Drug Legalization :: essays research papers

Just say no? This is not exactly the philosophy that the vast majority of the United States population tends to follow. Drugs have become a routine aspect of everyday life in the United States. Neither a gigantic metropolis nor a minute town have gone without feeling the everlasting effects of drugs. Drug use has always posed a major dilemma for America to overcome. The banning of illegal drugs takes many back to the days of the Prohibition problems involving the banishment of alcohol. Prohibition obviously did not work in the 1920’s, and some modern day people feel that making drugs legal would solve the constantly rising drug problem. In his article Facing up to Drugs: Is Legalization the Solution?, Pete Hamill presents both sides of the argument very thoroughly. Using tremendous techniques in both writing and in major points, the author persuades the reader to give a great deal of consideration to the author’s belief that legalization is the answer to America’ s drug problem. In delivering his points to the reader, Hamill effectively makes good use of internal structure. Initially, the point of view utilized in this article exhibits an interesting way that the reader can personalize himself with the article. The constant use of â€Å"I† in the article lets the reader know that the author has had first hand experience with the drug issue. The first person point of view also reinforces the fact that this article is completely based on the ideas and beliefs of Hamill. In addition, playing a key role in this article, the audience remains convinced via the effective techniques in writing. In general, this article reaches out to everyone in the United States, and possibly the rest of the world. However, this article targets powerful individuals, and those in the government who can make an impact on the drug world. This illustrates the whit of Hamill in that he discreetly makes a statement to high ranking officials. Most importantly, the tone in which the author reveals with dignity gives a sense of truthfulness to the reader. The author overall writes seriously, but with a touch of sarcasm here and there. Adding to the seriousness, the author’s realistic approach to the situation on drugs tells the reader that the author means every last bit of what he is saying. Although numerous internal writing techniques remain evident, some of the major points that Hamill illustrates in his article prove very effective.

macbeth :: essays research papers

The play Macbeth was written by William Shakespeare. This play tells of betrayal, temptations, ambitions, murder, treason and manipulation. The readers feels sympathetic for MacBeth, as he is stuck in the middle of a situation he can’t get out of. However, sympathy is lost when MacBeth commits evil deeds that he is only responsible for. Macbeth is only persuaded to commit treason, but due to his paranoia he kills many more people. The main focus is Macbeth, being the unfortunate victim, from the 3 evil witches to Lady Macbeth. His downfall is caused by other people around him. Macbeth is the unfortunate victim of other people’s greed and for this the reader sympathises. The three withes are a physical presence of evil. They conspire to kill as many people as possible, under their superior, Hecate. Using their evil gift to see into the future, they can tell that by using Macbeth as a tool for destruction they can fill him with evil. To get Macbeth to do their evil biddings, they first influence him by planting a seed of evil into his mind. By giving Macbeth that prophecy, they ensure that their plans will work. Macbeth is a good and loyal kinsman who would never harm his King. Were it not for outside forces, he would have lived happily as Thane of Cawdor, a high position title in itself. Macbeth does not even want to kill King Duncan. He says â€Å"chance may crown me without my stir†, which means that if he become king, he would not commit any evil to get there. Fearing the witches’ message means that he will kill the king in the futur e, he says â€Å"Present fears are less than horrible imaginings.† Three evil withes foretell that Macbeth will become Thane of Cawdor and even King of Scotland. Macbeth ignored their prophecies, but after he was promoted to Thane of Cawdor for his brave fight in the war, Macbeth wonders if he could become king, and than his ambition takes over. Up until this point, sympathy is lost, as MacBeth takes a turn for the worst, obeying to his wifes commands, and being tempted by the thought of becoming king. Lady Macbeth is an ambitious woman like her counter-part, but there the reader never feels sympathetic for her. She is an evil women, blinded by her greed, she makes MacBeth commit evil deeds, and leads herself and MacBeth to their self destruction.

