Harry Lavender Essay Essay Example for Free

Harry Lavender Essay Essay All characters have their own distinctive voices but the main voice is Cluadia Valentine and she makes all other characters involved in her search to find the real truth of the crime that has been committed to Mark Bannister. Claudia Valentine is drawn into Harry Lavenders web of corruption and the world of organised crime behind Sydneys established image. Marele Days choice to take the traditional hardboiled private investigator approach and not only challenge the stereotyping of characters but also the common setting, from somewhere such as Los Angeles to Sydney. She also brings about many new ideas in relation to characters and themes. The relationships between characters, themes and setting provide a strong message, which at first appearances are tricky and unusual. It is also apparent that the common issue of the good versus evil is explored through both the two sides of the city and the characters of Claudia Valentine and Harry Lavender. The characters may live and breath the city but the city too is living and breathing, every moment unfolding new beauty and new corruption. Marele Days choice of  Sydney as a plot setting is vital to the novel and provokes a reaction in the reader that is one of discovery, exploration and search for truth. In Harry Lavender text, lavender is a sweet smelling flower, which is unable to hide the stench of the criminal underworld in Sydney. There are three references to ‘lavender’ in the novel which emphasise a recurring theme: when Claudia receives the flowers, the secret message that was left for Claudia, the scent of lavender in bloom in Sydney, the clues in the coroner report that lead her to suspect that Harry Lavender might be behind this crime  committed over the reporter’s story. Claudia’s distinctive voice gives the impression throughout â€Å"The life and Crimes of Harry Lavender† that she does not give up easily, which is ultimately her character. Claudia is very analytical in any situation when meeting characters or being exposed to different environments, â€Å"The city looks like a huge building site†. In the â€Å"Drifter† the entire family does not agree with the idea of leaving just for the sake of leaving. The mother, for example the â€Å"her† of the first line has hopes of establishing some permanence here. She is willing to leave in order  to be supportive of the father, which is an aspect of their relationship that is clear in the poem’s first line, when a major decision for the family is made by him alone, without discussion, and told to her. What makes this two text connected are the distinctive roles, that is the role of reversal a female initiative and persistence in a traditional male dominated field; women can do everything men can do challenges the stereotypes of traditional crime fiction and the story of â€Å"Drifters†. Claudia is a domineering character as a detective unlike traditionally male ones while the mother in â€Å"Drifters† is an independent woman, who takes care of herself and her family. Just like Claudia the mother in a way tends to observe in order to understand people. This can be seen in the use of â€Å"Wildly excited for no reason† in reference to her kids. Marele Day uses a lot of the technique of modern day films especially the â€Å"black and white† scenes on Harry Lavender. He is very detached and aloof, (nobody knows where is and what he looks like). We as the audience get to see and hear what Claudia could not get her hands on to solve the problems, like where Mark Banister’s writings on  Lavander are hidden. In contrast to the Harry Lavender text, the use of â€Å"One day soon hell tell her its time to start packing† shows us the obstacles of life experiences that are influenced by the great depression, families such as the one seen in â€Å"Drifter’s†. Claudia’s life becomes depressed and troubled because she cannot solve problems of crimes as fast as she would like to. Claudia contacts the American publisher, Nancy Grosz, who had rejected Mark’s book and arranges for her to return the only remaining disc containing the manuscript. She also phones Steve and plans a holiday with him to  Queensland where she hopes he will be able to meet her children. Just as Claudia is hoping to get close to the victory in this case, Collier gives her message that Harry Lavender has lapsed into a coma and is expected to die overnight. For Claudia this may be the end of the road but her investigation in life will go on. Similarly, hope and willingness to go on at all cost is seen in â€Å"Drifter’s† when mother’s hopes and wisdom of constant movement will give the opportunity to new chances, new ways of sustain the life of the whole family, we see at the end of the text, in the verse â€Å"Make a wish, Tom, make a wish†, which  symbolises her will to cope and accept the problems that are part of everyday life which is very similar to Claudia’s mindset . Although of different genres, â€Å"Harry Lavender† a crime story and â€Å"Drifters†, a poem, dearly portraying the struggles of the great depression in 1920s set in the American rural area, these two texts are connected by two women and their singularity in the struggle of not giving up. When compared, both texts are opening our minds to how singular and distinctive voices the main characters have, sending the message that life is very precious and is worth fighting for.

Is Immortality Desirable?

