Erotic Love in the Iliad Essay Example for Free

Erotic Love in the Iliad Essay Eros, meaning â€Å"erotic love† in Greek, has had tremendous power over men and women for centuries, causing small and large conflicts. In Homer’s Iliad, it is the very thing that sparks the war between Greece and Troy. This theme of erotic love shows itself over and over again in the epic poem, showing the detriments of allowing desire and sexual attraction to overcome reason. Beginning in the first book, erotic love is responsible for starting the rage of Achilles. Agamemnon demands Achilles’ concubine Brisies for himself in exchange for returning his maiden Chryseis to her father Chryses in order to end the plague set upon the Achaean army. Agamemnon and Achilles, two of the best Achaean warriors, came extremely close to battling each other over these stolen maidens – a fight driven by erotic love that could have divided the Greek army. Furthermore, Helen contributes significantly to the theme of erotic love blinding men and causing citywide conflict in the Iliad. Paris’ attraction to and desire for Helen, the most beautiful of all women at the time, essentially led to the downfall of Troy. In Book 3, Aphrodite inspires the erotic love between Helen and Paris that Helen initially resists but is overcome by the power of this attraction fostered by the goddess. This book of the Iliad shows erotic love as an undeniable, powerful force responsible for much of the conflict resulting in the rest of the epic poem. This theme of erotic love, capable of dividing friends and starting wars, is not to be confused with other forms of love also portrayed in the Iliad, such as the love between Hector and Andromache, or between King Priam and his people. Erotic love appears alongside of other forces of love that all play a part in shaping the characters actions and the outcome of conflict.

Challenges of Culture in Multinational Companies

Challenges of Culture in Multinational Companies As business becomes more global and the workforce ever diverse , the issue of culture becomes increasingly important for leaders and managers and their organisations.(Fons Trompenaars and peter [emailprotected] pg 3).In the present context of global business multinational companies are increasingly grappling with many challenges that arise mainly due to phenomenon of cultural complexity specially in situations where merger and acquisition, franchising ,takeovers and various other business reformation takes place. This phenomena specially call for establishment of sound system of human resource management which along with organisation culture is considered to be important requirement for modern management in such companies. The proposed study makes an attempt to investigate how the organisation culture of a multinational company gets transferred to a country other than its own with different national identity by the form of local human resource management. 2.1 Culture and nation: There are numerous definitions of culture that have been produced over the years. In search for an appropriate definition ,it would appear that there are many facets, with emphasis shifting according to the individual author.(Goffee and jones,1998).Moreover culture is impalpable, making definitions hard to relate .(Schein,1985;Goffee and jones,1998).However, reviewing a number of definitions does lead to the identification of common thread in thinking. Formal writing focused on the organisation culture concept began with Pettigrew(1979),He was the one who initiated the concept of culture which is primarily appertaine to anthrpology and bought it to the related concept such as symbolism, rituals, and myth can be put into use in the context of organisational analysis. It has been demonstrated by Dandridge(1980) how the study of myths as well as symbols help in exhibiting the profound structure that an organisation has. More researchers conducted recently including Denison and mishra(19 95),schein(1985),sieh and martin(1988,1990) and Wallach(1983) have given numerous definitions to the concept of culture. such a host of research difinitions can be assigned to varied research framework which different authors have adopted. According to Hofstede culture is viewed as software of the mind-collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group of people from another.