Deah Of A Salesman Essays - English-language Films, Free Essays

Deah Of A Salesman Essays - English-language Films, Free Essays Deah Of A Salesman Death of a Salesman Willie Lowman is a character that most anyone can identify with. He has two sides to his life; On one side he creates an image of being successful, well liked, and bold. On the other side he feels old, unsuccessful, defeated and disliked. He maintains the successful image to comfort his wife and friends. This veil of success becomes thinner and thinner until he lingers between fantasy and reality of the cruel world, often changing back and forth in the course of a conversation. The core of Willie^s slow painful demise into nothingness is based upon his beliefs. Willie thinks that success is not what you know, but who he knows and how well he is liked. These beliefs he instills in his sons, who find themselves adrift and meaningless just like their father. In addition Willie sees the world changing, and his own inability to change with it, will seal his fate. He misses the open land and the smell of flowers in the summer, the pollution and high rise apartments add to Wil! lies dismal existence. An example of Willies shift from fantasy to reality is during his conversation with his wife about the Chevy. He thinks the car is fantastic, the best ever built. Later he and his wife discuss some bills that were paid, and when told about the bill to get the Chevy^s carburetor fixed, he says that they ought to prohibit the manufacture of the car. Willie Lowman is finding himself less and less capable. He dreams of making it big and has visions of Uncle Ben who gives him advice on how to get rich, but never the kind of advice Willie wants to hear. Willie is concerned about his image. He is a great showman who can brag and flaunt like the best of them, and as witness to the hard truth of his failure he continues to weave fairy tales and live in fantasy. Willie wants his sons to be better off and more successful than him, but he has already corrupted them, and they too claim achievements well beyond reality. Biff comes to the reality of his position in life in the opening of the play. He knows he is not cut out for the business world. Biff prefers to move back to Texas and work on a farm. Although he realizes working on the farm won^t make him successful, he knows that it^s his calling in life. Happy who is fairly stable and comfortable in his work, prefers to continue with the charade, and the deception so as long as it! makes life easier for him. Although his sons will not be successful, I think Willie Lowman did the best he could. Willie is not to blame for his sons disappointments, although he has delayed their success by giving them false ideas about success. The family situation is that of the standard dysfunctional family. The mother is upset by her sons because they have no respect for Willie and show no concern for his decline. Willie loves his wife, but often mistreats her, cuts he off in mid conversation and belittles her. Biff begins to hate his father because of the constant pressure to succeed, along with his fathers adultery and abuse of his mother. However Biff still cares very deeply for his father deep down inside. Willie^s favorite son is Biff; however Biff is also a continual source of disappointment for his father because of his inability to assert himself in the business world. Happy is most like his father in the way that he much prefers fantasy over reality. Happy is willing to continue with pretending everything is all right so as long as it makes life easier. The conflict is Willie versus nature. Nature being the environment and Willies inability to change and conform to it^s dynamic and changing nature. The characters in this play are easily understood because of their similarity to most people who find themselves washed up in this game called life. People watching the play can easily identify with these characters who represent the average working class family. Nobody wins in the end because it^s real life. The father kills himself, hoping that the insurance money will send his family on their way to success; and in actuality the insurance money from his death will heal no wounds, or right any wrongs.

To coin a word or drop a clanger, that is the question - Emphasis

To coin a word or drop a clanger, that is the question To coin a word or drop a clanger, that is the question On misusing or fumbling a word, is it better to hold your hands up to it or to compare yourself to the worlds greatest playwright? For Sarah Palin, apparently, the answer was easy. Her use of the entirely made up refudiate was no error; indeed, inventing it was akin to something Shakespeare himself would have done (oh, when will the comparisons between those two end?). Last Sunday, in response to proposed plans to build a mosque at Ground Zero in New York, Palin begged peaceful Muslims, please refudiate in a Tweet. While the message was later deleted, she eventually followed it up with one declaring, Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it! Of course, this new word, judged by those with dictionaries to be an accidental combination of refute (meaning to prove to be false) and repudiate (to reject as having no authority), still wouldnt quite work in this context, if at all. More appropriately, perhaps, Palin also aligned herself with George Malaprop Bush, the misunderestimated president who was mindful not only of preserving executive powers for [him]self, but for predecessors as well. The English language always has and always will grow and change. But the question now is: should we all refudiate words entering the language out of sheer unwillingness to admit we got it wrong?

The Concept of Liberty Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

The Concept of Liberty - Essay Example They re used to derive property implictions nd to solve philosophicl problems ssocited with this conception of liberty. In the following pper I would like to discuss the concept of liberty s it is presented by severl reserches. First I will define the generl concept of liberty s it is viewed by the generl socil community, then I will discuss the views of severl uthors s for the liberty concept. Finlly I Will mke the conclusions nd summrize the reserched pper. 'Liberty', in its most generl sense, signifies the bsence of some sort of constrint on something. The topic here is interpersonl liberty: the bsence of initited constrints on people by other people; or, more precisely, people intercting voluntrily without constrining, interfering with, or imposing upon ech other - except to prevent or redress initited constrining, interfering, or imposing. s 'imposing' seems the most generl of these terms, I shll stick with tht s long s it withstnds criticism. Positively inititing n imposition on nother is to be contrsted here with merely withholding ssistnce, or with defense or redress (so not just nything tht nyone else might do could be described s 'imposing'). This sense of 'liberty' is supposed to be the opposite of subjection nd oppression: it is individul sovereignty. It is bout the voluntry interction of persons rther thn selfish individulism, s its detrctors sometimes misrepresent it. This is the liberty of libertrinism, clssicl liberlism, nd much - though not ll - common sense. s fr s I cn tell, no one hs hitherto provided n dequte ccount of liberty in this sense. This filure is prticulrly striking nd ironic mong those clling themselves 'libertrins'. I shll ttempt cler, or t lest clerer, wy of expressing this ide tht is cpble of deling with vrious problems.number of reserches nd politicins in different wys interpret the concept of liberty. I will tke look t severl of them so tht them in my further reserch. Isih Berlin presents two concepts of liberty through which he plces the freedom of judgment in reltionship to them, nd lys out some dvntges of liberty bsed on judgment over the other two concepts. One wy of tking Berlin's distinction is to mke it debte over the importnce of politicl prticiption. Berlin himself llows for number of other wys to put the distinction, but describes the centrl issue dividing the two concepts s follows: Liberty in [the negtive] sense is principlly concerned with the re of control, not with its source. Just s democrcy my, in fct, deprive the individul citizen of gret mny liberties which he might hve in some other form of society, so it is perfectly conceivble tht liberl-minded despot would llow his subjects lrge mesure of personl freedom. Self-government my, on the whole, provide better gurntee of the preservtion of civil liberties thn other rgimes, nd hs been defended s such by libertrins. But there is no necessry connexion between individul liberty nd democrtic rule. The nswer to the question "Who governs me" is logiclly distinct from the question "How fr does government interfere with me" It is in this difference tht the gret contrst between the two concepts of negtive nd positive liberty, in the end, consists (Berlin, 2002). Mny hve red Berlin s n updted version of Benjmin Constnt, who put mtters similrly. Constnt distinguished between the liberty of the ncients nd the liberty of the moderns, sying tht "n Englishmn, Frenchmn, nd citizen of the United Sttes" understnds liberty to