Is Immortality Desirable? Abstract In this paper I discuss whether immortality in the physical form is desirable. In accordance with the deprivation account I seek to defend the commonsense view that death is a bad thing for the individual but will argue that consistency and logic does not require me to believe that an immortal existence is to be desired. I defend Bernard Williams claim that with an immortal life we are doomed to an eternity of never ending repetition, boredom and indifference and that death is a necessary evil if we are to avoid a life devoid of freshness. I will also argue that death and the very limitation that its sets down gives life meaning. In support of Victor Fankl I will defend the claim that it is time pressure that shapes our lives. In developing my argument I will oppose the counter argument that it is death that makes life meaningless not meaningful. Is Immortality desirable? Is it simply a design fault that we age and die? Are we living in a culture of death whereby we die simply because we accept it as an inevitability? â€Å"All men are mortal† said Socrates, however, a lifetime spent on in-depth research has led pioneering scientists to deem aging not as an inevitable consequence of the human condition but as a preventative disease. Perhaps these scientists are far too optimistic in their search for a virtual fountain of youth, or is it simply the case that death – the end of the physical being, is accepted by the mind and embraced through reinforced teachings and observation. Whether you believe that a quest for immortality will or will never be achieved is irrelevant to the question at hand. The focus will be on whether immortality is desirable, assuming something can be desired yet impossible. Clarification of what I mean by immortality is essential; I will focus on what can be described as physical immortality- by this I mean that on e can live for eternity as a human physical being on earth (where everyone is immortal). In my interpretation, I will also assume that there is no get out clause, take for example one is offered an elixir of immortal life, once taken a person cannot change their mind opting for death- immortality is forever. My definition will also incorporate a block on aging; eternity will be lived through a perfectly healthy functioning body. Accidents will be possible but can be fixed with ease. Intentionally, I have painted a picture of immortality which may at first glance seem desirable, as one may be quick to argue that an immortal life where a person is forever aging to the point of an eternity of pain and discomfort and where accidents occurred and could not be fixed is simply not one to be desired. However, throughout this essay I will put forward the argument that those who believe immortality to be desirable have made an irrational choice, it would be a mistake to crave an immortal life and take the elixir of eternal existence. I will approach this issue by initially examining Nagels (1970) question of whether it is a terrible thing to go out of existence, I will agree and defend the deprivation account of the evil and badness of death claiming it is possible to do so while maintaining immor tality would be a bad thing. The idea that boredom will develop if there was no end to human life will be explored, assessing much of the support from Bernard Williams (1973) as well as opposing and tackling one of John Martin Fischers (1994) criticisms of the above view. The second argument that I will present (which overlaps with my first) will be based on the meaning of life, I will argue that death and the very limitations that it sets down gives life meaning and this will be explored by assessing the views of Victor Frankl (1957) as well as counterarguments by Robert Nozicks (1981). Firstly, to determine whether immortality is a good thing, I pose the question of whether death is a bad thing. Death is an ambiguous term so let me be clear of the definition it will take in my essay. I will take death to mean the end of the physical being, the cessation of life. I am aware that defining death in this way is problematic but let us assume for the sake of simplicity that this is correct. My concern at this point is whether death is a bad thing for the person who dies, referring to the state of non existence (at least in the physical form), not the process of dying. For many, a rational response in life is to fear death- after all, it is our most personal and valuable asset, but is it really, as Nagel stated, a terrible thing to go out of existence? There has been extensive philosophical discussion and disagreement regarding this matter, with philosophers such as Bernard Williams (1973), who argue death has its rightful place; a point to which I will later return, and there are those such as Thomas Nagel (1970) who speak of its badness. Lucretius, however, argue that something can only be good or bad for a person if that person exists at the time the event takes place and is experienced, if we take death to mean non-existence where non-existence is nothingness then death cannot be said to be good or bad as only something can be interpreted in this way. I, however, believe that death is bad, agreeing with Nagel in most parts but at the same time believe that immortality, never dying is also bad, this is not a contradiction. I disagree with the Lucretius argument for the very same reason Nagel rejected their reasoning, Nagel presents an example of an individual betrayed unknowingly behind his back, although the person never becomes aware of this, it seems fair to say that the betrayal was a bad thing for the person involved, in this way the Lucretius connection between badness and experience does not hold true (Nagel, 1970:76). It may be the case that something can be intrinsically bad, bad in itself or in its own right, for example, pain is avoided for its own sake. It may also be the case that something can be comparatively bad, bad by virtue of what youre not getting while this other thing is present. I take the latter point to be the case for the badness of death. It seems to me that something can be bad even if you dont exist, e xistence is not a requirement, in fact it is the very fact that you dont exist that makes death bad. The central bad about death, about non existence, is that it deprives you of the goods of life you might otherwise be getting, I couldnt fall in love, enjoy a sunset or master philosophy.From this, it should follow that life is good because if I wasnt dead I wouldnt be deprived; more of a good thing is always