Susan Cains Quiet

In the introduction of Susan Cain’s Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking it told a story of Rosa Parks. She is the lady that would not change her seat on the public bus so a white passenger could take it. She simply said â€Å"No. † Many think Rosa Parks was an extrovert personality but in fact she was an introvert personality. Martin Luther King Jr. was a great orator and with an extrovert personality so he was able to help Rosa Parks since she was timid and shy. Rosa still had â€Å"courage of a lion. † Some ask how could she be quiet and courageous. Or how can quiet be strong? Today, we here, in the United States think we are a bunch of extroverts but in fact a study showed that one third to one half of Americans are introverts. We are told that to be a great person we have to be bold, or to be happy, we surly must be social. Americans pretend to be extroverts until their true colors come out when some life altering event changes them and makes them step back and look at their true natures. Truly we really like people who can put them self out there, someone who is comfortable in the spot light of life. But this is not the case with many successful people. Many wealthy, smart, and gifted people are not extroverts. Extroverts tend to tackle assignments quickly, make rash decisions, do multitasking, are risk takers, like money and status. They are the people who are the life of the party and love to laugh and talk. Introverts work more slowly and deliberately, focus on one task at a time, can concentrate well, they don’t really care to much for wealth or fame. They have social skills but after a while would just prefer to be at home with family or close friends. They are good listeners, they think before speaking and they express better in writing it than saying it. The introduction left us with a question if we can shape ourselves and make what we will of our lives. Can We? Chapter 5 Summary Susan Cain opened chapter 5 about her experience going to visit Dr. Carl Schwartz and seeing a multimillion-dollar fMRI (functional resonance magnetic imaging) machine. The fMRI can measure which parts of the brain are active when you’re thinking a particular thought or performing a specific task. They are really interested in activity in the amygdale the powerful organ inside the brain that Kagan found played such an important role is shaping some introverts and extroverts personalities. They test infants through their late teens. They have a theory that people are of high or low reactive temperaments and that our inborn temperaments influence us regardless of the lives we lead. Who we are is ordained by our genes, our brains and our nervous systems. We can stretch ourselves-within limits. We can even reach for the outer limits of our temperaments. We can get out of our comfort zones. We can even project artificial enthusiasm but there is no one more courageous than the person who speaks with the courage of his convictions. I do not think that our inborn temperaments do remain the same throughout our entire life. The events we face in life change us, such as marriage and parenting can make us more patient or less patient. Birth and death can change our temperaments as well as so could sickness and health. I believe that each thing we face in life teaches us lessons and with lessons we change our very being. I think that we stretch our personalities with each different circumstance in life because we just have to, we have to be able to live in harmony with ourselves as well as others at home, work, with our friends and extended family. And to that we must adapt and stretch ourselves. I had to stretch my introvert personality when I started playing the piano. I wanted to learn to play for myself but soon realized I had to play in front of my teacher, my parents (whom was paying the teacher). Then came the recitals. Then came the church music solos of playing the piano and singing at the same time! It was difficult for me to let people just sit and watch me perform. But you know what, I adapted my personality to do this talent. I recently played and sang at my high school graduation and was chosen to make a speech of what I was thankful for in life and about my future plans for my career. So I did overcome my quiet, shy temperament. I smiled, spoke loud, fast and clear and tired to act as if I was an extrovert.

American Economy

In a broad sense, the macroeconomic policies developed and implemented by the Federal Reserve (the Fed) are those which regulate the national supply of money. Either through foreign exchange operations, or management of public funds, the Fed seeks to maintain the level of money supply in ways that would sustain stable inflation rates. It should be noted that while Fed’s macroeconomic policies tend to impact aggregate demand and GDP these are primarily short-term effects, with the rate of inflation being the main long-term target of any monetary policy.Now, in conditions of the growing financial crisis, it is more than important to reconsider and reevaluate the effects of the major Fed’s macroeconomic policies on the major sectors of the U. S. economy. Given the instability of the current financial and housing markets, this analysis is expected to become the source of useful policy recommendations in short and long run. American Economy Introduction In a broad sense, mac roeconomic policies developed and implemented by the Federal Reserve (the Fed) are those which regulate the national supply of money.Either through foreign exchange operations, or management of public funds, the Fed seeks to maintain the level of money supply in ways that would sustain stable inflation rates. It should be noted that while Fed’s macroeconomic policies tend to impact aggregate demand and GDP these are primarily short-term effects, with the rate of inflation being the main long-term target of any monetary policy. Now, in conditions of the growing financial crisis, it is more than important to reconsider and reevaluate the effects of the major Fed’s macroeconomic policies on the major sectors of the U.S. economy. Given the instability of the current financial and housing markets, this analysis is expected to become the source of useful policy recommendations in short and long run. Monetary policies have long been the issue of the Fed’s major concern . Through the prism of numerous monetary factors, the Fed used to evaluate the causes and consequences of particular monetary decisions and their effects on economic behaviors. The truth is, however, that in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the macroeconomic policies in the U. S., a detailed review of the structural factors that stand behind the current economic crisis is required. The combination of the housing and credit crunch drivers needs to be reconsidered, to realize the real-life implications of all monetary initiatives the Fed has been able to implement over the course of the last three years. To start with, the current economic crisis originates from the strategic change in equilibrium within housing markets, as well as