Banning Catcher in the Rye Essay Example for Free

Banning Catcher in the Rye Essay The Catcher in the Rye by J. D. Salinger should not be banned in schools based solely on the fact that it is a controversial book that uses harsh language and sexual references. This book is J. D. Salinger’s freedom of speech, and it is a violation of the first amendment for schools to ban this book. This book is only offering an inside look into what teenagers go through in some point of their lives. According to the Los Angeles Times, The Catcher in the Rye’s, â€Å"†¦ profanity and sexual references drew scandalized reactions†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Rotella 18). Although this book has many sexual references, it is not in any way as explicit and as bad as what teenagers see and hear nowadays on television and in the world. Holden occasionally thinks and talks about sex: â€Å"Most guys at Pencey talked about having sexual intercourse with girls all the time. † (Salinger 48). The average teenager often thinks and talks about sex. It is not unusual for teenagers to do this. The profanity in this book is also not as bad as it may seem. Patty Salazar, a concerned mother and religious activist, claims that, â€Å"‘It uses the Lord’s name in vain 200 times’† (Rotella 17), but the curse words used in The Catcher in the Rye are nothing that teenagers have not heard before in their everyday lives. Banning The Catcher in the Rye in school is not acceptable. It is a violation of the first amendment, and it is nothing far from what teenagers encounter everyday. This book gives teenagers someone in literature that they are able to relate to in one way or another. The Catcher in the Rye is not a book that will corrupt young readers. The underlying theme of this book is loss of innocence. This loss occurs when a teenager makes the change to adulthood where he or she is obscured by phoniness. By banning this book from schools, the only thing that teenagers would be sheltered from is reality.

The Architecture Of Theatres Architecture Essay

The Architecture Of Theatres Architecture Essay Back to the first half of the 20th century and it was in America that mass production was becoming ever more efficient and chains of theatres were blooming all over the country. Architects commissioned to design these theatres were no longer being briefed by the playwrights and managers but by the owners of the chains with the sole intention on increasing box office sales. The aesthetics were clearly intended for the paying customer and the money directed at the entrance lobby and the ever growing auditorium spaces and the less spent on the ever smaller dressing rooms. This problem was less common in Britain around that time as very few theatres were built during the war but a prime example for Britain did come about with the redevelopment of the Memorial Theatre in Stratford-upon-Avon in 1930. Designed by modernist architect Elizabeth Scott, after months of fundraising and committee meetings, was expressed by the director of the theatre William Bridge-Adam as having, Absolute flexibility, a box of tricks out of which the child like mind of the producer may create whichever shape it pleases. It should be able to offer Mr Poel an Elizabethan stage after his hearts desire. The Architectural Review responded to it with critical acclaim. Sightline was an area singled out as being particularily good with no pillars obstructing any views and no boxes. Acoustics were also mentioned, the shape of the theatre resembles a giant horn and is so deigned that the players can be herd from all parts of the stage and the sound distributed evenly throughout the auditorium. The splays and the ceiling of the proscenium, together with the forestage when in use, act as reinforcment to the source of sound. Finally the use of materials and the style where mentioned. Though new theatres continue to appear in constant succession throughout the country, each newcomer, with very occasional exception, represents no more than another step along the tiresome path of motif ornament and meaningless decoration. Since Palladio built his theatre of Vicenza there has been no development other than an increasing tendency towards vulgarity and over-elaborationà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ in the new theatre in Stratford-on-Avon materials are used with intelligence, selection and fitness of purpose and designed by the nature of the material. It later became clear that the actors did not feel the same way. Comments were made over the distance from the stage and front row and the bare walls stretching from the proscenium to the circle. It was described in The Other Theatre, published in 1947,Word count: 294 as if performing to Calais from the cliffs of Dover. (Baliol Holloway) Clearly the architect had not achieved what she had wanted (an intimate theatre) nor what the client desired. What had happened here was a lack of communication and cooperation between the two professions. In the past there was an understanding of what was required and little was said between either professions but back then the architects working on theatre buildings would have specialised in Theatre design, most of them being builders themselves with several years of experience under their belts. The word specialist was not used in Britain until the mid-19th century, pervious to that an architect who designed theatres would just be referred to as a Theatre Designer. Earlier cases have been recorded in other parts of the world where renowned general architects have thought they could solve the problems aroused by the old theatre designs. At the end of the 18th century London had several theatres which had work done to them such as Benjamin Dean Wyatts Theatre Royal in Drury Lane which also received architectural critical acclaim. Too often theatres built by renowned generalist architects are more extravagant and end up having work done to the auditorium within and around a decade. Luckily for both architect and theatre owner money had become available for rebuilds and amendments however vast. The