better than less of a good thing; therefore more life is better than less life; it should follow therefore that eternal life never dying is exceptionally good. However, the rules of logic and reason do not require somebody who accepts the deprivation account to believe that immortality is to be desired. Looking closely at the deprivation account, what it claims is that death is bad insofar as it deprives us of the good things we could have otherwise experienced, but we shouldnt assume that life is good or always good (maybe Nagel does or often seems to assume this) what if it turned out that what you would have hereafter would be in fact a life full of bad things. It would there fore be a bad thing that you would go through the rest of your life which in this case would be an eternity with negative experiences. I will now go on to explain that it is an inevitability that an eternal life will somewhere down the line cease to be good, transforming into an eternity of badness in which case still in accordance with the deprivation account death will no longer be bad. I agree that at first thought immortality may be tempting the argument that life is too short will no longer exist. Think of all the things you could get done, you could devout years to writing great philosophy, you could take pleasure in countless sunsets and sunrises, you could enjoy things endlessly having more time to see and achieve things that you would have otherwise not had time to. Here is my argument, too much of a good thing can become a bad thing, medicine for example is something which is instrumentally good, however, although it is good in small doses in that it cures a disease for example if I take more than the prescribed amount it becomes harmful to my body. In this same way extending human life by 50 or even a 100 years can be good but what if someone added a thousand, a million, an eternity to your life? Having done and seen everything you could possible have imagined everything will start to feel the same, having experienced love and the sunset millions of times t hey would no longer excite you. Eternity is a very long time, forever goes on forever and boredom will eventually set in leaving you existing as oppose to living. It seems that I am in agreement with Bernard Williams, in his essay â€Å"The Makropulos Case:Reflections on the Tedium of Immortality† (1973) who also argues that an eternal existence would be intolerable, claiming that as human beings it is inevitable that by our very nature we will get bored we would be doomed to never ending repetition and boredom, life would simply be devoid of interest or freshness. He supports his view by discussing a play by Karel Capek which tells of a woman named Elina Makropulos, who at the age of 42 was given an elixir of eternal life by her father. The play is set 300 years on and Elina is now aged 342, Williams states that â€Å"Her unending life has come to a state of boredom, indifference, and coldness. Everything is joyless: â€Å"in the end it is the same,† she says, â€Å"singing and silence.† She refuses to take the elixir again; she dies; and the formula is deliberately destroyed by a young woman among the protest of some older men† (Williams,1973:82). EM has lived her life at the age of 42 for 300 years and it seems that everything that could happen to a woman of 42 has already happened to her. John Martin Fischer in an article titled Why immortality is not so bad criticizes Williams argument; Fischer asserts that if there was a sufficiently diverse package of experiences we would not get bored (Fischer 1994). He acknowledges that there are those pleasures that would be self exhausting, those which we would not want to repeat more than once or a few times as we would inevitably get bored. His examples of these self exhausting pleasures include pleasures that are disappointing which one would not want to repeat for that very reason and those non-disappointing pleasures which you do to fulfil a goal to prove something to yourself, for example, to overcome your phobia of heights you climb Mount Whitney but this is an experience you do not want to repeat. He acknowledges that there are those pleasures that are self exhausting but ther e are many repeatable pleasures that we would never get bored of like listening to beautiful music or seeing great art and we would therefore never fall victim to Williams boredom account. I disagree with Fischer, firstly it seems to me his examples of self exhausting pleasures present a distorted view of what pleasure really is. I agree that disappointing pleasures may appear to be pleasurable before the act but after we experience the disappointment they cease to fall into this category. It appears that these disappointing pleasures are not pleasures at all and should not fall into the category of self exhausting pleasures. It is a similar case for his example of non disappointing self exhausting pleasures like climbing a mountain to overcome a phobia, climbing this mountain is not done for sheer pleasure, we may experience pride and we may experience some pleasure from this pride but the very act is done reluctantly and is not pleasurable within itself. To claim that he partly agrees with Williams that there are those pleasure that are self exhausting is somewhat misleading what he presents in the above case are not pleasures at all. What Williams said, is to think of the most perfect immortality that you can imagine and imagine doing this forever, the above so called pleasures do not fall into this; it seems obvious they would not want to be repeated. Fischer also goes on to explain a second category of pleasures which he called repeatable pleasures which include listening to music and enjoying art, Fischer believed that if these pleasures were appropriately distributed (not too closely to each other ) they could be repeated countless times. I disagree; although in this case they could be classed as pleasure, it seems we would still inevitably get bored maybe not after 100 or even two hundred years but somewhere down the line of a never ending life we would get bored. I can only enjoy a piece of music a limited number of times before it no longer brings me pleasure. However at this point an objection may arise; some may argue that human potential is endless reducing the likelihood of boredom. There are millions of songs to be heard and millions more that will emerge, there is a countless number of things that can be enjoyed that will never run out so you are not doomed to be repeating the same things over and over, and maybe when