China Trade from Early 17th Century to Mid 19th Century Essay

Around 17th and 18th century, Western countries were extremely eager to reach the profitable Chinese market due to its privileged geological location. Although China had traded their riches with Europe along the Silk Road for centuries, Chinese government were afraid that the sea trade to the south would potentially corrupt their â€Å"imperial kingdom† and further try to conquer the country. From 1700 onwards, the government established a set of rigid restrictions imposing the practice of Co-hong to confine foreign trades and merchants in Canton. However, by late 18 century, the trading system seemed to change. The British commenced the opium trade, which created a steady demand among Chinese addicts and further solved the chronic imbalanced trade. As the Opium War broke out with Britain, China was no longer on the top of the world. The Celestial Empire not only was forced to be subservient to British trading regulations, but also somewhat became a semi-colonial country. The East India Company founded in 1600 that held a monopoly in east India by the British government was rapidly enlarging its global trading influence in China. By sending a company trader to address their concern regarding to the unreasonable restrictions on trade in Canton, the representative James Flint was arrested and imprisoned for being breaking the â€Å"Canton trading law†. This incident showed China’s superior attitude toward Westerners and how they manipulated the trade irrationally in their best interest disregarding the concerns of foreign traders. The growing number of foreign traders in the late eighteenth century strongly threatened the Qing. They feared that the trade with foreign merchants would give the opportunity for Westerners to corrupt China; therefore, a set of laws that was so called â€Å"Canton system† was established. The system restricted all European trades to only one port Canton and foreign merchants were forbidden to abode in the city except trading season. Moreover, the Europeans had to obey the licensed Co-Hong merchants, of who were responsible for controlling the trading behavior in Canton. As a result, these complex and irksome rules created a tension between foreigners and Chinese merchants, British traders especially. In 1792, a British ambassador Lord George Macartney set sail to China hoping to seek the approval of the Qing Emperor to loosen some of the trading restrictions to the British traders. Yet, the letters to the Emperor was unreservedly rejected; the response was fairly disappointing. Emperor Qianlong’s edicts to George III in response to McCartney’s demands on English traders showed his arrogant and condescending attitude toward the British. â€Å"As your Ambassador can see for himself, we possess all things. I set no value on objects strange or ingenious, and have no use for you country’s manufacturers. (105 Cheng and Letz with Spence) Furthermore, in his second edict, he stated, â€Å" But your Ambassador has now put forward new requests which completely fail to recognize the Throne’s principle to â€Å"treat strangers from afar with indulgence† and to exercise a pacifying control over barbarian tribes, the world over. † (106 Cheng and Letz with Spence) He describes foreigners as â€Å"barbarians, which showed how he disrespected all Westerners and measured China as the most superior in the world; other countries would have obey Chinese â€Å"law†. British viewed Qing’s legal code as unreasonable and perceived the Chinese officials as obstinate governance, which further exasperated the existed tension between the two nations. Meanwhile, a network of opium was widely distributed throughout China. In order to pay for the tremendous demand of Chinese tea, silk and porcelain pottery in Europe, Britain and other European nations determined to import the one product which became the factor that corrupted the Imperial Empire: opium. Opium addiction level arose in a short period of time, which affected not only the imperial troop but also the governmental officials. Thus, Emperor Daoguang appointed Commissioner Lin to confiscate opium from English ships and refused to pay indemnity to the British traders. The efforts of the Qing dynasty to coerce the opium restraints resulted in the trading conflict, which had already existed for decades between Britain and China triggered the Opium War in 1840. Lord Palmerston’s dispatch to the Emperor of China was a message to inform the Qing that Great Britain would no longer be submissive. The British government therefore has determined at once to send out a Naval and Military Force to the Coast of China to act in support of these demands, and in order to convince the Imperial Government that the British Government attaches the upmost importance to his matter, and that the affair is one which will not admit of delay. † (125 Cheng and Letz with Spence) The dispatc h simply showed the Britain’s intentions to use force to protect its subjects in China, Canton in particular. After the damaging defeats in the war, the first unequal treaty, Treaty of Nanjing was signed after the War, which awakened China from its fantasy of superiority. In the Treaty, China opened several ports and exposed its markets to Western merchants, which turned the central kingdom into a semi-colonial country. Consequently, the role in the national economy had reversed. China was now forced to obey all the demands in the Treaty of Nanjing signed with the British. China was no longer the â€Å"Celestial Empire†; inversely, it was slowly sliding down from the top of the world.