the decline in house prices â€Å"as the market gives back the excessive part of the rise in real house prices – the part not justified by realized rentals† (Wu, 2008).These structural shifts have obviously impacted the situation with em ployment, banking, and construction. Another set of structural factors is readily visible in the financial sector, where subprime mortgages and the following illiquidity and reduced supply of loans have led the banks to the need for increasing their assets and making their share prices vulnerable to even the slightest changes in business sector (Kutter & Mosser, 2007).The slowdown of productivity, the decreasing value of business and economic expectations, and oil prices have also contributed in the expansion of the current financial crisis, which is more the result of structural shifts in global and national economy, rather than the direct consequence of ineffective monetary approaches. In this context, the natural question is what the Fed has done to decrease the negative impact of financial crisis on the major sectors of business and economy, and whether Fed’s macroeconomic policies in their traditional form remain relevant in the changing financial and economic conditions .Since the end of 2006 and up to the beginning of 2009, the gradual increase of the Fed’s reserve balances has been the distinctive feature of the Fed’s response to the expanding economic crisis. The increase in reserve balances have become particularly visible and sharp by the end of 2008, when the Fed faced a serious need to provide banks and business entities with additional liquidity instruments and loans (Lacker, 2009). In a very short-time period, the Fed has increased the reserve balances supply by over 100-fold, with the latter reaching the amount of $848 billion (Boivin & Giannoni, 2008).Purchasing securities and providing financial institutions with guaranteed loans was one of the reasons for such sharp reserve balances increase, but beyond that, the Fed sought to finance its loan activities by creating additional money. It should be noted here, that with the need to obtain additional financial instruments, the Fed can follow the three different pathways: cre ating money, borrowing funds from the U. S. treasury, and issuing debt (Gilpin, 2008).Selling government securities is just another option the Fed can utilize to obtain additional funds. Importantly, with the emergence of the economic threats and during the first months of crisis the Fed chose to follow the fourth path, adjusting its portfolio to its economic and financial needs by selling off government securities, but with the amount of government securities being insufficient to maintain financial and monetary stability in the U. S. , the Fed has come to realize the need for creating new money.In the light of the essential structural shifts, and given the long-term impacts which the process of creating new money produces on all areas of economic activity, these macroeconomic policy decisions have already turned into the source of increasing professional concerns, and there are several reasons for that. First, the effectiveness of federal reserves increase seems doubtful due to th e inflationary trends with which it is usually associated. Under the impact of falling commodity prices, when inflation risks seem at least improbable, the Fed nevertheless should not lose the sense of caution.The fact is that when the need withdraw the funds and to reduce the amount of federal reserves arises, the Fed is likely to face another inflationary challenge, and whether it is able to avoid long-term increase in prices will depend on the moment the Fed chooses for reducing the amount of funds (Boivin & Giannoni, 2008). Second, Gilpin (2008) suggests that as long as the Fed is increasingly involved into selective financing as a part of its macroeconomic initiatives, the Fed’s independence from other governmental institutions becomes irrelevant and at least doubtful.Rudebusch (2008) writes that â€Å"the recent request by the Treasury for the Fed to assist in creating a Consumer and Business Loan Initiative is certainly reminiscent of the request by Treasury for the F ed to help out in its own borrowing operations before the Accord of 1950†. Thus, whether the Fed acts in accordance with macroeconomic principles or follows the recommendations and requirements of Congress will also determine its consistence as the central financial body and as the source of the major macroeconomic initiatives.Finally, as Congress is trying to tie the Fed to its authoritative decisions, and the Fed does not look beyond the need for creating additional money and applying selective funding principles, the only effect the Fed has been able to produce is proving its inability to act as an independent financial body. The problem is that against the continuous success of its expansionary initiatives and the absence of deep recessions, the Fed found itself in the midst of predictable policies and workable macroeconomic guidelines.Since the end of 2006, however, those guidelines and policies have gradually lost their effectiveness (Rudebusch, 2008). Scholars and profe ssionals in economics recognize the declining effectiveness of the major Fed’s initiatives: the Fed is no longer able to produce immediate positive effects on the interest rates; the benefits of the major macroeconomic initiatives have been muted by the mortgage securities market issues; investors are disappointed with the recent Fed’s decisions – all these factors significantly contribute into the expansion of the current financial crisis, making the financial image of the Fed even more negative.Until present, the ineffective macroeconomic activity of the Fed has only led to re-appreciation and reconsideration of the benefits of fiscal stimuli and responses to the changing economic conditions. Against the inconsistency of the Fed’s decisions, the scope of the Fed’s operations was limited to adjusting federal funds rate and issuing additional financial instruments. Federal Reserve lending in the broader macroeconomic contexts has also become the to pic of increasing professional interest.In response to recent slowdown, the Fed has developed a whole set of lending initiatives, which either targeted specific groups of assets, or specific business entities or institutions, or implied the need for standard discount window lending (Lacker, 2009). From the viewpoint of macroeconomics and the long-term impact which these interventions tend to produce, before the middle of 2008 the Fed had been working to provide lending in ways that would not increase the monetary base but would instead redirect additional bank reserves to cover its lending commitments.Since the end of October 2008, however, the Fed has no longer been able to maintain its monetary base unchanged, and had to combine its lending ideas with additional monetary stimuli (Lacker, 2009). These lending programs have been effective to the extent that changed the balance of credit in specific markets, and â€Å"while some market segments benefit from reduced funding costs, ot hers may