things start to get tedious new things will be invented to occupy our minds. The response to this is that having heard a thousand, a million, two million, songs they will all eventually take the same shape, nothing new can be invented that would be so drastically different from all previous inventions. Another point to be made is that Elina Makropulos maintains the same character throughout her life changing only to adapt to her surroundings it could therefore be suggested that the boredom she experienced was a result of her unchanging character not the fact that she lived for such a long period of time. Williams addresses this throughout his article, he argues that as human beings we aim to be, and usually succeed, in becoming a certain type of person, we develop a certain set of interests, a certain way of acting and we become settled as that type of person. His thought is that those who can avoid boredom and continue to find things interesting are not sufficiently mature there seems to be something wrong with them as such immortality is not a life for a hu man being (Williams 1973) . Let us now introduce a way boredom can be avoided in accordance with his argument, a possibility Williams considers is rejuvenation; by this he means you remain a human being in that you maintain the same body but every so often you are rejuvenated, a certain part of your history disappears and is replaced by a new start. Although this seems to deal with the boredom issue Williams does questions whether this is in fact you? Every time I am rejuvenated I have no recollection of my prior self and build a whole new character based on different memories and experiences. It seems wrong to say that I am the same person after being rejuvenated for the hundredth time as I was prior to my first rejuvenation (Williams,1973:92). Even if we are persuaded that you are the same person Williams would argue that it is not giving you anything that you could be interested in, the absence of a continuity of consciousness is a serious problem. Even if it is not death it is as bad as death to be rejuvenated in this way. Another possibility to consider is the gradual deterioration of memory where we forget things as time goes on for example every 200 years. However I believe this raises the same question as above are we really the same person if we live in a 200 year envelope? Williams concludes that death is a necessary e vil; we should hope to die if we are to avoid the alternative of immortality. My second argument to why immortality is not desirable is based on the meaning of life. I believe that death and the very limitations that it sets down gives life meaning. My second argument overlaps with my first but what I wish to specifically argue here is that it is the very fact that we are here for what is comparatively a short time that makes our lives meaningful, in the way we act and behave, this is the idea that it is time pressure that shapes our lives. It is irrelevant whether one believes or does not believe in god or any form of creator or greater being, they will still find life meaningless without death, even if you merely carry on living out of the fear of dying. I believe that all good things have to have a beginning, middle and an end and each is necessary and is enjoyed accordingly. Victor Frankl argues that death itself is what makes life meaningful, his reasoning is as follows: â€Å"What would our lives be like if they were not finite in time, but infinite? If we were immortal, we would legitimately postpone every action forever. It would be of no consequence whether or not we did a thing now; every act might just as well be done tomorrow or the day after or a year from now or ten years hence. But in the face of death as absolute finis to our future boundary to our possibilities, we are under the imperative of utilizing our lifetimes to utmost, not letting the singular opportunities- whose finite sum constitutes the whole of life-pass by unused† (Frankl,1957:73). Nozick , however, has a problem with this argument, in his book â€Å"Philosophical explanation† he wonders whether death in fact makes life meaningless not meaningful, he argues that â€Å"Frankl assumes our only desire is to have done certain things, to put certain things somewhere on our record†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.However, we may desire to do things; our desire need not be merely to have done them. Moreover, if we had an infinite life, we might view it as a whole, as something to organize, shape and do something with† (Nozick,1981:579-580) I disagree, firstly it was not assumed by Frankl that we merely do things to put them on record, what was being said is that we have a limited amount of time to do things but we do not merely do them just to tick a box but to grow and evolve as human beings because pursuing our goals enriches our lives. It is the very fact that we have a finite time that motivates us to make those decisions and do those things that enhance our lives, which would only be forever delayed with an infinite existence. For example why should I go to school if I dont like it? The simple answer is to learn to acquire skills that would help me to achieve and make something of my self before I die and cease to exist. If I was immortal, learning trigonometry would seem less attractive than watching TV or playing computer games all day. I get more pleasure from such things (in the short term at least) and watching TV is certainly easier than studying and Ill get round to learning trigonometry sometime.Time press ure is what makes us set goals, with an immortal life tasks would forever be extended and a consequence would emerge whereby we would be less likely to do things of value, we would become a stagnant society where simple pleasures rule. Even if we are partly motivated by the desire to do things not only to have done things they would still be postponed and contrary to what Nozick claims this would matter as the desire alone to do things does not make ones life meaningful it may contribute to some poor will to carry on living (to do that specific thing) but will not give satisfaction to ones life. Nozick also questions whether death in fact makes life meaningless? Many argue that death renders life futile because we will all eventually die and so there is no point in developing character or studying calculus if our progress is ultimately going to be permanently interrupted and it will all go to waste. It seems to me that to argue that death makes life meaningless is to argue that something can only be meaningful