Henry VIII †Success or Failure? Essay

Henry the eighth was born in 1491. His father’s good reign meant that Henry succeeded the throne without any problem. He became king in 1509. He was courageous and skilled, also ruthless and savage – one of his first actions was to behead two hated tax collectors. This made him popular. He married Catherine of Aragorn – his brother’s widow. This was against church rules, but the Pope gave special permission. Henry spent all of the money his father had given him on battle against France. This was the battle of Spurs, 1513 – the French spurred their horses and ran away straight away. Meanwhile, Scotland attacked England. Catherine of Aragorn and Henry’s nobles quickly built up an army. A tactical error on the side of the Scots meant that Scotland lost and suffered a political disaster. He also had many friends – one famous one was Thomas Wolsey. Wolsey’s intelligence had meant that he hade gone from rags to riches. Henry made him rich and powerful – many people said that Wolsey was more powerful than Henry. However, when Wolsey asked the Pope not to grant Henry’s divorce, Henry told him to attend a court trial which meant that he would go back to rags. Wolsey died just before the trial. Henry’s divorce is one of the most important religious changes in History. To acquire it, he changed England’s church so that it was separate (but still Catholic) from the Pope – who wouldn’t grant him a divorce. He then simply asked his archbishop to grant him a divorce. This created the Church of England and later meant that England would become Protestant. In order to get a son, he married three times. He then married another three times. He married Catherine of Aragorn, Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleves, Catherine Howard and Katherine Parr. Of these, 2 were beheaded. He decided to shut down the monasteries, possibly due to the fact that they owned 1/4 of England’s land and were very rich – his excuse was that some did a bad job. The 1535 Black Book of the Monasteries was a biased report on how well the monasteries functioned. By 1536, many smaller monasteries had been shut. In Yorkshire, where the monasteries were very good, there was an uprising of 30,000 men. Henry crushed this by lying to the rebels, waiting until they disbanded and then breaking his promise. This meant that by 1540, nearly 400 monasteries and their lands were owned by the king. Henry spent his last years fighting with Spain and France. To determine whether Henry was successful of not, we must first think, what is a successful king? What makes an unsuccessful king? Kings and Queens such as Mary Tudor and King John have often been called failures because they were not popular. At times, Henry was not popular at all – he had a great uprising. Does this mean that he was definitely a failure? Henry did many good and bad things during his reign. He was very ruthless – he executed many people without proper reason. He spent all of his money on wars. He lied and was arrogant and greedy. He also protected England from attacking countries. He changed the church and destroyed the monasteries. His son succeeded the throne without any problem. Henry himself had a bad personality. He did, however, improve the country a lot, keep it safe from opposing countries and keep his Barons and rebels under control. If you look at it one way, Henry had a bad personality, married 6 times and would not have been a very nice person to be with (he executed people without thinking). He was however; a very successful king and England did gain a lot from him. He went to a lot of trouble to prevent political disaster and acquire a male heir. If being a successful king requires a good personality, then Henry was a failure. But if being a good king depends on how many good things he did for his country, he would have been a successful king. Henry did however, do many bad things that some other ‘failure’ monarchs would probably not have done, such as ignore and mistreat his children/wives and fall out with the Catholic Church. In conclusion, Henry VI was a dictator and a failure, but his motives were not all bad and he, although using ruthless measures did succeed in his main aim to secure the throne of England with a male heir. Therefore overall, if the historian studies what he achieved, then he achieved a great deal more than many other monarchs and is therefore a success.

What is the role and purpose of the inspector in Priestley’s ‘An inspector calls’?

John Boynton Priestley was born within the city of Bradford on the 13th of September 1894. His childhood consisted of many major historical events, including the First World War in the period of 1914 – 1918, within this period he would have been 20, he served on the front line, and this life experience could have left Priestly with long-term mind like effects. Before the war his mother died, and collectively these two major events could have made him unstable or unsure of position within the world. You could describe his life as war, marriage and tragedy. Throughout his lifetime priestly wrote a number of novels, plays and other texts, mainly containing and expressing his own beliefs and experiences. As an individual he believed very much in capitalism and everybody living within there own success, benefiting from their own profits. Priestley was very left wing, whereas he disagrees with the right wing policies and prefers policies that are of a different extreme. This left wing attitude made up his main and general characteristic, which was that of someone expressing their views, his membership of the socialist party allowed him to do exactly this and share in other people's societal beliefs and views. This idea of Priestley's expression of beliefs, views, emotions and feelings of the world and society are shown clearly through the characters of Priestley's play â€Å"An inspector Calls†. Prior to the arrival of the inspector Mr. Birling appeared to be very confident in what he spoke, making his beliefs shown to his surrounding family. He made it clear that he was powerful and a strong believer of capitalism where oneself would benefit from all working efforts. From the opening scene Mr. Birling's characteristics started to be shown to the audience, he says, â€Å"I speak as a hard headed, practical man of business†, this shows that he considers himself of a high class and somewhat intelligent, however there is an understanding of his arrogance, self satisfaction and complacency. The idea of him being a man of business also suggests his obsession for money and power. Mr. Birling's confidence is shown in furtherance when he says, â€Å"the titanic-she sails next week forty-six thousand eight hundred tons- New York in five days and every luxury and unsinkable, absolutely unsinkable†. This to the audience shows irony as we know that the titanic went onto sink, however in context to the characteristic of Mr. Birling it becomes clear that he is a very confident and