theatre professions displeasure with the works of Wyatts at Drury Lane and Elizabeth Scott at Stratford -upon-Avon are only a couple of examples of what happens when famed architects try and impose a solution to and old and accustomed problem. Their belief that they could rethink the nature of the auditoriums issues upon their first attempt can be seen a s naÃÆ' ¯ve and as the theatre profession is more voluble than the architectural realm when provoked, the public tend accept the blame being placed on the architect. Word count: 385 Luckily there are a few first time Architects, Theatre Designers and Consultants who do listen to their clients and are willing to spend the time studying the code for auditorium design as well as meet technical requirements. As a result there are many theatres in both Britain and America which function out of a healthy relationship between both theatre and architecture professions. The breakdown in communication is what both sides have to be wary of and this can often be caused by the architects instinctive to offer slender resources to the external design. In some cases it may be the case that the architect has taken a modernist mind-set, strange to the theatrical precedence which is generally that the outside of the building should express whats inside and also the other way around. Therefore in the name of architectural truthfulness as a whole, the detailing and shape to the auditorium could be sacrificed by the architect under his manifesto. Looking at it the issue in detail, th e same outcome can be caused by the opinion that the architect is not changing anything just reorganising the auditorium elements more effectively which is just as dangerous as believing that they can change the nature of the auditorium itself. Therefore by trying to organise these key components such as lighting, side seating and acoustic materials, and moving them to the perimeter of the space the eye of the viewer may be drawn to the outside of the stage rather than inwards at the actor. The attention would be drawn to the side walls and ceiling hence the actor will have to try harder to gain the attention of the audience. The problem with auditoriums in the past was the failure to draw the attention to the front 15ft of the stage which should appear to float. Some of the causes may have been that the seating went too far back or was spread too wide. The stem for this problem maybe that some architects are taught and become firm believers that form follows function, thus the functionality fallacy. They work only with statistics in creating a design which is dictated purely on numbers. Areas of the design which could not be measured were often ignored or left to the architect to decide on the outcome unattended. This is a clear example of a lack of a real philosophical discussion on the nature of how theatre functions, between the theatrical technician and the architect. Word count: 403 To understand the architect lets look at how the development of the proper approach to theatre design. First of all a team needs to be formed consisting of: an architect, engineer, acoustic consultant, cost consultant and theatre consultant. An architect naturally heads the team as is in the architects office where he or she works alongside partners, associates and has technicians underneath heading different departments on the construction drawings. There will be some younger members of the team which would have graduated high from their architectural schools wanting to work for an experienced architect on high level projects who spend their time trying to find rational solutions through designing sketch schemes with the architect. These young people are who the Theatre Consultants should liaise with. The Engineers occasionally have a tendency to take over a project which can be dangerous for the position of the architect. The electrical engineer has the safest role in terms of lighting which can be overseen by the Theatre Consultant and more central to the success of the project is the mechanical engineer. The mechanical engineer takes charge of the heating and ventilation. Theatres require that the space be dry and cool whilst also being silent, something theatre managers specify as being essential is the silence. Architecture Actor Audience states that Quite simply there is nothing more expensive and nothing more necessary. The overall job of the engineers be them electrical, structural or mechanical is to solve how the design is put together as opposed to the what and the why of the design. This leads us to the dangerous cases in which the engineers take over the role of designer of theatres from the architects. 1950s America and engineers were emerging with numerous qualifications in stage design and acoustic and scenic engineering claiming they had solutions to sights and sounds. Fixed angles where determined for acceptable sightlines in the auditoriums. Ceilings hidden by lighting, previously referred to as the heavens to capture the rising human spirit and to keep a cap on the theatre space to focus the attention back down to the actor. The side walls which had been lined with humanity in the early years were also now shaped for acoustic advantages. To create a theatre that was intimate, it was suggested that the furthest seats from the stage had to be of a certain distance. Jo Melziners so called field tests in which he concluded that the furthest distance of: 55ft (16.8m) for Julie Harris in drama, slightly more for Gertrude Berg in a rather broad comedy and 100ft (30m) for Ethel Merman in anything. What had not seemed to be considered was the density of the space given to the individual audience member or of the impact of the amount of people to be fitted into the full distance allocated. Just to mention some of the theatres loved by the theatre profession; the Old Vic in London, the Lyceum and the Booth in New York, all of which would be considered badly designed with views obstructed with bad sightlines and areas with a lack of legroom but shows succeed in these theatres Word count: 331 Nowadays this is realised