if it lasts forever. The truth is that many things we value and find worthwhile do not last forever. I affirm that most if not all actions other than pleasures within themselves are predominantly motivated by the desire to get things done and enrich our lives from them before we die. Death is a deadline, a necessary evil; we know every day that passes we will never get back and this gives meaning and shapes how we live and thus an immortal life is not one to be desired. So far a strong argument has been provided for the undesirability of an immortal life but is there any situation in which immortality can be desired? In setting out what I meant by immortality I disallowed a get out clause, let us now suppose you would be able to live as long as you wanted and when you eventually had enough it would be possible to take your own life, is the elixir of eternal existence now more attractive? Surely it is, however, this is not all together straight forward. Take for example a mortal who chooses to commit suicide, in taking their own life he/she is giving up for example another 30 years, however, in the case of an immortal he/she is giving up what is essentially an eternity. They may be unhappy now but they could not possibly know that this would be the case in a million or a billion years time, choosing to take an immortal life is of greater consequence. In allowing a get out clause we would also become a very unadventurous and risk- averse society, who would take the risk of bungee jumping, paragliding and so forth if what they are risking is an infinite lifespan? Although this may seem a more attractive model of immortality it is complicated and can it really be called immortality if we allow this get out clause? It seems to me the very fact that we would choose this model supports my argument, that immortality would cease to be good and we would all sooner or later opt to take our own lives. In conclusion immortality in the physical human sense is never a good thing. It should not be desired; whatever perfect life you imagine to want to experience forever it will soon become tedious and boredom will eventually set in. Death is therefore necessary, even in accordance with the deprivation account, as further existence would become a bad thing sooner or later and it will no longer be the case whereby death deprives you of the good things life has to offer but where death provides an end to all that is bad with an eternal existence. It is also the inevitability of death that gives life reason and shape, the very fact that we have a limited lifespan motivates people through a sense of urgency to spend their time doing those things that contribute meaning and enrich their lives which would forever be delayed with inevitable consequences with an immortal life. Without death there would be no such thing as sacrifice, putting a lifes work into something, heroism and courage, we w ould lack appreciation for our existence, life would not be as serious or meaningful. I believe there to be an artistic necessity about dying- in the same way a picture has a frame, one cannot imagine an infinite painting, or a play has a shape and a final curtain, one cant imagine a play going on forever. Why grope for some mysterious realm for which we are not properly equipped to function in? Although I have argued that immortality is bad, this is not to say that it is a good thing that we die when we do, in accordance with all above arguments one can still think that we die too soon. Bibliography Fischer, M. (1994). Why Immortality is Not So Bad. International Journal of Philosophical Studies. 2, 257-270. Frankl, V (1957). The Doctor and the Soul. Alfred Knopf. New York Nagel, T (1970). Death. Nous. 4, 73-80 Nozick, R (1981). Philosophical Explanations. Oxford.  Clarendon Press Williams, B (1973). Problems of the Self: Philosophical Papers 1956-1972. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Essay --

Suicide is a permanent solution to what is often a temporary problem. Suicide not only affects the individual but it also affects all the people that surround that one person who committed suicide. When a person decides he/she wants to die they commit this act. But, when a person attempts suicide and is unsuccessful this can lead to that individual to be in more pain to include: broken bones to brain damage. An unsuccessful, suicide attempt can cause the person to sink further into depression as well. There are many contributing factors when dealing with someone who wants to commit suicide but there are also a few myths that are associated with suicide as well. When people talk about committing suicide to another person this does not necessarily mean that they want to kill themselves, but it just might be that they are reaching out or crying for help. There are many different myths associated with suicide. Myths like: people who talk about suicide are just trying to get attention; f rom suicide occurring without warning; and suicidal people not wanting to die. To identify theses myths one must understand why someone would want to end their life. With over 38,000 suicides in 2010 The Center for Disease Control and Prevention claims that is an average of 105 each day. â€Å"There is one suicide for every 25 attempted suicides and suicide results in an estimated $34.6 billion in combined medical and work-loss costs†. (States News Service) People who want to commit suicide can attribute these thoughts to many factors. Factors like family history of suicide, attempted suicide and depression, alcohol and drug problems also contribute to the thoughts of suicide. Warning signs are identified in many different ways and they also change with age... ... Did he want to die? His mind was not yet matured as most teenagers minds are. He just wanted the feeling of loss to stop. That was his cry for help. Luckily, it was only for a short time. â€Å"According to the Mayo Clinic, information was released relating to debunking certain myths about suicide. â€Å"The majority of people contemplating suicide don't really want to die. They are seeking an end to intense mental and/or physical pain. Most have a treatable mental illness. Interventions can save lives.† (â€Å"States News Service†) Suicide is a very serious condition that affects the lives of not only the individual who commits suicide, but it affects all the people who are involved with that individual. When we can separate the facts from the myths about suicide, we could possibly prevent a suicide and save someone’s life. Everyone should know the facts, it can save a life.