(Hofstede book pg 5).Schein (1985) defines culture as the deeper level of basic assumptions and beliefs that are shared by members of an organisation ,that operates unconsciously, and that define a basic taken for granted fashion in an organisations view of itself and its environment. [chris Brewster,pg14]. According to Tayeb (2003,p.10) culture involves historically evolved values, attitudes and meanings that are learned and shared by the members of a community and which influence their material and non-material way of life. Trompenaars and hampden-turner (1997) also gave prominence to shared meanings within a society, arguing that culture comprised not only agreed ways of living but also the ways in which a cultural group attributes meaning to their world that is how they make sense of it.[ray French page 16].According to dennis r.Briscoe and randall s.schuler, culture is the characteristic way of behaving and believing that a group of people in a country or region(or firm) have evolved over time and share.[ dennis r.Briscoe and randall s.schuler,pg116] A more long standing definition by hall(1959) suggests that culture is the pattern of taken for granted assumptions about how a given collection of people should think ,act, and feel as they go about their daily affairs(Hall,1959).While there are many other definitions of culture ,most commonly ,it is colloquially described as the ways things are done around here(Schein,1985;deal and kennedy:1988;Goffee and jones:1988).Although different in content,the parallel between these definitions is that culture is a collective way of perceiving things and behaving due to the sharing of an social environment. (Malcolm higgs and sally morton).Since 1990s there has been an increasing recognition of the difference that people can make to an organisations effectiveness and performance.(Ullrich,1997;IPD 2000). Organisational culture has become a important topic ,as it is seen to be underpinning, intangible infrastructure which influences how people behave at work.(Schien,1985;Goffee and jones,1998).There may be more and more companies globalise ,they may be configuring structures and systems for greater integration.(Collins and porras1997;Trompenaars and woollians,1999).Achieving commitment to a global strategy through an effective organisational culture is attractive, particularly for those operating in a highly competitive marketplace.(Goffee and jones,1998).The complexities of culture make it difficult for managers to understand and manage.(Schein,1985:Goffee and jones,1998).This is further compounded by the often confusing cross-cultural interactions required of those working in a multi-cultural setting, and invariably leads to misunderstandings.(Hofstede,1991;Garrison,1998).But if the culture is an powerful as we are supposed to believe ,then the benefits may be enormous.(Garrison,199 8;Hall,1990;Sparrow,1994).Therefore sometimes it is vital that businesses understand what influences organisational culture to help determine how best it should be configured and nurtured to support the business.( Schein,1985;Hall,1990;Sparrow,1994). Hofstede (1991) had used four terms to describe the way cultural differences manifest themselves they are symbols, rituals, heroes and values. He illustrates this is the form of onion with symbols representing the most superficial layer and values being the deepest manifestations of culture. [Hilary harris.p16-17] http://home.mnet-online.de/wendland/publications/img/oniondiagram.png Hofstede 1991 Trompenaars (1995) model of culture is almost identical to scheins model of 1985.Both model refer to culture as being multi-layered using the terms like artefacts and products for the more visible outer layer, norms and values and basic assumptions at the centre. Hofstede(1991) identified three levels of uniqueness in human mental programming such as human nature, culture and personality. Hofstede asserts that culture is something that is learned ,not inherited and that it derives from ones social environment ,not from ones genes unlike human nature which is universal and inherited ,and personality which is specific to individuals and is a mix of both inherited and learned. Schien(1985) also takes the same view that culture is learned through a group experience. Culture is multi-dimensional and therefore manifests itself in many ways. Schneider and barsoux(1997) refer to industry ;profession; national ;religion; functional and company as the interacting cultural spheres of influences. For the purpose of this literature, the main emphasis is on company culture, also referred as corporate or organisational culture. However, as an international company is being considered the impact of national culture cannot be ignored, particularly in the dyna mic and global market -place of todays business environment.