actually see their costs rise as credit is diverted to those markets that have been targeted by support† (Lacker, 2009).In relation to lending, it is essential to note that over the last three years the Federal Reserve intentionally chose to conduct its monetary interventions with the help of the federal funds rate, which provides the Fed with an increasingly active position regarding macroeconomic policies in the U. S. By changing the discount rate, the Fed gives financial institutions a chance and the right to borrow directly from the Fed, and the Fed’s board can either approve or deny the loan (Gilpin, 2008).The situation is similar with other lending initiatives, but when it comes to supporting specific business entities or markets, the Fed risks losing its independence and faces a decision-making challenge of cooperation with Congress. More than that, with lending being one of the major macroeconomic operations initiated by the Fed in the last 3 years, pro fessionals have come to realize the inconsistence and the distorted vision of the Fed with regard to discount rate as the central policy instrument.In other words, where financial institutions seek to replenish the lack of liquidity, they prefer borrowing overnight, thus leaving the Fed no time to review the real financial needs of financial institutions (Krugman, 2007). As a result, it was not before the middle of 2007 that the Fed has become concerned about the decreasing liquidity of its assets and the need to reduce the discount rate for primary credit.Since that time, the Fed continuously supported its â€Å"federal funds rate reduce† line, which suggests that reducing discount and federal funds rates was one of the least ineffective macroeconomic approaches and did not extend beyond producing short-term positive impacts on financial and commodity markets (Yuan & Zimmerma, 2008). The structural forces that currently govern the economic and financial balance in the U. S. and the world inevitably impact the so-called natural interest rates, of which the Fed seems unaware.That means that while the current rate of return on equities is above 5. 5%, it is also much higher than the policy rates which the Fed adjusts to make them fit to the current rates of inflation (Gilpin, 2008). Furthermore, given that the origins of the current economic crisis lay within the limits of the housing markets, it is very probable that â€Å"what will be driving real rates of interest once the economy settles into its new growth path is the rate that households require on loans† (Krugman, 2007).Thus, in its credit initiatives, the Fed has obviously neglected a whole set of important factors, which make its macroeconomic policies at least irrelevant. While the Fed seeks to expand the liquidity of available funds by maintaining interest rates at the levels close to zero, it distorts the macroeconomic balance. The fact is that against the reduced wealth levels and the growing negative expectations, the expected rates of interest in future will be much higher than the Fed currently promotes (Krugman, 2007).With the growing need for funds on the side of financial and business entities, the Fed is likely to face the crisis of expectations, where it is either unable to maintain sustainable interest rates or fails to provide businesses with sufficient amount of financial assets. Thus, whether the Fed is able to promote the success of its major macroeconomic initiatives depends on its ability to timely review its macroeconomic attempts and to adjust them to real-life market contexts.In the light of the increasing inefficiency of the major Fed’s interventions, special attention needs to be paid to the so-called moral hazard problem. â€Å"Safety net support for financial institutions encourages private market participants to view some institutions as ‘too big to fail’ and weakens those institutions’ incentive to monitor and m anage the risks they face in their business strategies and financial market transactions† (Gilpin, 2008); as a result, this inattentiveness to the major market risks weakens financial and business institutions and increases the cost of this financial protection.In other words, while the Fed pursues the need to reduce the cost of credit for ultimate borrowers by providing financial and credit institutions with additional financial assets, it unintentionally leads these institutions undertake higher additional risks than they otherwise would be willing to recognize (Lacker, 2009). As a result, the cost of borrowing substantially increases, leaving these institutions in the need to absorb the effects of moral hazard without external support.Does that mean that the Fed has initially chosen a wrong macroeconomic path? This question lacks a single and obvious answer, and while many financial institutions and business entities will require expanding the range of available liquid reso urces by using federal funds, a stronger regulatory basis and strict system of monitoring could significantly increase the efficiency of all macroeconomic policies aimed at reducing the negative impact of the current financial crisis. ConclusionThe Federal Reserve has appeared completely unprepared to facing the challenges of the expanding economic crisis. Despite the relevance of the new liquidity mechanisms and the Fed’s striving to expand the range of available financial instruments, these measures will hardly be effective in the long run. Moreover, given the undue risks financial institutions and business entities undertake and the limitedness of the Fed’s financial resources, its current macroeconomic initiatives are likely to become counter effective in the U.S. striving to preserve its leading position among the major economic powers. In this context, strict regulation and a well-developed system of federal monitoring will increase the effectiveness of all Fedâ €™s initiatives at the macroeconomic level. References Boivin, J. & Giannoni, M. P. (2008). Has monetary policy become more effective? The Review of Economics and Statistics, 90 (3): 445-462. Gilpin, R. (2008). Global political economy: Understanding the international economic order.Orient Longman. Lacker, J. (2009). Government lending and monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. Retrieved April 1, 2009 from http://www. richmondfed. org/press_room/speeches/president_jeff_lacker/2009/lacker_speech_20090302. cfm Krugman, P. (2007). Thinking of the liquidity trap. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 14 (4): 331-337. Kuttner, K. N. & Mosser, P. (2007). The monetary policy transmission mechanism: Some answers and further questions.Federal Reserve Bank of New York Economic Policy Review, 8 (1): 15-26. Rudebusch, G. & Wu, T. (2008). A macro-finance model of the monetary policy and the economy. Economic Journal, 118 (530): 906-926. Wu, T. (2008). On the ef fectiveness of the Federal Reserve’s new liquidity facilities. Elsevier, 52 (4): 745-777. Yuan, M. & Zimmerman, C. (2008). Credit crunch, bank lending, and monetary policy: A model of financial intermediation with heterogeneous projects. Springer, 29 (1): 244-265.