arrogant man. When the inspector arrives it is made clear that the family are tense, uneasy and uncomfortable with the arrival of an unexpected visitor. When the inspector asks any questions, very blunt and subdued responses are given. The family regard themselves as class which should receive no such suspicion of any crime or any police related incident. Mr. Birling believed that the inspector must be calling regarding his â€Å"Knighthood† or a warrant, however in actual fact there are questions to be answered, and this scenario shows the arrogance of Mr. Birling, alongside his self satisfaction and his complacency. The inspector at this time plays a vital role in the implementation of fear, worry and guilt. In furtherance Mr. Birling becomes victim to a thorough scrutiny by the visiting inspector. Before the inspector begins his questions Mr. Birling shares information which highlights his importance within the local community, His mellow minded approach to the scenario has no huge effect and instead suggests and expresses his personal characteristics to the audience. The way that Mr. Birling says, â€Å"I was an alderman for years and lord mayor two years ago and I'm still on the bench so I know the Brumley police officers pretty well†. This shows his eagerness to express his importance and destroy any of the inspector's suspicions or questions. As the questions carry on being delivered by the inspector, Mr. irling's level of impatience increases. He also shows an eagerness to complete the interview and carry on with the evening celebrations. At this stage of the play the inspector is staging a battle, where he has to bring Mr. Birling down to reality and try to extract information regarding the death of Eva Smith. As the inspector continues to reveal the horrific happenings, Mr. Birling continues to defend his position, expressing a query regarding the role in which he plays as a high class business man in connection to the death of an ‘unknown' person. Mr. Birling says, â€Å"Yes, yes. Horrible business but I don't understand why you should come here, inspector? † In relation to human nature in general it highlights people's arrogance, directly what is being shown through the character of Mr. Birling. It is made clear at this point that it was the idea of J. B. Priestley to express peoples characteristics and show them to the reading audience, probably intended to support the main theme of the play which is to extract information using certain techniques which are used in order to allow people to face their actions and relate it to guilt, making people realise the consequences of their actions. As more details become revealed by the inspector and as Mr. Birling realises that he has previously employed Eva Smith, tension starts to build, Mr. Birling begins to give very blunt, sharp and self centred, with the inspector interrupting with a very abrupt manner, suggesting that he wants answers and will not let Mr. Birling's attitudes and beliefs stand in the way. In relation to the real world, people often have to use appropriate manners and techniques to show that they are important and will not let anything slip away from the matter in hand, regardless of a person's attitudes and characteristics etc. Although Mr. Birling accepts that he has once employed Eva Smith, and in furtherance sacked her, due to a protest over the smallest increment of pay, which solely adds to and shows his arrogance, business man like ways and higher class ignorance. He stills shows denial, he says, â€Å"Oh – that's it, is it? Well we've got several hundred young women there, y'know, and they keep changing†. This clearly shows that Mr. Birling has no care for anybody other than himself and his family, this is also shown within the following quotation, he says, â€Å"A man has to make his own way – has to look after himself – and his family of course, when he has one†, Small details which are given off by Mr. Birling relate to a major or important and meaningful thing. Mr. Birling's actions and characteristics are very important towards the main theme of the play, as they separate truth from reality, just as many defensive people within today's society would also contemplate, it shows in general how people will withhold information for the sole purpose of preventing a leakage of information which could be potentially harmful lot themselves, there business or there social dealings. Within the context of ‘An Inspector Calls', Mr. Birling makes every possible attempt to prevent a scandal which would involve himself, he repeatedly says to the inspector, â€Å"I don't see where I come into this†. The use of the word ‘I' shows his belief in a society where oneself looks after themselves and there surrounding family only. Mr. Birling continues this self satisfied and self belief attitude as he continues to use words which refer to himself, this is recognised by the audience and the inspector who are now in realisation of his full characteristics. Mr. Birling is faced with the realisation of responsibility and how it is affected by small and simple actions which in context to the guilty party may appear harmless. The inspector says, â€Å"What happened to her then may have determined what happened to her afterwards, and what happened to her may of driven her to suicide†, this makes Mr. Birling think and realise fully what his actions could have caused, however instead of simple straight confession he replies to the inspector with the following comment, â€Å"oh – well put it like that, there's something in what you say, still I cant accept any responsibility. If we were all responsible for everything that happened to everybody we'd had anything to do with, it would be very awkward†. At this moment in time Mr. Birling demonstrates once again his strong and clear attitudes, however the inspector makes his first challenge, questioning his use of vocabulary, he asks more questions, forcing more related detail. The inspector starts to be shown as a strong character who is unwilling to take blunt and meaningless responses, however the inspector needs to be shown as strong, otherwise Mr. Birling would express no relevant detailed information, and instead only the bare minimum. Priestly made this idea significant by showing that so called superior high class citizens are not entitled to withhold and ignore information which links and directs to a plea of guilt. The Inspector asks very probing and searching questions, which have great significance, his role becomes much more exposed, the inspector as a character becomes someone who is confid ent, wise and possibly someone who is an advisor like person who is warning of a future event. He is seen as someone who can adapt to an individual to extract the highest quality of information. He acts as a catalyst, wanting to change something in the case of the Birling family, this is to turn their attitudes away from uncaring to somewhat sympathetic. The inspector says, â€Å"But after all it is better to ask for