(Hofstede,1991;Barnham and oates,1991;joynt,1999). The various definition of culture are also influenced by an authors particular field of study within the social sciences(Hall,1976).As culture is about perceptions and behaviours in groups, the study of culture is mainly had its roots in sociology, psychology and anthropology. The influence of economics, politics and religion are also considered to be key influencing factors that Garrison(1998) describes as the culture bedrock. The commonality between differing perspectives on culture is that there are value systems involved within groups in all of these types of social sciences-members of such groups each live by a set of common values and beliefs and system of meaning. (Malcolm higgs and sally morton).The culture of a country has been recognised for long as a major characteristic appertained to environment underlying behavioural differences in a systematic was norm as wel l as beliefs related to culture serve as powerful forces determining the perceptions ,behaviours and depositions of people.(Markus and kitayama,1991).culture gets reflection in common tendencies regarding enduring preference for specific state of affair over others,enduring preferences for certain social processes over others, an rules for selective attention ,interpretation of environment cues, as well as responses.(steenkamp,2001) There are several focus on national culture. some of them may be merely for the society, others for many ,if not all the societies at the same time. The present study aims to focus on those cultural dimensions that are several societies .Earlier, research on cross-cultural aspects was occasionally considered to be not painstaking since healthy, theory based frameworks of national culture had no existence. Valid fundamental frameworks depicting aspects of variation in national culture are of crucial significant in evolving a nomological structure able to integrate various attitudinal as well as behavioural phenomena offering a strong national advancing hypotheses which expatiate on systematic variation between various cultures in attitudinal and behavioural times.(Smith,1996.steenkamp,2001) References for 2.1 TROMPENAARS,F .AND WOLLIAMS,P.2003.BUSINESS ACROSS CULTURES.ENGLAND:CAPSTONE PUBLISHING LTD. GOFFEE,R.AND JONES,G.1998.THE CHARACTER OF A CORPORATION.LONDON HARPER COLLINS. SCHEIN,E.1985.ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE AND LEADRERSHIP.BOSTON:JOSSEY-BASS BREWSTER,C.SPARROW,P.VERNON.G.2008.INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT.2ND EDITION.LONDON:CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF PERSONNEL AND DEVELOPMENT SPARROW,P.BREWSTER,C.HARRIS,H.2004.GLOBALIZING HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT.LONDON:ROUTLEDGE. BRISCOE,D.SCHULER,R.1995.INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT. 2ND EDITION.NEW YORK:PRENTICE HALL. HALL,E.1959.THE SILENT LANGUAGE.NEW YORK:ANCHOR PRESS. DEAL,T.AND KENNEDY,A.1998.CORPORATE CULTURES.THE RITES AND RITUALS OF CORPORATE LIFE.MIDDLESEX:PENGUIN BOOKS. ULLRICH,D.1997HR OF THE FUTURE:CONCLUSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS:HR MANAGEMENT,36(1),PP 175-179 IPD.2000HR AND THE BOTTOM LINE.LONDON:IPD COLLINS,J.AND PORRAS,J.1999.BUILT TO LAST.LONDON:RANDOM HOUSE TROMPENAARS,F.AND WOOLLIAMS,P.1999.TRANS-CULTURAL COMPETENCE.PEOPLE MANAGEMENT,VOL.5,NO.8,PP.30-37 HOFSTEDE,G.1991.CULTURES AND ORGANSATIONS:SOFTWARE OF THE MIND.LONDON:MCGRAW-HILL BOOK COMPANY. GARRISON,T.1998.INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS CULTURE.LONDON:ELM PUBLICATIONS. HALL,E.1990.UNDERSTANDING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES.NEW YORK:INTERCULTURAL PRESS. SPARROW,P.SCHULER,R AND JACKSON,S.1994.CONVERGENCE OR DIVERGENCE:HUMAN RESOURCES PRACTICES AND POLICIES FOR COMPETATIVE ADVANTAGE WORLDWIDE,THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT5:2,MAY 1994 SCHNEIDER,S AND BARSOUX,J.1997.MANAGING ACROSS CULTURES.LONDON:PRENTICE HALL BARHAM,K.AND OATES,D.1991.THE INTERNATIONAL MANAGER.LONDON:ECONOMIST BOOKS. JOYNT.1999.THE GLOBAL HR MANAGER.LONDON:IPD HALL,E.1976.BEYOND CULTURE.NEW YORK:ANCHOR PRESS. STEENKAMP AND JAN-DBENEDICT.E,M.2001.THE ROLE OF NATIONAL CULTURE IN INTERNATIONAL MARKETING RESEARCH.INTERNATIONAL MARKETING REVIEW,VOLUME 18,NUMBER1,PP30-44 MARKUS,H.R AND KITAYAMA,S.1991. CULTURE AND THE SELF:IMPLICATIONA FOR COGNITION,EMOTION AND MOTIVATION,PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW,98,2,PP224-53. DENSION,D AND MISHRA,A.1995. TOWARD A THEORY OF ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE AND EFFECTIVENESS,ORGANSIATION SCIENCE.6.2,PP204-23. PETTIGREW,A.M.1979. ON STUDYING ORGANISATIONAL CULTURES.ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE.QUARTERLY,24.PP570-81 SIEHL,C AND MARTIN,J.1988. MEASURING ORGANSIATION CULTURE:MIXING QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE METHODS,IN JONES, M.O,MOORE,M.D,SYNDER,R.C(EDS),INSIDE ORGANSIATIONS:UNDERSTANDING THE HUMAN DIMENSIONS.NEWBURY PARK,CA:SAGE PUBLICATIONS.pp79-103 SIEHL,C AND MARTIN,J.1990. ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE:A KEY TO FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE,IN SCHNEIDER,B (EDS),ORGANSIATIONAL CLIMATE AND CULTURE,JOSSEY,SAN FRANCISCO, CA, pp 241-81. WALLACH,E.1983. INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANSIATIONS:THE CULTURAL MATCH.TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL,pp29-36 DANDRIDGE,T.MITROFF,I AND JOYCE,W.1980. ORGANSIATIONAL SYMBOLISM:A TOPIC TO EXPAND ORGANSIATIONAL ANALYSIS.ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT.REVIEW 5.pp 248-56 (Malcolm higgs and sally morton). .(Smith,1996. [Hilary harris.p16-17] Trompenaars (1995) .(Collins and porras1997; ;Goffee and jones:1988) Tayeb (2003,p.10) Trompenaars and hampden-turner (1997) .[ray French page 16]. .(Hofstede book pg 5)

Sydney Opera House Construction Project

Sydney Opera House Construction Project The purpose of this assignment is to research the Sydney Opera House construction project and to prepare a report under the following headings: Jump to Project overview/Background Project team/Stakeholders Construction Project costs Executive summary/Conclusion Project Overview/Background The Sydney Opera House is one of the worlds iconic buildings and is recognized by most people universally. It is has become a global symbol of Australia. Planning for the Sydney Opera House began in the late 1940s, when Eugene Goossens, the Director of the New South Wales (NSW) State Conservatorium of Music, lobbied for a suitable venue for large theatrical productions. The normal venue for these productions, the Sydney Town Hall, was not considered large enough. By 1954, Goossens had gained the support of NSW Premier (Prime Minister) Joseph Cahill, who called for designs for a dedicated opera house. It was also Goossens who insisted that Bennelong Point be the site for the Opera House. Joseph Cahill had originally wanted it to be on or near Wynyard Railway Station in the northwest of the CBD. In 1956 Joseph Cahill, announced an international competition for the design of an opera house for Sydney. The competition called for a structure that contained two theatres a large hall for opera, ballet, and large scale symphony concerts capable of seating 3,000-3,500 people, and a smaller hall for drama, chamber music and recitals, capable of seating approx 1,200 people. A total of 233 designs were submitted for the competition. In January 1957, Jorn Utzon was announced the winner after his design had originally been rejected by three of the four judges. His design was based on the sails of a ship and gull wings using architectural concepts borrowed from the ancient Chinese. He won AUS $15000 for his design. One of Utzons Original Sketches The Fort Macquarie Tram Depot, occupying the site at this time, was demolished in 1958. Originally the project was scheduled for four years with a budget of AUS $7 million. The goal was to have the project completed by the end of 1962 and have the grand opening at the start of 1963. The construction of the Opera House did not begin until March 1959. The project ended up taking 14 years to complete and cost AUS $102 million. Project Team/Stakeholders The project team consisted of the designer and architect Jorn Utzon as well as Ove Arup, who was in charge of the structure and the engineering. There were various other subcontractors who made up the remainder of the team. The team was in charge of mechanics, electrics, heating and ventilating, lighting and acoustics, basically all of the design and construction. There was no project manager appointed to the job, and it was assumed that Utzon was to take the managerial role for all decisions regarding any design, construction or development. In actuality, it was Arup who was in charge of construction and development, even though Utzon usually had the final decision. So while the responsibilities should have been evenly shared between Utzon and