as being a mistake in design as functionality actually took away from the experience but in the 50s and 60s this confusion of the criteria of what makes a good theatre experience had not been realised. What differentiates the live theatre is the sense of community and involvement not the emphasis on the visual lines and sound quality. Maybe if we take a step back and look at what Marcus Vitruvius Pollio wrote in the early first century BC on theatre architecture, we could possibly find another angle on design. Vitruvius having been an architect and builder shared most if not all his knowledge in his ten books on architecture. He makes detailed reference to existing buildings and gave recommendations on how to build new ones. Word count: 248 The conclusion is that clients are appearing to be increasingly greedy wanting larger seating volume with equal comfort. The architect must not fall for the naivety that they can solve the problems which have been around for centuries. An architects overconfidence in his technical skills can easily cause the failure of a production and not have the talent of the production or writers to blame. Many newly emerging architects believe that theatres need modernisation but there needs to be a greater understanding of the magic and illusionistic handling of the space of such a complex building type. It seems better then to stick to old strategies which work and if there is an old theatre in question then keep it if it works. Amendments can be made to the dressing room and bar, possibly the foyer but not to the spaces in which the audience interact with the performers. By looking to the past for answers we will find that the majority of successful theatres are based on the principles of the sacred geometry which should be considered as special harmony with the intention to encourage movement of energy not as a robust net of formations. Finally the sightline paradox. It seems the theatres which work well suffer from the occasional views with obstructions but those theatres which have excellent sightlines all-round are universally disliked by actors and audience.

Race and Ethnicity in South Africa

Race and Ethnicity in South Africa The apartheid government believed that South Africa should be represented predominantly by the beliefs and cultures of the white race group, diminishing the others. Tutus speech directly challenges this by saying that the South African nation is a rainbow nation, with its national identity involving the different cultures, religions and beliefs of any and every group. This goes against the apartheid belief of a white supremacist state, saying that South Africa is a home to a diverse population, all of which share equal rights. It clearly states that, as a rainbow nation, South Africa embraces diversity in any form, whether it is racial, cultural, religious or ethnic. This means that anyone can be anything they desire and still be considered an equal citizen with equal rights. At the same time, however, it says that the countries people will rally together against any opposition, united by the common understanding that we are all South Africans. This one common plateau is what makes South Africa a unified nation, while at the same time celebrating its diversity in its people. No, he says the something completely different. He clearly says that different cultural groups must exist, but that there must be a common and mutual tolerance and respect for each group. This differences in society need to remain, and a mans views must stay intact, but people need to understand that we all fall under the title of South African, and it is this that will unite us and make us a peaceful and tolerant nation. If this understanding can be spread, according to Sparks, this is what will inspire our national identity. Rainbow nation is the concept that South Africa accepts all races and beliefs, viewing them as equal under a legal constitution, thus making South Africa a nation of many colours, with the identity of a diverse country, i.e. a rainbow nation. Mosaic society is a metaphor that compares the national identity of South Africa with a mosaic, a piece of art (usually a picture) made up of many differently shaped and coloured pieces of slate, slotted together. In the same way, each different culture, belief, religion, ethnicity, etc. must be accepted as part of society, but be separate from other groups (like the slate pieces). Melting pot refers to the opposite of what is considered to be the national identity. It suggests that like a pot in which ingredients are melted together into one entity, so is the South African society brining in its diverse people to be melted together to become the same, with the same beliefs and understandings. According to Source C, the hope was that a new South Africa would bring about racial integration and the enjoyment of wealth by all, as seen by looking at the image provided by the advertisement. This is clearly a false representation of reality, as today it is well known that those who were oppressed by apartheid (mainly black people, but also Indians and coloured people) found it hard to recover in terms of education and finance after apartheid ended, resulting in the persisting divides we see in this country today, in which the vast majority of wealthy people are white and therefore live separate from the economically underprivileged. This proves that the idea of a national identity provided by the source is completely artificial. Source D also explains to us an important fact; that the divides created by apartheid, across religion, race, ethnicity and gender, meant that people experienced very different ways of living during the apartheid era. These differences and divided experi ences are not something that can be broken down over years, let alone over night, resulting in what has previously been explained as different groups preferring to exist in their own comfort zones of society, making the notion of a national identity almost absurd. Finally, Source E shows us that the concept of a national identity is one that belongs to the starry-eyed