the earth than to take it†. This quote is significant because it shows a man of wisdom, and knowledge, but it also shows Priestley's perspective of life, showing that it is better to ask for something rather than just taking it. In relation to the general world it shows how people will just take something or do something without thinking of the consequences, this is exactly the point that the inspector is making when he makes this comment to Mr. Birling. Mr. Birling continues to show his arrogance as he begins once again to relate to his superiority and importance he says, â€Å"How do you get on with our chief constable, Colonel Roberts? † The way that he gives names is supposed to impress the inspector, and release himself from any further suspicions, even though at this stage he does realise that he has played a part in the death of Eva Smith. However it makes the inspector more eager to move on and away from the situation, leaving Mr. Birling beginning to realise his wrong doings which had consequences eventually leading to a death. Sheila enters and her interview begins. When she enters she appears totally oblivious to the presence of the inspector, although all is about to be changed as her true doings and actions are about to be exposed changing her high class status into a guilty, responsible and conscious citizen. Although Sheila is totally oblivious to the scenario and situation, she is eager to find out exactly what is going on, the complete opposite to her father, showing a difference in character. Sheila appears much more subtle and sympathetic, personally asking questions to entice more information. It becomes clear that the inspector will play up to Sheila's nature and play a different game, using different techniques. It appears at the outset that Sheila has driven herself into the situation and dragged herself in purely because of the many questions which she is posing. It appears that priestly wanted to make the play more interesting to the audience by introducing from the outset a mix of characters, creating conflict, opposition and contrast, however it is soon to be made clear that only from the outset the family are different, and in fact very similar within their ‘unintentional' actions. Gerald and Mr. Birling soon realise potentially what Sheila could be doing to the family, too much information can be never to good! Gerald intervenes with the following comment to the inspector, he says, â€Å"And I don't see that this inquiry gets you anywhere, inspector†. This shows Gerald's desperation to release Sheila from the scenario, and save the families from a public scandal. Gerald and Mr. Birling at this stage seem to have at least one thing in common, and this is the matter of business. Sheila starts to turn against her father, precisely what the inspector is trying to do, she says, â€Å"I think it was a mean thing to do†, this conflict starts to draw tension, totally obliterating the happy followings from the earlier evenings, Priestley's idea of creating conflict is the basis for the revealing of the truth, in relation to the general world it often takes a simple disagreement or argument for people to confront there guilt. Shelia has won the gold award for drawing attention to herself, asking many questions has eventually led her to be faced with the truth, the inspector appears to know more than he is letting on, and instead of showing it he allows the family to expose there corrupt ways themselves. Priestly made this idea of self exploitation significant because it shows how uncaring, unsympathetic people in general will expose themselves is correctly probed, in the case of the Birling family they are turned against each other, which makes them face to an extreme guilt and true reality. The inspector keeps the photograph to himself and only one family member at a time, refusing access to no one other than the interviewee. Could the photograph be someone different each time he shows it to somebody, the way that priestly keeps the audience guessing and allowing for them to draw there own conclusions on the situation is very cleverly done. Slightly coincidental but the inspector keeps the photograph very secret, just like the Birling family with there secret's, kept hidden from anyone other than themselves. The inspector has taken a very different approach to the interview with Sheila, this approach to Sheila is to extract information, however with the rest of the family members it is seen to be inappropriate and somewhat intrusive. With the continuation of the Inspectors questions and Sheila's subtle approach, she realises that she has some responsibility for the happenings of Eva Smith. She realises that the inspector had his suspicions and admits her responsibility, a total contrast to her fathers approach. As is shown in the following comment, she says, â€Å"I've told my father, he didn't seem to think it amounted to much – but I feel rotten†. It just shows there contrasting attitudes to life. Priestly made this idea of contrast significant because it shows how people on the outside can be very different, but inside can be very similar. As Sheila continues to expose her conduct, the audience starts to understand her character from a different angle, her innocent early impressions change as she tells of a story of jealousy. It becomes clear that Sheila was jealous of the girl, her looks and her position within the world. She says, â€Å"She was a very pretty girl†, this shows her jealousy of other glamorous threats within her society, she went onto to misuse her power, by using a threat to the manager, she says, â€Å"If you don't get rid of that girl, I'll never go near the place again†. This is significant because it shows how people's actions can be solely driven by jealousy and power, without thinking of the consequences, this is exactly the case of Sheila, the audiences perceptions of Sheila have suddenly changed, and as an audience we begin to understand that people shouldn't judge on first appearances as there is usually more to be told. The inspector says, â€Å"Well, we'll try to understand why it had to happen? And that's why I'm here, and why I'm not going until I know all that happened†, this quote is significant because it shows the inspectors determination to change the family, to extract and make them face reality and guilt, making them confess to all of there wrong doings, making them realise that actions have consequences. Sheila's interview takes less time than Mr. Birling's, possibly because of co-operative manner, showing a willingness to become involved and share all that she knows, accepting reasonability. Now that Sheila accepts what she has done, she casts her suspicions to Gerald, who is next for the hot seat. Gerald is confronted on his own honesty, Sheila realises that the inspector knows about each person, this is imprinted on her mind and she confronts Gerald about his own doings with Eva Smith, he admits a relationship only to Sheila expressing no real