Arup, Utzon strived for more control than he had. In addition, since Utzon was unquestionably the leading professional in the team, the other members expected that he would control the program and produce the drawings for construction. Stakeholders are persons or organisations who will affect or be affected by the project. There were two main stakeholders at the beginning of the Sydney Opera House construction, Jorn Utzon and the state of New South Wales which encompassed the Australian Government who launched the competition for the project, especially the Labour Premier Joseph Cahill. Jorn Utzon When a more conservative Liberal Party won the elections in 1965 and a new government was created, Davis Hughes was appointed Minister for Public Works and became a main stakeholder as he had control over the funding for the project. Some other stakeholders were Ove Arup and his firm as well as the other external companies and consulting firms. The construction of the project required the use of new techniques (computer-based three dimensional site positioning devices, geothermal pumpsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦) and it was outsourced to new consulting bodies such as Unisearch. Finally, the public was an indirect stakeholder because they were concerned with the projects success. And while only some citizens would be customers of the Opera House, it would also prove to be an integral part of Sydney and the countrys history. The public also contributed to the funding of the Opera through a lottery set up by the Government. Construction The project was built in three stages. Stage I (1959-1963) consisted of building the upper podium. Stage II (1963-1967) saw the construction of the outer shells. Stage III (1967-1973) consisted of the interior design and construction. Stage 1 Stage 1 commenced on 2 March 1959 by the construction firm Civil HYPERLINK http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil__CivicHYPERLINK http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil__Civic Civic, monitored by the Ove Arups engineering firm. The government had pushed for work to begin early, fearing that funding, or public opinion, might turn against them. However, Utzon had still not completed the final designs. There were still some major structural issues that were yet to be resolved. By 23 January 1961, work was running 47 weeks behind schedule, mainly because of unexpected difficulties (inclement weather, unexpected difficulty diverting stormwater, construction beginning before proper construction drawings had been prepared, changes of original contract documents). Work on the podium was finally completed in February 1963. Construction of the podium 1962 The forced early start led to significant later problems, one of the biggest problems being the fact that the podium columns were not strong enough to support the roof structure, and had to be re-built Stage 2 The shells of the competition entry were originally of undefined geometry. Ove Arup and his engineering firm struggled to find an acceptable solution to constructing them. The formwork for using in-situ concrete would have been prohibitively expensive, but, because there was no repetition in any of the roof forms, the construction of precast concrete for each individual section would possibly have been even more expensive. From 1957 to 1963, the design team went through at least twelve variations of the form of the shells trying to find an economically acceptable form before a realistic solution was agreed upon. The design work on the shells involved one of the earliest uses of computers in structural analysis, in order to understand some of forces to which the shells would be subjected. In mid-1961, the design team found a solution to the problem: the shells all being created as sections from a sphere. The shells were constructed by Hornibrook Group Pty Ltd, who were also responsible for construction in Stage 3. Hornibrook manufactured the 2400 precast ribs and 4000 roof panels in an on-site factory and also developed the construction processes. The achievement of this solution avoided the need for expensive formwork construction by allowing the use of precast units (it also allowed the roof tiles to be prefabricated in sheets on the ground, instead of being stuck on individually at height). Ove Arup and Partners site engineer supervised the construction of the shells, which used an innovative adjustable steel-trussed erection arch to support the different roofs before completion. On 6 April 1962, it