Essay --

Freedom of Religion The individual right to freedom of religion means that you can freely practice your religion without the government interfering. It’s in the first amendment of the Bill of Rights, in the Constitution, it protects all U.S. citizens to a certain extent. The first amendment went into effect on December 15th, 1791. 1The first amendment states â€Å"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof† (American Civil Liberties Union). There are two clauses in the U.S. Constitution that guarantee freedom of religion. The Establishment Clause which prohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official religion. There is also the Free Exercise Clause, it prohibits the government from interfering with someone’s practice of religion (LII). The first amendment also sets a fine line between states’ rights and the churches rights (Black,130). Throughout time, many things have happened to w here the first amendment has had to been set into play. In 1620, a large group of settlers moved into the New England area, and formed individual colonies. This group was known as the Puritans. The Puritans fled Europe in search of religious freedom, which was not granted by the Church of England. The church expected everyone to turn to the Catholic religion. They worked toward religious reforms, so they could purify the church and their own lives. However, they discovered the church was far beyond reform because it was so powerful (Kizer, Kay). They realized the only way to purify their lives was to break away from the Church of England. They came to America where they could freely practice their religion. At this point in time there was neither a law against nor ... ...ace where every religion is accepted and welcome. It’s supposed to be a place where you can freely practice your religion without people discriminating against it (Washington Times). Another con is that some displays of symbols can be a violation of freedom of religion. It all depends if its for a certain season or if its to benefit or promote a certain religion (Harper, 62 and 63). Depending on what you’re showing, you can get in trouble for trying to convince people to believe in a certain religion. The public school system not allowing kids to read their religious book or let the teachers read excerpts from certain religious books, some feel isn’t right because they should be able to freely express their religion. So depending on who you’re talking about, this could be a negative or positive thing. There are also some cons to freedom of religion, as well as pros.

Dear Mama :: Personal Narrative Writing

Dear Mama By the same token I leave you, I leave myself (with you) Wong May, "Dear Mama" Wong May, poet extraordinaire, transnational writer, post-colonial female subject, unphotographed, barely reviewed, past unknown, present undocumented, and for all intents and purposes disappeared after 1978 somewhere in Western Europe. Things I do know about her, mostly from an entry found in Contemporary Poets, edited by Thomas Riggs: She is Chinese by birth, born November 16, 1944 in Chungking, China. She is/was/is not anymore a Singaporean citizen. 1965, Bachelor of Arts degree in English Literature, University of Singapore 1968, Master of Fine Arts, University of Iowa, 1969, first book of poetry A Bad Girlà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s Book of Animals published by Harcourt, Brace and Jovanich while working as Assistant Editor for United Business Publications. This is her only documented professional appointment. 1972, second book Reports. 1975, she is translated into German and receives a German Academic Exchange Service fellowship (Deutsch Akademisch Austauch Dienst). 1973, marries a certain Michael Coey, who is referred to as a travelling companion in her last and final book, 1978 Superstitions. With all this information, she fills one page of my notebook. Then she disappears. Or rather, in the spaces between her poetry, she was never there in the first place. My obsession is with her absence, her absence in reviews, her absence in critical studies, her absence in official conversations about Singaporean poetry. On the inner book sleeve of her second book her quote reads, "My poems are about wordlessness..." So I decide I want to write about her, a substitution for writing to her, because it is to her that I would rather write. But since there is no way of doing this, I pick the second best, I write, I investigate, I fixate. The last lines of her last book read, O Travellers, travelling anywhere the world is beautiful Our windows get dirty Her books are all dedicated to her mother, "DEAR MAMA," "To My Mother," "To my mother." Her poems are the only chronicles I have of her life. In the second book we learn that she started writing it in the winter of 1968 in New York and finished it in Winnipeg in September 1971. Her third book is begun in Berlin that same year and finishes in France, in between she continues in Hebrides, Singapore, Steglitz, Meylan, Budapest, Iona, Cracow, Prague, Poland, Malaysia, Paris.

Porter’s Five Forces Model versus A Blue Ocean Strategy Essay

Porter’s Five Forces Model, provided by Michael Porter, is an external environmental analysis tool for a specific market. This model emphasizes that in any existing industry, there are five competition forces: threat of new entrants, power of suppliers, power of customers, threat of substitute products, and intensity of competitive rivalry. In addition, these five forces can influence and determine the profitability of the enterprise. Using the five forces model, one can analyze the industry attractiveness and the level of competition, which can then help the company to develop the business strategy. In the real world, strategic analysis and strategy formulations are important for company to gain the profitability. For example, IKEA focuses on operating efficiently and developing new product continuously for their business strategies. Also, the Five Forces Model has helped IKEA to maintain its low cost and obtain the huge profitability in the furniture industry over the years. The Blue Ocean Strategy takes the view that innovation, innovation that creates new market space, taps into unsatisfied consumer demand that finds uncontested market space in the hope of finding a blue ocean. A blue ocean exists