idealists, i.e. not something that could happen in reality. It also provides another take on this, by suggesting that South Africa was never really a unified country, but rather the product of hundreds of years of colonialism, meaning that because this land was influenced so drastically by the external imperial powers, that the groups and social divides created by this influence resulted in the present idea of a unified and nationalistic South Africa being non-existent. A national symbol needs to be at least one of the following three things. Firstly, it must be created from the hearts of the people, from something that they feel strongly about and can therefore rally behind. Secondly, it needs to be created with regard to the experiences and suffering of those it will represent, as people who need to back this symbol must feel that it stands for everything they have gone through in order to make it possible to have such a symbol. Lastly, it must be something that people identify with, something easily recognisable and universally accepted so as to appeal to a diverse population. I would support the third approach, which says that a national symbol should be something that every person can identify with fully, as this encompasses the other two approaches. In order for someone to identify with a representational symbol, they must accept it into their hearts, as it needs to be something that they feel close to and that reaches them on a emotional and personal level, while still standing for their political persuasion. As well as this, it needs to be something that represents the experiences and suffering that one has been through in order to insure the creation of the symbol itself. This means that it must reach them on an external, physical level, as well as a personal one. Therefore, we understand that in order for something to be identifiable to a person, it needs to encompass all the three approaches mentioned above, which are brought together by the third approach. The fact that Thabo Mbeki implies that every group in our culturally diverse country stems from the same source and should therefore have the same belief and understanding of a national identity that represents every South African. This is most definitely not the case, and hence completely idealistic. To claim that every black man and women has the same interpretation of what it means to be South Africa as the average white South African is absurd, as the formative experiences of these different groups during both the apartheid and post-apartheid eras are, the vast majority of the time, completely different. This idealistic and hyperbolic tone of the speech also emphasises its forced nature. It almost seems as if he is trying to convince both himself and others of his preferred reality rather than affirm what the true reality. This speech was made during the creation of the South African Constitution, widely considered to be the best in the world on an idealistic level, while being difficult to uphold in practise. This means that the speech fits with the constitution in terms of the belief that all South Africans feel united by the common nationhood, but also falls in line with the constitution in terms of being unrealistic. In other words, the context of the speech emphasises the idealistic nature of the content. It reveals that heritage is constructed from the history. While history is the historical fact of what happened and how it happened, heritage is not as straight. It is built on the basis of history, but on a more subjective and interpretive level. An example is given by the speech, by how Thabo Mbeki chose to use certain historical facts as a foundation for his construction of a so-called common South African heritage, also implying that heritage can be about choice, what you want to be and how you want it to be. Therefore, while history is about the compilation of factual events, heritage is about the creation of what we feel represents us from our past. Source K suggests that the problem with the use of the term African as a form of national identity is that nobody seems to know what they it truly stands for, whether its blacks, people born in Africa or those committed to the African continent. This is a well identified problem, as it is not possible to use a term to unify a country when one cannot clearly define those who the term represents. It is not possible to allow anyone to create a definition, neither a person nor a government, as this may conflict with the definition of another person or group and it will be impossible to compromise. It therefore stands to reason that Source L should bring up the argument that those who choose to bestow Africanness on others are out of place and should first try to come to terms with what it means before labelling it as an honorary title and using it to create a national identity. It also brings up the fact that the continual use of the term as a means of national identification will only l ead to further confusion of those who dont understand its significance (if any). If we look at the holidays celebrated during the apartheid year of 1986, we clearly see that they are predominantly white/Afrikaner, Christian holidays. There is nothing that celebrates any kind of equality or democracy, nothing to commemorate the anti-apartheid struggle. However, when we look at post-apartheid 1996, we immediately see the change. There are now days that celebrate human rights, freedom, workers, women, heritage, etc. and days such as 16 June that remember those who died to bring about the end of apartheid. Therefore, the types of holidays celebrated changed drastically over the decades, between 1986 and 1996. The change in holidays shown between 1986 and 1996 also shows us the change in national identity in South Africa. The identity starts in 1986 being clearly white, Christian, Afrikaner, promoting only the beliefs that one would expect from such a person. This shows the narrow-mindedness of the apartheid identity, which neglects the cultures and rights of other racial, religious and cultural groups. Then in 1996, it