was estimated that the Opera House would be completed between August 1964 and March 1965. Construction of the shells 1963 Stage 3 By Stage 3, the interiors, the project was taking up so much of his time that Utzon moved his entire office to Sydney in February 1963. However, there was a change of government in 1965, and the new Robert Askin government declared the project under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Public Works and put massive pressure on Utzon to finish the project. This ultimately led to his resignation in 1966. His position was taken over by Peter Hall who was mostly responsible for the interior design. At this point, the government asked for the number of seats to be increased from 2000 to 3000. The acoustic advisor, Lothar Cremer, was full of criticism of Utzons original design. He said this would not be possible and would be detrimental to the acoustics. Utzons design was coming under a significant amount of criticism at this point. Even the stage designer, Peter Jones, criticised the overall interior design. During all the criticism, work was still carried out with significant changes to Ut zons design. The final stage was eventually completed in 1973. Sydney Opera House Interior Project Costs The Sydney Opera House could probably be seen as one of the most financially disastrous construction projects in history. The winning design from the competition was originally supposed to have a budget of AUS$7 million. Initially the cost of the Opera House was estimated at AUS$3.6 million from the design entry. When Utzon submitted his refined designs the Red Book, the estimates were then calculated by a quantity surveyor at AUS$4,781,200. The NSW Government decided not to invest any money into the Opera House and decided to donate no more than AUS$100,000. They then set up the Opera House Lottery for the public, which ran through the course of the construction and generated enough funds to keep the construction going. The Opera House was formally completed in 1973, having cost $102 million. The following approximations were provided by the Hornibrook director in charge of the project Stage 1: Podium Civil and Civic $5.5 million Stage 2: Roof Shells $12.5 million Stage 3 : Stage equipment, stage lighting and organ $9 million Fees and other costs $16.5 million. 1974, the minister for public works announced the final bill for the project was $102 million, a total of $95 million over budget. Executive Summary/Conclusion The Sydney Opera House project was an unmitigated failure from a construction and project management point of view. The three major factors for a project to be successful are cost, time and quality. The project came in at a total of almost 1400% over budget and took ten years longer than expected. There were a number of factors in the failure of the project. At the beginning of any project, goals and objectives have to be clearly defined by the client to provide a guideline for what the project must contain. The project wasnt defined properly and the plans were changed constantly. The Australian Governments impatience and decision to start the construction before all the designs and drawings had been completed was a major factor in the project failures. This in turn made it extremely difficult for the design and construction teams as well as increasing the costs of the project. Jorn Utzon, being the designer and architect should have attempted to minimise changes to the plans unless absolutely necessary by simply rejecting unnecessary alterations. The lack of a project manager played a big role in the failure of the project. A project manager is absolutely essential for most construction projects and certainly a project of this size. In general, the project manager is responsible for the overall success of the project. The lack of leadership and guidance seemed to be a significant problem during the building of the Opera House. Without a project manager there was no clear leader or boss and therefore nobody for the contractors to liaise with in the event of uncertainties or concerns about any aspect of the construction except for Utzon who seemed to have his hands full with the constant design changes and updates. Although the construction of the project is generally seen as an absolute failure, it is impossible to argue that the Sydney Opera House is anything other than an outstanding success for Sydney and for Australia as a country. It is one of the most recognisable buildings in the world and attracts millions of visitors annually.