details, however not with an Eva Smith but instead with a Daisy Renton, the change in name suggests confusion and deliberate separation to attract no links between the very secretive family members. As Gerald's interview begins he again starts the routine where he tries to excuse his rather fragile Sheila. He protests that she must leave, escaping the following disturbing details which are to be revealed by Gerald. This is significant because it continues to show the families rather secretive motives, relating and sharing to nothing with the possibilities of exploitation leading to a public scandal. Gerald says, â€Å"I think Miss Birling ought to be excused any more of this questioning. She's nothing more to tell you†. From this comment he shows to the audience that he is hiding something, which appears to be his affair with the dead girl. The inspector makes a very interesting comment when he says to Gerald, â€Å"And you think young women ought to be protected against unpleasant and disturbing things†, which is closely followed by, â€Å"we know one woman who wasn't†, this comment is an attempt to hit Gerald with guilt in the face, it is yet another revelation from the part of the inspector. The inspector wants Sheila to stay with Gerald throughout his interview, he says, â€Å"She feels responsible. And if she leaves us now, and doesn't hear any more then she'll feel she's entirely to blame†, this quote is significant because it relates to an idea of sharing guilt and not just accepting as a sole being, however in relation to the general world, people are prepared to burden guilt onto a sole being to save themselves from any shame of guilt. As the interview of Gerald continued there were numerous interruptions, possibly planned, possibly coincidental, Mrs Birling made her first appearance who also tries to expel Sheila from the ‘damaging' scenario. Sheila continues to defend her case and manages to stay for the remaining of Gerald's story. There is an element of surprise when the inspector directly asks Gerald when he started seeing Daisy Renton, Gerald plays down the claim by saying, â€Å"where did you get the idea that I know her? † However the inspector continues to say, â€Å"I knew already! â€Å", this tactic used by the inspector is interesting as it shows the ignorance and arrogance of Gerald and Mr. Birling, who are unwilling to take and accept responsibility. The inspector is getting Gerald to reveal and expose his secret life, which prior to this interview no other person was aware of. Gerald reveals that he felt sorry for the girl and he was acting to save her from an atrocious womaniser, surely this shows a caring side to Gerald, yes, this other side to people is significant because it shows that people are made up of a mixture of personalities and characteristics, what would the world be like if we only had one mode? Gerald says, â€Å"We went along to the country hotel, which I knew would be quiet at that time of night† this suggests that he has been there before and possibly has a habit of taking in women for short petty affairs, this in relation to the real world shows how people have secret lives behind the backs of there supposed family. Gerald is exposed almost to be as bad a Muggerty, although he had saved someone from an extreme sexual relationship from an intense womaniser, he himself took advantage of the situation, turning a simple refuge campaign into a secret affair, although he did implement thoughtful and caring measures to make sure that she was well looked after, and free of trouble, you could say he was only helping a weak, vulnerable and deprived person. He said, â€Å"It was inevitable. She was pretty and warm hearted†, Priestly made this idea significant because it shows in relation to the world how people will take advantage of a weak and vulnerable person to benefit themselves in some way, In the era of priestly it was common for high profile men to take advantage of weak lonely women for the sole purpose of making there reiterating lives into something more exciting with a bit more entertainment. Gerald eventually puts into context what he has done and realises that elements were unscrupulous and inappropriate, Gerald explains that the relationship ended a few months after it begun, it was clear to the audience that the affair wouldn't of continued for a long period of time, because back then within the days of Priestly it was totally expelled that only people of the same class could have a relationship, and not a mixture in the case of Gerald and Daisy. In furtherance Gerald offered Daisy money to keep her sustainable and out of trouble, however she refused as she wanted the relationship to be meaningful and representative, she also wanted to take away the idea that Gerald was paying her for her services, this idea is significant because it shows that a proud person does not have to be of a social high class, and instead should be respected whatever there actions or beliefs. Gerald appears to have moved by the story in which he has told, he asks politely to be excused, the inspector allows for this to happen, the upset of Gerald is significant because it shows even a high class man of business with unsympathetic feelings for others in the world can and does feel emotion for tragedy's that occur within the world, I believe that it was the idea of priestly that characteristics must be shown and covered from every angle, in accordance with the main theme of the play which is the expressing of emotions, feeling guilt for the of consequences caused by an unintentional action. Gerald leaves and Mrs Birling now becomes accustom to settling routine of interview. Mrs Birling is very assertive showing that there should be no such suspicion hanging over her. She answers very sharply being very inconsiderate, when the inspector poses a question she immediately without thought gives such an answer which releases no such relevant information. The inspector says, â€Å"You're not telling me the truth! â€Å", which is followed abruptly with the following comment from Mrs Birling, she says, â€Å"I beg your pardon! already just seconds into the interview Mrs Birling and the inspector are having major clashes of personalities, Mrs Birling's attitudes are shown very strongly and she repeatedly makes the point that she has no point to play in this charade. As tension continues to grow, and as the inspector continues to fire questions which antagonise Mrs Birling, Sheila makes a point which brings the family back down to mother earth, she says, â€Å"We've no excuse now for putting on airs and that if we've any sense we won't try†. This allows Mrs Birling to realise that there is no escape as the inspector has already uncovered information from three characters, finally the inspector can resume his questioning to a more subtle level. Priestly made this point significant because it shows how people will act without full information to save themselves from suspicion or scrutinising. Still a little hesitant