changes to incorporate the celebration in womens rights, freedom, human rights, workers rights, etc. therefore showing us a more diverse cultural, religious and political identity that fits closer with the post-apartheid South Africa. The day that most resembles independence day from 1986 is Republic Day, as this celebrate the day South Africa became a republic and hence a independent country, and from 1996 is Freedom Day, a celebration of South Africas first non-racial elections and thus of a new kind of liberation and independence emerging, as well as a new South African identity. Therefore, we can say that the most important thing, the one aspect that has been preserved over the decade, is the feeling of independence from external forces, whether it is your own government or that of another country. The eight episodes referenced refer to pivotal areas of South Africas history. They are all conflicts which shaped the nature of the future South Africa and as such need to be given a place in the celebrating of a freedom that is supposed to be at the core of modern South Africa. Their commonality is illustrated by the fact that each one of these events is characterised by violence stemming from injustice of one sort or another, be it racially charged as in Genocide and slavery or politically and nationalistically motivated as in the Anglo-Boer and world Wars. In each of these there is the fight for freedom from some threatened or real form of repression. They differ in the nature of their fights- some are internal fights for freedom dividing people within borders- Slavery, Wars of resistance, The struggle for liberation and some are external, usually uniting different people within the country against a common enemy as in the World Wars. Together they represent an opportunity to pul l people together by inspiring a common sense of pride and identity by emphasising that the country as a whole has defeated so many forms of brutality and repression to ultimately gain its freedom and as such the freedom of each and every one of its citizens across all ethnic barriers. The Freedom park was created for one specific purpose, as stated in the source: to help South Africans reconnect with the lost spirits that died in war, who fell for South Africa, in the way that their culture dictates, i.e. a ground for the mutual respect of the dead by all South Africans, regardless of cultural belief. Therefore, according to the logic provided by the source, it stands to reason that such a place would be perceived to play an important part in the restoration and rejuvenation of the indigenous, South African cultures that were diminished by the apartheid area, not to mention helping to rebuild the bridges between culture burnt away during the long years of apartheid separation. The 2 sources discuss the purpose of Freedom Park, that is the need to create a place of remembrance which will allow people to remember the fallen, those that have shaped the country, and therefore inspire a deeper feeling of commitment to building it in the future. In doing this they show how invaluable it is to delve into the complex cultural belief systems of different groups within the country. If one honours these appropriately e.g. by fastidiously allowing the visiting of the places of death and carrying out relevant rituals and therefore ensuring the return of the spirits of dead combatants, the experience of the living is resolved and completed and their ability to have a positive outlook on a South African future restored. It is therefore vital that one have a deep understanding and sensitivity towards each different groups particular understanding and rituals surrounding death and remembrance, as if you validate and honour these individually you allow each group dignity an d this will in turn foster respect of each other and a common wish to build a country where the future can be shared by all.

My Desire to Teach Literature :: Teaching Education Essays

My Desire to Teach Literature A couple of months ago, out of curiosity, I engaged in a test offered by the MENSA association. Along with the I.Q. figure, I received there was also some two word description attempting to label my intellectual prowess. As I recall one of the words was â€Å"intuitive†, or some variation thereof. People with a propensity to intuitiveness generally have some sense of this. Call it intuition. As a learner I would have to say that I fall into the visual category. For an instructor to describe a mathematical formula, for example, it just does not have the impact as to actually see the process worked out on a blackboard. The same applies to a tangible object. I am able to fully grasp its applications if it was placed before me, as opposed to being merely explained. I do intend to teach in the visual style when, at last, that role is mine. Ultimately my goal is to teach college level literature. Off hand I can think of a few instances where visual tools might be employed in this arena. Suppose I was to assign a class to read Joseph Heller’s â€Å"Catch 22†. Clips from Mike Nichols’ film version would give the class a firmer grasp on the insanity of war. Gustave Dore’s sullen and intense companion paintings to Samuel Taylor Coolidge’s â€Å"The Rime of the Ancient Mariner† would assist in bringing students closer to the mood and drama the poem evokes. And why stop with artistic mediums. Nature herself is the ultimate instructor. After a reading of Emily Bronte’s â€Å"Wuthering Heights† I can see myself marching a class out into a rainfall (weather permitting) and proclaiming â€Å"O.K., guys. You feel those cold drops pounding you? Feel the general wildness of it all? That, my fr iends, is unbridled passion. That is Cathy and Heathcliff in a nutshell.† Regarding the application of learning styles and learning style assessments, quite honestly, I don’t know enough about it yet to make a judgment call. This is new to me and I am still learning. From what I understand of some of these issues, such as integrated learning, this is a practice that should be administered to students at a lower grade level.