where no firms currently operate, leaving the company to expand without competition. The core strategy is the value innovation, which means that the company should create new demand and make the competition irrelevant. In short, the company needs to pursue unique product or service differentiation and low cost simultaneously, in order to capture the untapped market. Moreover, it is significant to create new value that can rebuild the buyer value elements and capture new demand. As the number of firms that come into the market, the market is actually expanded, and they are filling an entrepreneurial role in bringing innovation into the market. In pioneering new markets, it is often the followers that cash in. Eg. Microsoft in relation to the computer interface, iTunes in relation to  portable music. These companies were followers and employed adaptive innovation in   terms of these new markets. Most of the firms are innovating in incremental stages. The type of  innovation that you have to look at is doesn’t have to be the big, radical, revolutionary type of innovation. It is more incremental & adaptive. The aim is grow demand and pull in new and non-customers into the industry. You stop competing and create products and services and offerings that have no alternative from the buyer’s point of view. In the real world, people usually are not interested in repeated experience. For example, Cirque de Soleil created a brand-new circus performance by reconstructing market boundaries, focusing on the whole situation, and reaching beyond existing demand. Company Summary A one time accordion player, stilt walker, and fire-eater, Guy Laliberte is the founder of Cirque Du Soleil, one of Canada’s largest cultural exports. Created in 1984 by a group of 20 street performers, Cirque Du Soleil has achieved a level of revenues that took Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey (the Global Champion of the circus industry) over 100 years to attain. Cirque du Soleil is now a major Quebec-based organization providing high-quality artistic entertainment. The company has close to 4,000 employees, including 1,300 performing artists from close to 50 different countries. Cirque du Soleil has brought wonder and delight to close to 150 million spectators in more than 300 cities in over forty countries on six continents. Cirque du Soleil’s Blue Ocean Strategy Cirque du Soleil’s success did not come from taking customers from the already shrinking and structurally unattractive circus industry, which historically catered to children. There was also rising sentiment, fueled by animal rights groups, against the use of animals, traditionally an integral part of the circus. Cirque du Soleil did not compete with Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey. Instead it created uncontested new market space that made the competition irrelevant. It pulled in a whole new group of customers who were traditionally noncustomers of the industry—adults and corporate clients who had turned to theater, opera, or ballet and were, therefore, prepared to pay several times more than the price of a conventional circus ticket for an unprecedented entertainment experience. Significantly, one of the first Cirque productions was titled â€Å"We Reinvent the Circus.† Cirque offered the  best of both circus and theater. By eliminating many of the most expensive elements of the circus, it was able to dramatically reduce its cost structure, achieving both differentiation and low cost. How did Cirque du Soleil create new value? They addressed each of the value creation factors: Cirque du Soleil had followed the Blue Ocean Logic: Create a quantum leap in buyer value and this will dominate the market. Their Blue Ocean Strategy was a success.

Bill Gates had been friends since high school Essay

Mike Basset and Bill Gates had been friends since high school. They’d competed for 1st place all the time. They’d spent hour’s together writing computer programs even before people heard in programming. They grew up together and even went to university and were joint top students. They both went in the programming business and soon each opened their own computer company Bill named his ‘Microsoft’ and Mike called it ‘Compufriek’. Bill was very successful and was very famous his products all across the globe he was well know for Windows and Microsoft office. On the other hand Mike was very good but only known in the United States but still lacking behind Bill. They both got married and had children. Mike’s wife Jenny was very jealous of Marry Mrs. Gates shoe always used to talk about how successful her husband is and the contacts he makes with Difrent Company’s across the world. Mike is also fed up his only ambition from when he was a boy was to run the best computer company and here his best friend his standing in his way. One day Mr. & Mrs. Gates invited the Bassets for a barbecue in their new mansion. It was exactly noon when the Bassets arrived at the Gates. â€Å"Hello Mike† said Bill, â€Å"how’s things going? † he asked. â€Å"Alright† replied Mike. They sat down at a table, Bill has dismissed all the servants so they could spend some time together and do everything like the old days. â€Å"I have just signed a deal with the Japanese,† â€Å"Worth a lot† saying Bill as proud as it gets. â€Å"Good I wish the best for you† replied Mike but in a not meaning it sort of way. â€Å"I am fed up of this he’s always boasting about himself, oh I wish I was as rich and famous like Bill† he was saying to himself. The day went on and they had dinner. The next day Mike’s wife started to nag she kept saying how come you’re not as rich as bill and you’re better than him, he couldn’t take it. That day he wanted to eat Chinese he went to his favorite Chinese restaurant ‘Chin Dragon’. They ate dinner and after a waitress came up to them, â€Å"do you want to try our new fortune cookies† â€Å"some people have been very lucky and even there dreams came true† she said. â€Å"Well ok get us two,† replied Mike â€Å"Right away† said the waitress. She went and came back after five minutes carrying a plate with 2 cookies. â€Å"There you go,† said the waitress Mike took his and snapped it in half and took the paper out. â€Å"What does it say? † Asked Mikes wife. â€Å"Fame and fortune will come very soon,† replied Mike. His wife then takes hers and snaps it in half and took