When Harry Met Sally

When Harry met Sally Based on the communication styles listed in your text (Closed, Open, Hidden & Blind), please match a character to each of these styles. List the character, and then support your answer with a specific example. Closed Communication Style- Marie shows signs of representing a â€Å"closed communication style† because she spends most of her time in the film overly obsessed with a married man. She has a hard time recognizing the fact that he is married and stays in the â€Å"relationship† with him even though it has no clear destination.Hidden Communication Style- I witnessed two examples of hidden communication thru out the movie. One example, when Harry is persistent about questioning Sally’s life and never really shares his own life experiences. Jess is another example of a hidden communicator. Jess was concerned about Harry not being happy when they were batting. He also showed that he was concerned about the progress of Harrys relationship an d his emotional feelings while his marriage was disintegrating. Blind Communication Style-From my understanding, blind communicators voice their opinions about how things should be done and have no problem with telling people what they have done wrong. The character that I think represented blind communication mostly throughout the film was Harry. Harry had the tendency to think his knowledge superseded everyone else when it came to relationships. For example, Harry criticized Sally on the way to the restaurant when they first met outside the college. He talked about her choice of career, and basically said that she will not know what to do when â€Å"her world comes crashing down† so to speak.Open Communication Style- Based on my knowledge from the book, people that express all their feelings, emotions, life experiences and more are considered â€Å"open communicators†. Based on the conversations between Harry and Sally, I would have no choice but to say that Sally is classified as an open communicator. When Harry asked Sally at the restaurant who she had great sex with, at first she refused to tell him and only seconds later she rambled on and on about her sexual experience. Match a character to each of these conflict strategies? Give a specific example to support your answer.Compromising- (Jess) In the movie Jess and Marie were having an argument over Jess’s table (whether or not to have it in their home). Marie did not want the table, Jess asked Harry what he thought and after Harry gave him his opinion Jess got rid of the table. Collaborating/Problem-Solving- (Harry) Harry spent a lot of time attempting to fix his relationship with Sally after their huge fight. He kept calling her and eventually sang to her over the answering machine when she did not pickup. Accommodating/smoothing-(Marie) In the movie Marie held a relationship with a married man.She discarded her own feelings to make this guy happy, and he never once considered her f eelings. She had this fantasy that he was going to leave his wife to be with her, but it reality he never intended to. Marie put her feelings last to make the so called relationship work. Avoiding/Withdrawal-(Sally) When Harry and Sally first met and were at the restaurant, Harry complimented Sally on her attractiveness. Sally, be loyal to her friend, immediately gets up and is ready to leave, because she knows that Harry is in a relationship with her friend.In this example she is withdrawing herself from a situation, by avoiding the compliment. Competing/Forcing-(Harry) Harry is constantly debating his relationship knowledge with Sally in the movie. He is a very competitive individual and seems to always have the need to be â€Å"right†. Provide 3 signs of poor listening seem throughout the film. Provide ways that their listening could be improved. One sign of poor listening that I remember, was each time Marie talked about her boyfriend and Sally tried to tell her that the he would never leave his wife; Marie appeared to listen but refused to take the advice to leave him.She could of maybe did some compare and contrast to her relationship and others to realize that Sally was right. If she would have listened to her, she would have saved herself the emotional rollercoaster and maybe could have found a man sooner. The second sign of poor listening was when the two couples were exiting the restaurant from their double date. Harry and Sally both expressed, separately, to Jess and Marie that it would be better for them to wait to call each other to protect the feelings of Harry and Sally.Jess and Marie obviously couldn’t wait to be together, so they got in the first cab they saw and drove away together. This illustration of poor listening could have been improved if Jess and Marie took Harry and Sally’s advice and waited a little bit to see each other again. The third sign of poor listening I witnessed was during one of Harry and Sallyâ€℠¢s many conversations. He told her that it was merely impossible for a woman and a man to be friends. He stated that sexual relations would basically occur no matter what.Sally eventually forgot about, (and Harry as well â€Å"having no recollection†). Physical Barriers to effective listening Throughout the movie I saw quite a few examples that could be defined as physical barriers. One of them was when Harry and Jess were discussing Harry’s marriage issues during the football game. Also when the two of them were batting cages at the same time as they were discussing Harry and Sally’s relationship issues. Both of these scenarios could have prevented effective listening by distraction of physical barriers. Personal Barriers to effective listeningHarry was unable to concentrate after seeing his ex with her new partner. Harry was completely distracted and wasn’t even able to hear Jess, Marie, or Sally talking to him about the table. Gender Barriers to effect ive listening When Harry and Sally were driving to New York and they had discussed Casa Blanca and the end of the film when the lady was boarding the plane, Harry expressed that the woman should stay for sex. Semantic Barriers to effective listening Harry told the waitress that Sally was with him. In my opinion he was just telling her that they would be sitting together.However, sally took it the wrong way and expressed her thoughts aloud and said that they she was not with him. What is your own conflict management style? Give an example that supports your style. Have you been guilty of any of the signs of poor listening? What will you do in the future to improve your listening? I would have to say that my conflict management style is the Competing style. To my understanding, people who hold this style tend to be extremely assertive to achieve their goals. I have the tendency to be what some would call â€Å"sneaky†.I tend to elevate my own argument and conceal my goals to le t the opposing side think they are ahead. For example, I currently hold a sales position. As we all know the sales industry is very competitive. My employer often has rewards and bonuses for the top sales performers of the month. I like to â€Å"fake† people out and make them think that I am not doing so hot on my sales so they will think I am behind them on the ranking. This way, once they think they have beaten me, their effort will slowly decline and there I am still banking on my sales.Being in the sales field I do need to have attentive listening skills so I can read between the lines and let the customer know exactly what they need. I’m positive that at one point we have all been guilty of poor listening skills. Maybe for example in the drive-thru when they read back your order and you just automatically say that is correct because you have been sitting there for 10 minutes already, and then when you get your food and it’s not what you ordered but it is ex actly what is on the receipt. In the future I will continue to build my listening skills buy getting clarity from individuals and clients.