Great Expectations By Charles Dickens :: Great Expectations Charles Dickens Essays

Great Expectations By Charles Dickens Charles Dickens makes this extract memorable and significant as it is the first time Pip, a working class boy from the forge, meets Miss Havisham and Estella who are going to have an important and significant affect on his life. Pip is invited to Miss Havisham's residence Statis house. This is important as he doesn't know why he was invited and before he goes he is told there may be something in this for him. The reader knows this might be true due to the title of the play "Great Expectations" Dickens makes Pip's first encounter with Miss Havisham and Estella at Statis House a significant and memorable point in the novel in a number of ways. The first point that makes it memorable is that it is written in first person narrative. Pip says "sat the strangest lady I have ever seen, or ever shall see". This image is seen through the eyes of a child so it will be memorable to him as he will never forget this lady. This also gives the reader first hand experience into what Pip is seeing. Another point why Dickens makes this a significant and memorable part of the novel is that at the beginning of the extract we do not know who the lady is. Dickens uses pronouns to name her, he uses words like "she" and "her". This makes it significant as Dickens is building up an appearance of the character before he tells you her name. Dickens makes a memorable part of the novel when he describes the lady's clothes. He says "she had a long white veil dependant from her hair and she had bridal flowers in her hair". This gives the impression of a young bride. Dickens uses the adversative clause "but" so we know something is going to be wrong. Dickens then says "her hair was white". This then changes the reader's perception of the character so this is why it is memorable as it now sticks in the readers head. Another memorable part of the extract is how Dickens gets across that this lady is wealthy. Dickens just doesn't say she is rich he describes her assets that pip can see in the room. He describes the fabrics "rich material- satins, and lace, and silks". He also describes her jewellery "bright jewels" and "some other jewels lay sparkling on the table". These all tell you how rich she is and the adjectives "bright" and "sparkling" makes it memorable to the character and the reader. A way Dickens makes this a memorable and significant part of the extract is when he describes what sees when he enters the room, he

Bullfighting in the Sun Also Rises

Jonathan Rowe Essay 1: The Sun Also Rises English 42 Doctor Speirs 3/28/2010 No Bull in Bullfighting In The Sun Also Rises, Ernest Hemingway writes â€Å"nobody ever lives their life all the way up except bull-fighters† (100). Spoken by Jake, this line exemplifies the importance that bullfighting plays in the novel. It's not only portrayed as a sport, but rather as a complex, mathematical art in the form of a dance between the bull and fighter. The matador scene in chapter 18 is perhaps one of the richest in the novel due to it's use of symbols.The choreography between Romero and the bull is reflective not only of the characterization of Brett and Jake, but of the relationship between Brett, her masculinity, and her effect on the other male characters. It also provides penetrating insight to the role that Robert Cohn plays as a foil, and how he contrasts with the other characters. The most prominent correlation that the bullfighting scene carries in terms of symbolism is a par allel to Brett's sexuality. On a closer inspection, the fight also resembles an improvised dance between two partners.Each dancer has a designated terrain, and â€Å"as long as a bullfighter stays in his own terrain he is comparatively safe† (213). And a dance between two partners can be compared to the tumultuous events that love can bring, for example the relationship between Brett and Jake. It's interesting to note that early in the novel, Brett responds to Jake's inquiry of living together by saying that she'd just â€Å"tromper† him (55), a French word meaning to abuse and cheat. The diction almost resembles an animalistic quality, as well as the word â€Å"trample,† foreshadowing the symbolism behind the bullfighting scene.Just like Romero is luring and enticing the bull with his cape, Brett lures men with her charisma and charm, and refuses to bring any meaningful relationship to fruition. The diction of the scene involving Romero and the bull also carrie s some sexual overtones. Romero had to â€Å"make the bull consent with his body,† (217) creating an image where the man and â€Å"the bull were all one sharply etched mass† (217). In terms of symbolism, Romero is reflective of Brett, and the bull represents the men that Brett seduces. His method is to be â€Å"all so slow and so controlled† (217) at first, to lure the bull into proximity.Similarly, Brett lures men in with her brazen sexuality. The end result is the same however, with the bull and the men she's involved with. Romero will fight and kill the bull, just like Brett will lure men and eventually leave them. It's â€Å"all for sport, all for pleasure† (208). Brett's attraction to Romero can be explained in terms of his masculinity. Romero is somewhat of a perfect male, he's an aficionado, brave, beautiful, and held in very high esteem by everyone he encounters as well as being the favorite fighter of the crowd. He resembles Brett's masculinity.S he's given a unnisex name, has short hair, and even refers to everyone as â€Å"chaps. † She seems to mingle only with other men, possibly because she's shunned by other females for her promiscuity. While Romero and the bull most closely represent Brett and Jake, upon closer inspection another similarity can be drawn between Belmonte and Robert Cohn. Belmonte is a symbol for Cohn and his relationship with the other characters. Just like how Belmonte serves as a foil to the decadent style of Mercial and valor of Romero, Cohn is a foil to the other characters around him.While Romero would tease the audience with his graceful