The Woodlanders :: Free Essays Online

The Woodlanders Thomas Hardy, the author of The Woodlanders, is "considered one of the greatest novelist in English literature"(Vol. 4). This genius was born on June 2nd of 1840 in Bockhampton, Dorset, England. He was the oldest boy in his family. Hardy began his writing career in 1862, at the age of twenty-two. In 1867, at the age of twenty-seven, he wrote his first novel. The novel was entitled, The Poor Man and the Lady. Today only bits and pieces of this book remain. Some critics did not think that Hardy’s first book was cut out for publication. George Meredith, a reader for Chapman and Hall publishers, advised against the publication of The Poor Man and the Lady. He thought Hardy had potential and encouraged him to continue writing(Pettit). Practice makes perfect. In November of 1872, at the age of thirty-two, Hardy was asked to write a serial novel for Cornhill Magazine. This was the start of something really good for Hardy. Soon after this, his career sky rocketed and he started pumping out the manuscripts. In 1874, Hardy began writing Far from the Madding Crowd. He was engrossed in the making of this book; it consumed him. While attending college classes, he resorted to writing on leaves, woodchips, stones, and whatever else he could find while moving between classes. This book marked the turning point of his career. Not to long after this, his wife passed away. It did not seem that Hardy was too broken up over this tragedy because soon after his wife’s death, he married his secretary. The marriage only lasted for a little while because on January eleventh of 1928 Hardy died in his hometown of Dorset, England. His heart was buried in the "Wessex" countryside, in the parish churchyard at Stinsford. His ashes were placed next to those of Charles Dickens in Poet’s Corner of Westminster Abbey. Wessex is a fictional place in England that Hardy made up, and placed his novels in its scenery. Its lush landscape is what is described in most of Hardy’s novels, especially The Woodlanders. The book has been described as being "alive with landscape"(Woodlanders). James Wood describes the book by saying it "is an anguished and contradictory meditation on belonging, on what it means to be rooted in a place"(Woodlanders). Wood also says that Hardy’s works are like Shakespeare’s, except Hardy’s works are like hard comedies and hard tragedies. The Woodlanders was first published simultaneously in monthly serial parts in England’s Macmillan’s Magazine and in weekly parts in the United States in Harper’s Bazaar.

Essay --

%tim's tictactoe final project for ENGR 120 computational tools function tttprog() %builds UI screen f = figure('Name','Tic-Tac-Toe','Units','centimeters',... 'Position',[5, 5, 15, 11]); %keeps track of turns - 0:X 1:O global turn turn = 0; %add buttons global b1 b2 b3 b4 b5 b6 b7 b8 b9 b1 = uicontrol(f,'Style','pushbutton','Units','centimeters',... 'Position',[1, 7, 3, 3],'FontSize',36,'Callback',@onPush); b2 = uicontrol(f,'Style','pushbutton','Units','centimeters',... 'Position',[4, 7, 3, 3],'FontSize',36,'Callback',@onPush); b3 = uicontrol(f,'Style','pushbutton','Units','centimeters',... 'Position',[7, 7, 3, 3],'FontSize',36,'Callback',@onPush); b4 = uicontrol(f,'Style','pushbutton','Units','centimeters',... 'Position',[1, 4, 3, 3],'FontSize',36,'Callback',@onPush); b5 = uicontrol(f,'Style','pushbutton','Units','centimeters',... 'Position',[4, 4, 3, 3],'FontSize',36,'Callback',@onPush); b6 = uicontrol(f,'Style','pushbutton','Units','centimeters',... 'Position',[7, 4, 3, 3],'FontSize',36,'Callback',@onPush); b7 = uicontrol(f,'Style','pushbutton','Uni...