Describe the Different Forms of Disguise and Deception That Feature in Twelfth Night Essay

Shakespeare’s play ‘Twelfth Night’ is a comedy centred on a main theme of disguise and deception. The elements of both bring confusion to the characters creating comical situations throughout the play, also adding a lot of dramatic irony to entertain the audiences through the ages. There are many different types of disguise and deception in the play, most are used for the comical effect, but one deception in particular gives the play a darker edge because of the malicious intent to hurt the character. Viola’s disguise as the young man ‘Cesario’ is the stimulus that triggers the love triangle which is the foundation of the whole play. Antonio assists Viola to disguise herself as a man, ‘conceal me what I am, and be my aid’, to enable her to work as a messenger for Orsino. She also tells Antonio to ‘shape thou silence to my wit’ so that no one in Illyria will know that she is actually a girl. Orsino sends her to ‘Unfold the passion of my love’ to Olivia. However Viola has fallen in love with Orsino: ‘Whoe’er I woo, myself would be his wife’. The disguise then causes even more confusion when the love triangle is completed and Olivia, believing Viola is a man, falls in love with Viola/Cesario: ‘methinks I feel this youth’s perfections’. All of this confusion with the disguise and the love triangle enthrals the audience because of the depth of dramatic irony created. Shakespeare has let only the audience know that Cesario is Viola, and he tells them about Olivia’s love for Cesario, before Viola herself knows. All of the confusion from the disguise would have been even funnier when acted out on stage, because all the actors in Elizabethan times were men. Therefore the boy playing Viola would have been dressed up as a girl, and then disguised as a man, and then the man dressed as Olivia would be in love with what the character thinks is a man, which is actually a girl who is played by a boy. Shakespeare used the disguise to create humour for the audience in this way. In Act 3, after Viola has found out that Olivia is in love with her, Viola tries to hint at Olivia by saying ‘I am not what I am’. Viola is telling the truth, but it is a very vague phrase so it does not give away her identity to Olivia. This simple sentence could show that Viola is not using the disguise for malicious reasons and she does not like deceiving people, so by saying this line she is perhaps trying to alleviate some guilt from the deception that unintentionally made Olivia fall in love with her. Viola’s quote is a direct opposite of a quote in the bible, ‘I am what I am’, back then, nearly everyone would have been familiar with the saying, as most attended church and sermons quote the bible, so her quote shows that what Viola is doing is breaking an important moral code and her deception would have been seen as more of a wrong doing back then than it is today, causing Viola to feel the guilt and shame that she does. Malvolio’s deception is a subplot of the play which creates a lot of the comedy, but also has overtones of malice that brings darkness to the play. Malvolio is a servant to Olivia, who gets on the nerves of Maria and other servants because of his pompous behaviour. They decide to plot against him because of his arrogance and frequent nasty comments to them: ‘have you no wit, manners, nor honesty but to gabble like tinkers at this time of night? ’ Maria forges a love letter from Olivia in her handwriting, ‘I can write very like my lady’, and it tells Malvolio that to show his love for Olivia he has to smile, talk like he is of higher class and wear yellow cross-gartered stockings, this ridiculous outfit and behaviour would have entertained the audience very much. So to the audience, this deception starts as a humorous bit of fun for the characters to poke fun at Malvolio, but as the play goes on it turns into purposeful malicious intent to degrade and humiliate him. Maria starts as the originator of the prank, but when Feste becomes involved the pranks become cruel and callous. He takes it a lot further by locking Malvolio up and taunting him: ‘it hath bay windows transparent as barricadoes’ and he carries on even when Sir Toby wants the prank to end ‘I wish we were well rid of this knavery’. Shakespeare leaves Malvolio in a very poor state at the end of the play. Malvolio ends up being damaged emotionally by the pranks and the audience ends up feeling sorry for him, despite him being a very unsympathetic character. The reason Feste enjoys the deception of Malvolio so much could be because he is actually a very intelligent character, but has turned bitter after people are unintentionally deceived into thinking he must be stupid or have no feelings because he is just another clown: ‘I saw him put down the other day with an ordinary fool that has no more brain than a stone’. The previous quote is the kind of thing that could anger Feste because people do not notice his intelligence; it was also said by Malvolio which could be why the full force of Feste’s bitterness was aimed directly at him. Shakespeare made Feste pick up on dramatic ironies: ‘nor your name is not master Cesario’ to show Feste’s intelligence to the audience, but the characters never noticed Feste’s intelligence because of the unintentional deception he caused by being a clown, so this is why his jokes are perceptive but bitter. Within the play a lot of plot devices regarding the disguises are helped by the characters self-deception. The deception of Malvolio wouldn’t have worked if he had not deceived himself into thinking that Olivia liked him. Malvolio was a haughty character who had very high opinions of what Olivia