style and fighting close to the bull, Belmonte, now resuming bullfighting out of retirement, simply â€Å"gave the sensation of coming tragedy† and only gave the illusion of being close to the bull. He was once a great fighter, but now refuses to subscribe to the new â€Å"decadent† (215) bullfighting style. His fighting style represents Cohn in the sense that they both had their shining moment—Cohn's brief relationship with Brett, and Belmonte's glory days of bullfighting: which they're still trying to win back.Belmonte stands apart from the other fighters because he adheres to an traditional form of fighting. Similarly, Cohn is the only character with no involvement in the war, he preserves a sort of innocence and value system that disappeared with the â€Å"lost generation. † He tries to preserve the idea that sex equals intimacy and love, and throughout the novel his clumsy attempts to win back Brett are reflective of his refusal to understand that his brief relationship with Brett was simply a series of sexual encounters, nothing more.In conclusion, part of what makes Hemingway's style so unique is that he simply shows, without much telling. The matador scene in chapter 18 is rich because it provides penetrating insight with it's symbolism; Lady Brett with her elusive nature with men is captured throug h Romero's matador technique. The fact that Romero penetrates the bull with his sword accentuates the inherent masculinity that Brett displays—a sort of role reversal. Chapter 18 also highlights the character of Cohn, and his role as a foil and it's parallels to Belmonte's traditional fighting style.

Tv Representation of Families and Society – 1950s to Present

The television shows from 1950 to the present are connected in many ways. The characters showed in the 1950s television show called Leave It To Beaver all have white coloured skin and portrayed as a happy, perfect family. As the decades increased, the nuclear families turned into blended families, and the television shows started to have coloured characters. The families started to have problems and social situations. The viewer sees the conflicts inside the family begin as the years progress. For example, in the 2000's we examined a television show called Arrested Development.The show portrays the characters as if they are troubled and have problems. The children do not listen to their parents but instead have their own path in life, and their father is in jail. The representations of families changed according to society. In the 1950s, society acted traditionally, and old-fashioned. Therefore, the families portrayed in television were traditional, old-fashioned, obedient, and respo nsible. However, as the years progressed, society changed. The people became more free, open-minded, united, and dysfunctional.However, even though there are many differences between the television shows from the decades, there are still similarities between them. Even though society changes through time, families are still connected through love, support, care and responsibilities. In my family, we always stick together, support each other's choices and love every person unconditionally. The television show that I can most relate to is The Crosby Show for many reasons. The Crosby Show has a humorous father, and a caring and loving mother who are both hard working, siblings who fight but still love playing and music.The female teenager called Denise is independent, likes boys, music, wants an education, but still has fun which is alot like myself. The family had the same values as mine, such as education is important in the household, being healthy, and having a respectful and hones t relationship with everyone. However, the past television show which I least relate to is called The Brady Bunch. It is a blended family which consists of a father who is an architect, a mother who stays home, a family nanny, and six children. The parents act romantic, loving and do not raise their voice or argue. The children behave properly nd do not have their independent voice nor their freedom. My family is not perfect like The Brady Bunch but we are a loving family with modern values and morals. The past television shows I have examined demonstrated morals, and values in families. In my opinion, the most realistic TV show about a family in the past was the Cosby Show. The Cosby Show was the only TV show that had a normal family. Both the parents had a successful job, the children have morals and optimistic values, and the family is always positive and humorous. The children have normal problems at their age, they care about education and social standards.They make it seem as if everyone is equal and fair, and everyone has their own opinions not just following every action. On the other hand, the TV show which had a dysfunctional and least unrealistic family was Married With Children. This family was chaotic, uncontrolled, and they have dysfunctional values. The mother does not think straight and wants control over her husband. The father on the other hand, gives away his money without an opinion, and does not give authority to the children. The children do not care about school, nor health. They cannot be controlled and handled by the parents very well.Half the time, the parents do not even know where their children are. In my opinion this is not healthy nor a stable environment for the children to grow up in. Overall, families in general are represented in TV shows by how society is acting in that specific year. For example, in the 1950s families were behaving properly and according to the rules. They had perfect hygienic appearances and they were prec ise about everything they did. They had a daily routine including work, chores, school, healthy food, doing homework, speaking politely, and the husband was the man of the house.In the 1960s, they begin to blend a family together and the viewer begins to see a small change. The children start to argue and disagree with many things, the father is still the only one working and still the man of the house. The family begins to have arguments and situations but learn