but more cooperative, Mrs Birling responds to the inspectors questions, it is revealed that she is a volunteer working for women's charity, she says, â€Å"We've done a great deal of useful work in helping deserving cases†. From this the audience starts to understand that she must be very caring, but indeed we are very wrong, our perception of a volunteer would be a caring person, but in the case of Mrs Birling it is non existent, it appears that she only carries out the volunteer work to gain status within her community, showing that she is prepared to be caring and work for free, to serve and aid the needy. Priestly gave the audience this idea because it is very true throughout the world, Mrs Birling represents the snobs of the world who participate in such events which gain them credentials within the community's perceptions. The inspector reveals that Mrs Birling was in fact one of the last people to see the girl before she died, she had appealed for help to the women's organization, however due to Mrs Birling's bitterness and prejudice she influenced the decision that no help would be given, Mrs Birling says, â€Å"I didn't like her manner†, jealousy and prejudice are shown. Priestly made this significant as he showed that a snobbish like person will feel no such remorse for somebody else's misery or wrong doing. In my own personal opinion Mrs Birling is the worst character out of them all, she had the opportunity to help this harmless, vulnerable, friendless, penniless, desperate victim but instead because she was dissatisfied with her initial case she dismissed her and made sure that the other members gave a unanimous vote to refuse help, it should be Mrs Birling who feels the most sympathy, but instead she probably feels the least amount of compassion from the overall spectrum of the Birling family. Tensions continue to rise as Mrs Birling's attitudes towards the inspector change, as she begins again to give responses which suit herself and not that of the inspector. More details are revealed which will eventually link back into the remaining character, Eric. The inspector Wants Mrs Birling to release more information to make her face the consequences of her actions, repeating and exploring the avenues more of the incidents will hopefully help Mrs Birling realise what she has done. The family begin to realise that Eric plays a role in the death of the girl, and his scrutinising will begin shortly, just as Mrs Birling's interview comes to a firm conclusion. The family sit and wait in anticipation for the return of Eric. Priestly made this idea of time significant, because it changes the way that we as the audience interpret the play, somebody who read the play twenty years ago will have different interpretations of the meanings than somebody who reads the play today. Eric enters and is sharply questioned, he enters with a realisation that the inspector knows about his traits, and actions, His realisation that his family are also aware of what he has done creates a rather subdued atmosphere, arguments arise and there is an overall feeling that Eric has committed such an act that jeopardises the family's status. With the family firing questions wanting to know why and what possessed him to do such a thing, the inspector becomes increasingly angry and frustrated. Eric says, â€Å"Could I have a drink first? â€Å", this is answered with a ‘No' from Mr. Birling and a ‘Yes' from the inspector, this conflict of interests between the two is increasingly apparent with a case of rivalry implemented. Is alcohol the answer to all problems? Priestly wanted to show how different people deal with their own problems in there own ways, this varies videly throughout the world. Suspicion and guilt hits Eric straight in the face, He tells of the secret meetings with the girl, and he explained how he made love to her on more than one occasion, it is suggested that himself and Gerald both took advantage of the girl, for her good looks, and her vulnerable position within life. Eric says, â€Å"She told me she was going to have a baby†, Eric then replies with, â€Å"I was in a hell state about it†, this shows that only consequences hit certain people in the face when they are confronted with reality, a baby for Eric created by accident with somebody he didn't love would have catastrophic and disastrous. Priestly wanted to show exactly how some high class families were humiliated back then within his era, when such events occurred it was common that the families would banish the perpetrator, and escape any disgrace from the local community, for the Birling family it would have been cataclysmic if any such news escaped of there corrupt wrong doings, this would have been followed by a public scandal. Eric's integrity is severely questioned by his fathers somewhat raging temper and annoyance. It is revealed that that he stole money from his own family business, as the truth is revealed, it becomes clear that Mr. Birling is more concerned about the money, than the pregnancy of the girl. He says, â€Å"He's admitted he was responsible for the girls condition†, Mr. Birling burdens total blame onto the Eric, as his secret life unfolds, for the position that the girl was left in. Priestly made this idea significant because it shows how people will prioritise things to there own aptitudes and attitudes of life, in the case of a business man (Mr. B) he is putting money and theft before family and pregnancy. This is shown by Mr. Birling when he says, â€Å"I've got to cover this up as soon as I can†. A childhood revolt begins to occur as Sheila continues to blame her mother and father for all of the endeavours committed by the younger generation. Eric blames his mother for the final death of the girl, saying, â€Å"You killed her – she came to you to protect me – and you turned her away†. This idea of a childhood revolt is significant because it shows how disrespect on the child's part occurs within a family, in the time of priestly it was unheard of a child questioning there parents, in the case of the play it was the inspectors job to remove such disrespect. The inspector continues to assert his authority, interrupting and taking charge, He gives a summary of events, hitting each perpetrator directly in the face with guilt and realisation of there true given consequences, he burdens the main blame onto Mr. Birling, who is left with a moment of thinking to reiterate what has just been said, this idea of repeating what has been done is allowing for the family members to understand the extent of there actions, coming to terms with the consequences, realising what they did then was unacceptable and a feeling of guilt should be felt. The interviewing of the family draws to a conclusion, he leaves the family divided, with opinions against each other, they are allowed to reserve judgement and come to terms within there own hemisphere just exactly what they have done. The inspector leaves giving a rather meaningful speech

The Great Gatsby Character Analysis