her paper. â€Å"Mines say’s your loved ones will be rich and famous! † She told Mike. â€Å"Can it be that my dream will finally come true? † He said to himself. â€Å"What does this mean? † Asked Jenny. â€Å"I don’t know† Mike replied. â€Å"But lets go home I’m tired and I need a rest† he said. When they got home Mike couldn’t stop thinking about the fortune cookies. He kept wondering was this just a coincidence that he got this in a fortune cookie, even Jenny his wife got the same thing. Can this be true can his life ambition come true? No he thought it has to be a coincidence. That night he couldn’t sleep. He kept thinking if this was true what was going to bring him this fame and fortune? All he’s working on at this moment is a simple hacking program for him self because of free time. His wife wakes up. She asks him why isn’t he asleep. He tells her what he’s thinking about and she says, â€Å"I don’t think your going to get fame and fortune just like that†Ã'Ž â€Å"What do you mean? † he replied â€Å"Well, that hacking program you’re working on for fun† she says. â€Å"Yes what about it? † he replies anxiously. â€Å"Is it power full? She asks. â€Å"Yeah its pretty good† he replies but doesn’t have a clue what’s all this got to do with his fortune. â€Å"Why don’t you access Bills files and find out what he’s planning? † she says quietly. â€Å"You want me to betray my best friend. No forget about it† he replied angrily and went to bed. The next day he gets up and goes on his computer to do a bit of work. He kept working on his hacking program until it was finished. â€Å"Honey† he called. â€Å"I’ve finished my program. † Jenny walks in and congratulates him â€Å"Well no you need to test it! † she said. â€Å"Test it? † he replied. â€Å"Who on? † â€Å"I can’t try it on anyone its illegal† â€Å"Well test it on Bills I am sure he wont mind, you are his best friend† she tells him â€Å"Just see if it works properly and the switch it off† â€Å"Well ok† he replies and starts to test it he started to input and few numbers and letters and the put search. Bills name came up on the screen. He accessed his computer. â€Å"Look what’s that? † asked Jenny â€Å"Oh it will be some of his files† â€Å"I’ll close it now I know it works† he saidÃ'Ž â€Å"No† Jenny said, â€Å"just have a quick look, it won’t hurt† He sat there looking at Bill Gates files. His ambition took control of him. He spotted a file named ‘big plan’. He began looking through it. It was a massive program what was going to change the world. He froze. All his life he wanted fame and now he could get it but at his best friends cost. Jenny kept telling him to copy the file then alter it for him so he goes wrong. She called him a coward. He didn’t know what to do. His wife kept nagging him. He finally surrendered to his ambition and downloaded the file to his computer and started to alter Bills file completely. Jenny kept saying how wonderful he was and encouraged him to carry on. He was finished. He worked day and night on this program until one day he had finished it. Bill rang him up that day and said that his whole life just went wrong. The program contract with the Japs he made has fallen because his program didn’t work. Now he has to pay Billions of pounds in compensation and at the moment cant pay that amount so he had to sell half his company. At that moment guilt started to grow in Mikes heart. His best friends life has collapsed but his road is open. He felt very sorry for him and said he was busy. In the following week Mike made a contract with the British. He sold them Bill’s program for a 30 billion contract he got 50% of the shares. His name was known all across the globe and his program sold very fast. But now he was feeling very guilty he’s now the famous rich and famous one while his friend was under debt. In those weeks Bill didn’t even find out about Mike he was to busy sorting out his problem. He went and says the program a computer competition. He was absolutely stunned when it had looked just like the one he made. He gets a bit suspicious and goes to Mike’s home straight away. When he got there he didn’t even say hello to Mike the first thing he said was â€Å"that program of yours when did you start making it? † Mike hesitated a bit knowing Bills suspicion he replies â€Å"oh I’ve been on this special project for a long time, Its been a secret† Bill talked to him about it and went back home. Mike was feeling awful he probably just lost his best friend. His guilt grew more and more over the days past. He didn’t hear from Bill for a while now and was really scared. What he didn’t know was at this time Bill was trying to see if anyone had hacked is computer. He knew that it couldn’t be just anyone because his computer was protected with extra security. Bill spent hours trying to track down the thief. One day when Bill was on his computer he was going through a list of who opened the computer and when he say a weird number. He tried to find out what it meant but couldn’t. Meanwhile Mike was not leading a happy life. He was rich and famous. Didn’t even see his wife, she was always out and about. He couldn’t go out and show his face to the public they would just give him credit for the new program and that would make things worse. One week later something very unexpected happened when Mike was at home. The F. B. I came knocking at his door. â€Å"Can I help you? † he asked â€Å"Would you please come with us? † they replied. â€Å"What seems to be the matter? † Mike asked knowing he was caught. â€Å"You are under arrest for hacking into someone’s computer and steeling ideas and programs. † They replied in a disappointed tone of voice. At that moment he knew his life was over his ambition just destroyed his life. He went quietly with them. As stepping out of their car and going towards the police station he says Bill. â€Å"I’m sorry,† he said to him. â€Å"From all the people I didn’t want to think it was you† he replied in a disappointed way. Mike walked off with the agents and into the station. He was sentenced to 15 years in prison. All of the money from the program went to Bill Gates and he got all the credit. He managed to by back all his company and start dominating the computer world once again. Mike was finished he would never write another computer program again. Bill’s life returned to normal except for one thing he had no best friend beside him.