thought of him: ‘should she fancy, it should be one of my complexion’. He would not have fallen for the prank if he had not deceived himself in this way, therefore in a way he deceived himself into the prank because he was conceited enough to think that Olivia liked him, thus abetting his own ruin. Orsino’s love for Olivia could be seen as self-deception. Orsino believes that he is in love with Olivia, and is feeling all the sorrows and joy of love: ‘that it alone is high fantastical’, but he seems to have deceived himself that he is in love with Olivia, when actually it perhaps is more of an infatuation and he is now in love with the idea of love. Orsino is a wealthy Duke who would be very used to getting what he wanted whenever he asked for it, so seeing Olivia and wanting her ‘Methought she purged the air of pestilence’, and then not being able to have her could have given him the feeling of longing that he has never really had before. He could have then misinterpreted the new feeling as love and now his whole mind is preoccupied with the longing that he thinks is love. Olivia’s mourning for her brother could also be perceived as self-deception. Olivia declared that she would mourn her brother’s death for a long time, believing that she would never really be able to overcome her grief. However when she falls in love with Cesario she perhaps realises she can still be happy. She didn’t know she could be happy when she declared her years ourning and she had been deceiving herself that she was completely grief-stricken about his death, when actually she may have just been feeling lonely. This could also be why Olivia fell for Viola’s disguise quite easily, she was vulnerable and sad and may have just like the idea of a man, so not paid that close attention to who Cesario actually was. In the denouement of the play, Viola’s twin Sebastian arrives in Illyria thinking that Viola is dead: ‘She is drowned already, sir, with salt water’. Sebastian looks a lot like Viola, so because Viola is dressed as a man a lot of people mistake Sebastian for Cesario and it causes many confusing situations. The main confusion that happens is that Olivia mistakes Sebastian for Cesario, and Sebastian deceives her by not telling her who he actually is and goes along with the whole charade. Olivia thinks that Cesario has finally succumbed to her and they agree to get married: ‘plight me the full assurance of your faith’. Olivia not noticing that it was actually Sebastian shows that she may have not actually been in love with Cesario but because she was vulnerable at the time she clung to the idea of having somebody without actually really knowing the person. Sebastian’s deception was merely dishonest. He took advantage of the situation, but he never really knew what was going on because he was in a strange land and it all happened very quickly so Olivia forgave him. All the disguise and deception is very cleverly plotted through the play to structure the whole story line. The disguises are finally revealed at the end, solving all the confusion and allowing the various couples to join and give the play finality. The disguise and deception gives the play the confusion and dramatic irony to make the play a comedy. The theme entwines in every plotline and all the way through the play ‘nothing that is so is so’.

Analysis of Darcy’s first proposal to Elizabeth Essay

Look again at the Darcy’s first proposal to Elizabeth that is made in this novel. Choose at least two and, write responses to the following questions: * under what circumstances does Darcy propose * how does Elizabeth respond and why * how does Austen present the proposal to the reader That evening, just before Mr. Darcy comes to meet Elizabeth , she rereads Jane’s letters and finds out Mr. Darcy’s ‘shameful boast’ of misery that inflicted Jane’s happiness and it gives her a ‘keener sense of her sister’s sufferings’. To Elizabeth’s ‘utter amazement’, Darcy enters the room approaching her ‘in a hurried manner’ enquiring after her health. He ‘sat for a few moments’, got up, and ‘walked about the room’. Mr. Darcy’s body language shows that he is nervous and agitated. Then he took several minutes to say his true love for her that how ‘ardently’ he ‘admires’ and ‘loves’ her. However, the reader later realises that his nervousness is not due to his love for Elizabeth is so great but due to the hesitation, whether it is a good idea to propose considering the inferiority of her family and social background. Mr. Darcy explains to Elizabeth that ‘in vain’ he has ‘struggled’ to ‘repress’ his feelings towards not to love her’ he expresses his love for her unromantically and was less ‘eloquent on the subject of tenderness than of pride’. He talks about ‘his sense of her inferiority’ and the ‘family obstacles which judgment had always opposed inclination’. He means that although he had loved her for a long time he knows that her family is beneath him. Mr. Darcy considered his wealth and status as ‘sufficient encouragement’ for Elizabeth to accept his hand of marriage. Elizabeth ‘could see that he had no doubt of a favourable answer ‘as he ‘spoke with apprehension and anxiety’ although his ‘countenance expressed real security’. When Mr. Darcy first enters Elizabeth’s room, her ‘astonishment was beyond expression. She stared, coloured, doubted and was silent’. Then Darcy tells Elizabeth how much he loves her in spite of her ‘inferiority’ and her family’s degradation’. Despite of her ‘deeply-rooted dislike’ for Mr. Darcy, Elizabeth ‘could not be sensible to the compliment of such a man’s affection’. She is flattered when she realises how much he loves her and ‘she is sorry for the pain he was to receive, but she ‘lost all compassion