Inequality: Education and High Income

There are gaps between the rich and poor. The world has income inequality, inequality of opportunity such as education, and environmental inequality. In Toni Cade Bambara’s short story, â€Å"The Lesson† she talks about social status and economic inequality. Most people do not have the same equal opportunities to be successful because of numerous social issues. The main social issue that Bambara wrote about in her short story is economic inequality is a big social issue in society. But this social issue inspires people to make a change and not keep repeating the cycle. Why does economic inequality exist? What causes inequality of opportunity? This paper seeks to define these questions and how it is important in society and its impact. To fix the main cause of inequality it must be taken care of early on in a child’s education. People that do not have a high income should be more supportive of programs that effectively involve, low-income students in school, and programs such as Head Start. These different types of programs in a child’s life can provide students with an early start in school and decrease privileged students. Tackling and fixing these problems from an early start is a primary solution that can create a small effect of great outcomes to solve the problem of educational disparities at the root of the cause. People can solve these types of problems in society as a community. People must change their mindset and actually support and work together for a better educational system. It is hopeless to try to create a change without first changing and questioning the way society thinks and functions. The way the educational department is established is not providing the results it should be having with students, and the way it is designed is not benefiting students equally, in fact, it is leaving many students behind. It is only by changing the way the education system functions that the people can create a better system more suited to improving the learning conditions among everyone equally. There are many reasons why inequality can be caused in society. It is caused by a person’s skin color, or the simple fact a person’s growth in overall income. Inequality is caused by just being born into. For example, if a person is born into a family that has wealth and assets they basically got a head start, verses someone that is born into a low income home. Families with wealth can pay for better education for their children which will open opportunities for them. On the other hand, people hat are born into a disadvantage home that cannot afford better education will most likely stay with a disadvantage. Education makes a difference whether a person has a high paying or low paying job. In Bambara’s short story â€Å"The Lesson† Sugar says â€Å"this is not much a democracy if you ask me. Equal chance to purse happiness means an equal crack at the dough† (Bambara, 362). Sugar expresses that people with high income buys toys that cost more than th eir home income. The people that can afford toys that cost $300-$1,000 obviously have a good job which came from a good education. But if schools in low income communities do not educate like schools in high income communities, the low income schools do not have the same opportunities as the high income schools. Sounds like environmental inequality. People get what their environment hands them, which is bad education, low paying jobs and small income. Equal opportunity is a law that all people should be treated the same. It is not an equal opportunity if a person cannot go to a better school to get a better education to make a better income because they do not have enough money for that better school. Inequality of outcomes often goes hand in hand with inequality of opportunities, as poor people endure various forms of social exclusion, including unequal access to education and health care, high rates of youth unemployment of precarious work and an absence of social recognition. † (F Bourguignon) They say important jobs go to people most qualified, which is reasonable but if a person with a high income cou ld afford a better education that a person that could not afford a better education the job would automatically go to the person with the higher income. Does not seem fair, and it is probably hard to break that cycle. Economic inequality is a big social issue in society. Economic inequality is known as the gap between rich and poor, income inequality, and wealth differences. There are many reasons why inequality is caused such as, educational issues, skin color, or even wealth. Nevertheless, inequality does make people want to change. In Toni Cade Bambara’s short story, â€Å"The Lesson†, she expresses about a social problem in the world called economic inequality.

Peter Kolchin, American Slavery

For the past quarter century Edmund S. Morgan has been one of the most prolific and respected authors of early American history. This is an excellent, in depth survey of Virginia?s colonial experience, with an emphasis on how the seemingly contradictory institutions of slavery and equalitarian republicanism developed simultaneously. Indeed, Morgan argues that Virginians? definition of freedom, and their very ability to establish a republican political system, rested upon the creation of African slavery. Morgan shows that institutionalized slavery did not necessarily have to become part of British colonization; the earliest Englishmen to dream of a colonial empire hoped for the establishment of a utopian community in which natives could benefit from enlightened English governance that recognized the inherent rights of all men. Early English explorers even helped to organize revolts against the Spanish by their slaves in Latin America, and while they were motivated by their own interests in doing so, they clearly were willing to treat their slave co-conspirators as equals. However, the utopian phase of colonization died with the failed settlement at Roanoke in the 1580s. The founders of Jamestown quickly learned racism towards the Indians, whom Morgan speculates they goaded into warfare out of frustration at their own inability to support themselves. The settlement eventually became prosperous as the colonists learned to produce tobacco for market, but it was hardly the ideal society envisioned by the founders. Labor shortages were endemic, as to make a profit planters needed to control a large number of indentured servants. Unfortunately (for the planters), laborers needed only to serve for a limited period before setting up business for themselves, and thus creating competition for the planters. To check this competition, planters made it difficult for freedmen to buy lands of their own (land was plentiful, but acreage with access to shipping had been almost totally monopolized by the large planters), which resulted in freedmen foregoing planting, and becoming lazy, shiftless, and at times rebellious. Moreover, planters treated their indentured servants so poorly that as news of their condition drifted back to England, fewer of the mother country?s poor were willing to indenture themselves, especially as the burdens of overpopulation were being reduced at home.