IÃ¢â¬ suggested that I sleep another half hour. My judgmental Ã¢â¬Å"meÃ¢â¬ aspect suggested twenty minutes more was the maximum time I could sleep if I was to meet my responsibilities. I proceeded to go back to sleep for twenty minutes and at 8:00 a. m. I went to my economicsÃ¢â¬â¢ class ready to absorb the knowledge. Society is created by interactions between persons first with their selves that allow them to plan and coordinate their own behaviors. But social interaction first requires more than selves and it depends on symbolic communication through language. A verbal symbol is a sound which indicates some object. The spoken word say for example chair means something to sit on. People who are born in the same society learn more or less the same symbols. For example, I went to Ohio once to visit a friend I asked for a soda and was told that she didnÃ¢â¬â¢t have soda but she had Pepsi. ThatÃ¢â¬â¢s what I wanted, but in Ohio they ask for a pop. People born in the same society that pick up the same symbols helps conversations between persons in which joint plans are made and communicated. So the existence of the self and symbolic communication makes group interaction possible. Because I have self and can communicate symbolically I can form groups such as my family, my college and my religion. These are the foundation of social life. People will think of the world in terms of symbols that represent objects and these objects can be physical like chairs and books, social like teachers or sisters, and abstract such as truth, liberty, or evil. To understand cities and the development of cities I thought of looking at urbanization first. Urbanization refers to masses of people moving to cities and to these cities having a growing influence on society. Urbanization is worldwide. To understand the cityÃ¢â¬â¢s attraction the first thing to consider is the pull of urban life. New York City offers an incredible variety of social events such as music ranging from rock to classic, architectural history, and cultural diversity. It also offers anonymity, which I find so much better than the scrutiny and restriction my friend had in her small town in Ohio. But probably the most important factor would be the opportunities in jobs. There are three types that life in cities by choice the cosmopolites, which I fall into, are students, intellectuals, professionals, artists, and entertainers. We are pulled to the city because of the conveniences and cultural beliefs. The single, another group I can associate with, are young unmarried people that are staying in the city because of the job and entertainment. Staying in the city reflects a stage in my life course, because after I marry and have children I have thought of moving to the suburbs. Then there are the ethnic villagers that are united by race-ethnicity and social class. These people live in tightly knit neighborhoods that resemble villages and small towns around New York City. Moving within a close circle of family and friends trying to isolate them from what they view as the harmful effects of city life. There are two groups that have little choice about where they live; they are the deprived and the trapped. Symbolic interactionism focuses on society as an outcome of persons with self-identities interacting with one another. An example of how symbolic interactionism can be applied to me by how I view myself as say; a drinker I have been taught about drinking through interaction with my friends. The learning requires interaction in a number of steps. This process is often accompanied by learning to explain away some unpleasant sensations caused by drinking in excess. Once drinking begins individuals will change their self-concept and thoughts of themselves as an occasional or to regular use of alcohol. So major changes made by alcohol were not caused by the alcohol but by learned changes in self identity. So in addition to other theories critical theory, phenomenology and ehtnomehtodology are also important to experiencing cities. Critical theory focuses on alienation and social contradictions and how they are overcome. Phenomenology focuses on how claims to knowledge about society are constructed. Ethnomethodology looks at how social actors make sense of their own actions and all of these are used to understand society.