in anger’ with his subsequent criticism of her ‘family’s inferiority’ while asking her to marry him. As Mr. Darcy ‘spoke with apprehension and anxiety, Elizabeth’s ‘colour rose to her cheeks’, she refuses Mr. Darcy and says that she could not ‘feel any gratitude’ towards his proposal and she has ‘never desired’ his good opinion. Mr. Darcy is furious and looks at her ‘with no less resentment than surprise. ‘His complexion became pale with anger, and he was struggling for the appearance of composure’. He enquires ‘in a voice of forced calmness why she refused him ‘with so little endeavor at civility’ Elizabeth replies in a confrontational manner asking why he has spoken with ‘so evident a design of offending and insulting’ her by telling how much he loves her against his ‘will’, ‘reason’ and his ‘character’. She uses this opportunity to express how her feelings have been hurt by his insulting comment. Furthermore, she goes on to explain that even if his feelings had been ‘favourable’ she would never marry a person who has ‘ruined the happiness of a most beloved sister’. Although Darcy changed colour at this moment, he showed no feelings of remorse and listens ‘with a simile of affected incredulity’ as Elizabeth explains how he destroyed Jane’s happiness by splitting up Jane and Bingley. Mr. Darcy admits that he did ‘everything in his power to separate his friend from Elizabeth’s sister and he adds ‘to him (Mr. Bingley) I have been kinder than to myself’. This ‘civil reflection’ of Mr. Darcy, which she disdained, was unlikely to ‘conciliate her’. Elizabeth replies that Mr. Darcy’s interference in Jane and Bingley’s relationship was not the only reason for her bad opinion against him. She mentions what she had heard from Mr.Wickham. He responds to this ‘in a less tranquil tone and with heightened colour’. He answers that she taken ‘an eager interest’ in his concerns and Elizabeth accuses him of depriving Mr.Wickham, ‘the independence which was no less his due than his desert’. She is shocked by seeing Mr. Darcy speaking of him ‘with contempt and ridicule’. Mr. Darcy’s says that ‘perhaps these offences might have been overlooked, had not your (Elizabeth) pride been hurt by my honest confession of the scruples that have long prevented my forming of any serious design’. This explains that he believes his honesty has made her reject him and asks her ‘Could you expect me to rejoice in the inferior of your connections? To congratulate myself on the hope of my relations, whose conditions in life is so decidedly beneath my own?’ Jane Austen comments to the reader that Elizabeth ‘felt herself growing angrier every moment’. However, ‘she tried to the utmost to speak with composure’. When she says to Mr. Darcy ‘you could not have made me the offer of your hand in any possible way that would have tempted me to accept it’, Mr. Darcy astonished by this remark and looks at her ‘with an expression of mingled incredulity and mortification’. She further comments that she disliked him from the very first time they met because of his ‘arrogance†¦.conceit†¦ self disdain of the feelings of others’. Her ‘immovable dislike’ has made her feel that he was ‘the last man in the world’ that she ‘could be prevailed to marry’. After Mr. Darcy left, Jane Austen writes that Elizabeth cried for half an hour. It seems she felt it was ‘almost incredible’ that Mr. Darcy is so much in love as to wish to marry her in spite of all the objections which had prevented his friend (Mr. Bingley) marrying her sister. She feels it was ‘gratifying to have inspired unconsciously so strong an affection’ but Elizabeth condemns Mr. Darcy’s ‘abominable pride’ and ‘his shameless avowal of what he had done with respect to Jane’ and Mr. Darcy’s ‘unfeeling manner’ when he spoke of Wickham. Jane Austen portrays how men and women in her times considered marriage through different characters in the novel. Mr. and Mrs. Bennet’s family especially shows that middle class women could not work; it would be seen as improper. Mrs. Bennet is desperate to get her daughters married to wealthy young men. This shows that parents were very much involved when it came to their daughter’s marriage and would play a large role in finding a husband. Jane Austen views love as the foundation for a happy marriage. This view is mainly portrayed through Darcy and Elizabeth’s marriage and this is thought be the best marriage in the novel along with Jane and Bingley’s marriage because they are well suited and they are financially secure. Mr. and Mrs. Bennet, Lydia and Wickham and Charlotte and Mr. Collin’s marriages are viewed as bad marriages as their marriages lack the element of love that the other two good marriages have a plenty. Jane Austen portrays that these marriages are bad due to lack of intelligence and wit that neither person has, the lack understanding and communication between each other in their married life. Lydia running away with Mr. Wickham without getting married was a big scandal in the novel. She was excluded from the society as she went against its traditional values of the society in those times. However, getting married reduced the shame slightly that was passed on to the family. Jane Austen shows the consequences that will occur to women who live together with a man without getting married. Charlotte married Mr. Collin because she felt she was already a burden for her family and this would be a social embarrassment. Mr. Collins is Mr. Bennet’s closest male who will inherit his estate, which meant that he had definite financial security. This marriage shows that there was a lot of pressure on women like Charlotte from society. She is influenced to marry a man for financial security, protection and a house of her own.