Fell in love with luxury/grace/charm, lied about his past to woo her First speaking role in chapter 3 Initially aloof, enigmatic host, surrounded by luxury, powerful and beautiful people Subject of gossip Chi- learn of his childhood Chi- proof of criminality Later on- lovesick, naive, innocent, hopeful, centered on dreams Delayed revelations- 'emphasis the theatrical quality of Gatsby approach to life' Transformed self into a persona ‘Ability to transform hope and dreams into reality' Title = reminiscent of The Great Houdini/adolescent' etc. Suggesting Jay IS only an illusion Dream of Daisy falls apart (Wall Street Crash) Contrasts Nick & Tom Passionate, active Loyal and good hearted Loses love interest to Tom, like George Wilson. Temporarily lost touch with father MASC. political commentator Chris Matthews sees him as the eternal American striver: â€Å"Gatsby needed more than money: he needed to be someone who had always had this blind faith that he can retrofit his very exi stence to Daisy's specifications is the heart and soul of The Great Gatsby. It's the classic story of the fresh start, the second chance. ‘appears to be the quintessential American male hero†¦ Powerful businessman with shady connections, drives a glamorous car'(- Michael Kismet and Amy Aaron's) Often used as a symbol for wealth Believes American dream New man = born when he met Dan Cody Restless- like America, resourceful and active Never cynical or corrupt Cannot see daisy fault (using him for a release from her boring life & retaliation from husband) Pretends he, not Daisy, killed Myrtle Killed by George Wilson â€Å"Jimmy was bound to get ahead.He always had some resolves like this or something. Do you notice what he's got about improving his mind? He was always great for that. He told me I et like a hog once, and beat him for it† â€Å"Somebody told me they thought he killed a man once. † â€Å"it's more that he was a German spy during the war. He was n ever quite still; there was always a tapping foot somewhere or the impatient opening and closing of a hand. Consumed with wonder at her presence' (Daisy) Nick Caraway Sober, reflective Narrator Slowly moves to forefront From upper Midwest, family in America a little over 70 years Sent substitute to war (therefore of a wealthier class) Acts similarly to an ‘Everyman' Is not blinded by glitz and glamour Disgusted by realization of shallowness, hollowness, uncaring and self-serving attitude of his superiors.Distances self instead of catering to them More racial and down-to-earth than Buchannan and Jordan Baker (and so distances himself) Has personal integrity Affected by Gatsby death grows, from a man dreaming of a fortune, to a man who knows only too well what misery a fortune can bring romantic relationship with Jordan Baker calls himself â€Å"one Of the few honest people that have ever known Daisy Fay/Buchanan Enigmatic Tom's wife, Gatsby love interest, Nick's second cousin one removed, mother of Pam Beautiful, charming Selfish, shallow, hurtful See the world for what it is, cruel (why she's happy her child is a daughter so he can be a ‘beautiful little fool' Character built on light, purity and Innocence Otherworldly- angelic White- purity or void? Name- pure, centered around gold (wealth, status and money) Finds nouveau riches to be tedious and vulgar Materialistic â€Å"Thinking about Gatsby stretching his arms out to the green light across the water, we can't help thinking of the Sirens: the mythical island dwellers whose singing was so seductive that sailors would throw themselves into the sea and drown trying to reach them. † Capacity for love and wants to be loved Idealized image of relationship with GatsbyFickle Tom makes decisions for her undecided Us Percival ‘her voice is full of money' low, thrilling voice High in a white palace the king's daughter, the golden girl. Human orchid of a woman Tom Buchanan Cold-hearted, arist ocratic bully Daisy's husband Staggeringly rich, for centuries Relatively young Arrogant Questionable love for Daisy Racist (more accepted then) Confident dads George to believe Gatsby is at fault It was a body capable of enormous leverage-?a cruel body. Brute of a man, a great, big, hulking physical specimen â€Å"Go on. He won't annoy you. I think he realizes that his presumptuous little flirtation is over. George Wilson Myrtle's husband Suicide Kills Gatsby Owner of run-down auto shop by the Valley of Ashes Respectable? The Great Gatsby character analysis Throughout The Great Gatsby, Jay Gatsby plays the main character. He is slowly introduced and revealed by Nick Carraway, his neighbor. Gatsby does both right and wrong things, he has acquired his great amounts of wealth through shady business and all to attain a financial situation that is equivalent to that of his love, Daisy Buchanan. Those actions and motives makes him a morally ambiguous character and greatly contributes to some of the bigger themes in the story as well as furthering the main plot.There are two sides to Jay Gatsby, a lovesick and determined young man that represents hope and loyalty, and a shady, corruptive man that represent his decay of morality. He is known all over the city for his extravagant parties full of alcohol and jazz music. This makes his name well known all over New York city, but he maintains the hard facts of him and his past hidden. He associates with a man who Gatsby claims â€Å"fixed the World’s Series back in 1919. † and he†™s in the business of bootlegging (illegal trafficking of liquor).Although Gatsby sounds like a despicable man he does all of this to reach his dream who is Daisy buchanan. Jay Gatsby has been emotionally loyal to Daisy since they fell in love when he was a young soldier, but she is already married and is part of an â€Å"aristocratic† class that ridicule people like Gatsby. When they are reunited Gatsby yearns for her approval by showing of his imported clothes and grand home and feeling helpless when she doesn’t enjoy his parties.These contradictions are sustainable proof of Gatsby’s moral ambiguity. Gatsby’s obsession with repeating the past is what results in his moral ambiguity and makes everything else servile to his dream. Bootlegging and fixing world series’s all seem like nothing if it means it’ll help him get to a financial level close to daisy’s. His shady business affairs and hopeful dreaming deepen the main plot and con tribute to the theme of the american dream that is extremely present throughout the whole story.Gatsby is able to attain his dream but in a non decent way that leaves people wondering if it was worth it or if that was the only way. He represents the rebellion and lack of morality of the 1920’s and the ostentatious ways in which the newly rich of the time live. Gatsby’s moral ambiguity can be shown through his determination to attain the one he loves, even if it means becoming a criminal. It contributes to various themes and lessons taught by the novel, like the dangers of not leaving the past behind.

Models of Evidence-Based Practice Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Models of Evidence-Based Practice - Essay Example Through the bundles, the practitioners select the best practices then put them together in an attempt to offer the best services and deliver the expected outcomes. In the clinical setting, the practitioners select the most appropriate bundles for certain conditions to improve patient care (Kim, 2011). This model would help in creating a procedure that will see Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) be of less pain. Pantoja & Britton (2011) indicate that the multidisciplinary approach is one that focuses on speeding up the attainment of quality care. Through the model, it is easy to define mechanisms that will lead to collaborative learning among the healthcare providers. Pantoja & Britton (2011) argue that more focus is shed on patient through the Multidisciplinary model. Through this model, Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) would be conducted by a multidisciplinary team; thus, a successful procedure. According to Riva, et al (2012), PICOT focuses on â€Å"P† for the population or the disorder in question, â€Å"I† for the intervention, â€Å"C† for comparison with other infections, â€Å"O† for the outcome after a diagnosis and â€Å"T† for the time frame set for the outcome of the intervention administered to take place. These questions present a formula for developing researchable questions and evaluating the existing evidence. The PICOT Model would allow for a systematic practice of conducting Total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Doody & Doody (2011) indicate that the IOWA model highlights the importance of analyzing the whole healthcare system from its infrastructure, the patients as well as the providers. Through this, Doody & Doody (2011) say it is possible to identify solutions to problems that exist in the system. Through IOWA, the entire healthcare system will shift its focus on alleviating pain on patients after going through Total knee arthroplasty (TKA). I would recommend the PICOT Model for implementation to this research problem because it is inclusive and provides a

Health and Safety Report Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Health and Safety Report - Essay Example The paper includes aspects of case laws with respect to the initiation and spread of fire. It goes on to point out some aspects related to emergency evacuation and strategies. All these aspects are collaborated with relevant legislations, fire preventive measures, the protective measures, as well as relevant fire fighting devices. The paper argues that resulting effects and the situations leading to fire outbreak call for the need to develop a good plan of action for handling cases of fire outbreaks. People could as well come up with elaborate plans that would prevent fire outbreaks within their environs. Organisations holding the responsibilities to contain fire outbreaks need to introduce fire fighting gadgets and chemicals that can fasten process of extinguishing fire. The fire fighting departments need to ensure that there are good indicators of places likely to be a threat to the people. Besides, these indicators should be in a way that can warn the people about the issues that they are likely to face as the paper depicts. In most of the buildings, fire fighting strategies need to be established to ensure that the people residing or working in such buildings are in a position of containing situations that may face them as a result of fire outbreaks. This situation could be even more difficult to the people living in high rising buildings. In this case, the fire department needs to establish an elaborate design to ensure that cases of fire fighting are settled as much as possible. This means that fire-fighting departments need to develop and advocate for good fire fighting plans that ensure that people achieves their goals in solving fire accidents within a short period (Communities and Local Government 2007). On another hand, there is the need to establish some good plans of building in ways that enhance the safety of people, especially during a fire incident. Apparently, within the plans of designing these buildings, there need to be emergency escape

Marketing the Bad Boys of the NFL Research Paper

Marketing the Bad Boys of the NFL - Research Paper Example The Super Bowl is the most-watched American television broadcast. Super Bowl XLIV, played in 2010 between the New Orleans Saints and the Indianapolis Colts, became the most-watched American television program in history, drawing an average audience of 106.5 million viewers and taking over the spot held for 27 years by the final episode of MASH. Sunday Night Football has become the most popular sow in prime-time television this season, dominating the overall Nielsen ratings, with the highest average viewership for a prime-time NFL package in 14 years. Sunday, December 6th's Pittsburgh-Baltimore classic, seen in nearly 23 million homes, was the most-watched show on television in the first week of December 2010, as Sunday Night Football has been since the start of the 2010 season. The NFL is so violent that the league, the US military, and neurologists recently held a conference to investigate head injuries and concussions and determine if equipment or rule changes could protect the players better. Remarkably, the military was involved because NFL players suffer the same type and frequency of injuries as soldiers in combat. That is an astonishing correlation – the NFL is as violent as combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. NFL is so violent that players regularly suffer 'career-ending' injuries that leave them crippled for life. It is so violent that Daryl Stingley was paralyzed for life in a game, and in pre-season games at that. In a meaningless preseason game New England Patriots quarterback Steve Grogan overthrew wide receiver Darryl Stingley, Jack Tatum of the Oakland Raiders, known for his vicious hits, nailed Stingley while he was in the air, snapping vertebrae in his neck. Stingley was a quadriplegic for the rest of his life. He died in April of 2007 at the age of 55 of heart disease and pneumonia complicated by his quadriplegia. NFL also has a propensity for criminality and criminal violence.