how to solve it by communication. In the 1970s, the children begin to think more modernly and start to think for themselves. The parents are older and the children are younger. The children begin to wonder; my parents are older and they do not understand me.The values of the children are liberal while the parents are more conservative. In the 1980s, the families begin to show humour, choices, and diversity. The shows begin to have dark coloured skinned characters, and freedom of speech. The children begin to engage in extra curriculum activities and have their separate social lives. The parents are strict but still loving, and the family thinks modern and up to date but the husband is still the man of the house. In the 1990s, the families represented in the TV show, become disoriented, their values are mixed up, eat unhealthy, and do not follow any morals or rules.The parents do not seem to care or worry about their children. The children begin to disrespect their parents and not pay attention to the rules. In the 2000's, the family is more dysfunctional, and less sophisticated. The children are rebelling against their parents and their father is in jail. Basically, as the years progress, the values and morals of society changes thus, changing the morals in families. Report On The Image Of American Society In Films Representations of the American society in films changed throughout 1950s to the present. American society revolves around the typical American family.The family structure has changed drama tically over the years. In the early years, the family was represented as a perfect family structure that acted politely, sophisticated and came together as a family. The family communicated with each other and spent valuable time as one. They sat down together as a family and bonded. As the years increased, the morals and values began to get lost in time through technology. Family keeps everyone together and responsible but without an authority figure inside the family, the family will start lose their bond.Throughout the years, the husband was the authoritarian man figure, however, as years progressed from the 1970s to the present, allowed women an amount of independence to express their freedom by getting a chance to support their families and to receive an amount of responsibility. The films demonstrated that the families in the past had morals and values but decreased throughout the years. However, families still have honesty and unity to live by these days and no one can take that away from them. American’s society has a wide view on people based on the present life experiences.American films from the 1950s to the present have families based on the expectations of society at that moment. The past American film that I can most relate to is The Breakfast Club. The Breakfast Club is a movie from the 1980s about a group of different teenagers stuck in detention. These teenagers all have different personalities and hang out with different people. In the present society, I do not stick myself with one â€Å"crew† or â€Å"clique†. I pay attention to different kinds of people, with unique social standards and diverse appearances. The teenagers all come together and help each other and put aside their differences.The American film which I least relate to is called The Fight Club. This American movie about society got society all wrong. Society is not that cruel, guilty, and violent. The entire film is about a depressed man who meets another man who is played by Brad Pitt and form a fighting club for the men who need confidence and never fought in their lives. The two men lose their jobs, homes, and health and begin to live in a broken down house and rebel against the law. They lose themselves inside the money they earn and the fights they fight. They do not understand the true meaning of life.In my point of view, I cannot relate to those men fighting and rebelling against society. American society creates films based on the American population’s beliefs and moral values. America’s most realistic form of society in a film is Saturday Night Fever. This film toke society’s fashion, fads, slang, and the realistic view of society at that moment and brought it to life. John Travolta played a young adult who worked part time, but still made his own decisions and worked hard for what he wanted. He had an extra curriculum activity which was dancing, and that was special for him. He worked hard, and he devot ed himself to his passion.In civilization, human beings work hard to become someone that’s treated with respect. His family was not always beside him and supporting him but they got around like a normal loving family. He has freedom of speech and is involved with everyone around him. In that moment in society, the director got the exact moments, and social events precisely into the films. In my opinion, the least realistic film that was brought to the public based on the public was The Fight Club. The Fight Club did indeed touch people and made people want to fight to prove themselves worthy, however, society is much better and efficient than that.If one works hard, then the hard work will be paid off correctly and they will become a winner on their own. One cannot achieve greatness and success over one fight. One has to work hard, believe in themselves and have hope. Society is not weak and does not fight because they need confidence. In reality, people challenge themselves and earn their life and living in a proper educated manner. Overall, American society in general are represented according to the community’s actions, feelings, and moral values. The world begins to think less old fashioned and the directors understand that.Young adults are changing the future as we know it. Society is going to act accordingly to modern young adults’ opinions and attitudes. The films represent the positive views on society. They demonstrate the modern experiences and attitudes that the director places in the movies. Technology is taking over our world and has a huge impact in the movies. Directors try to catch the attention of their audiences but placing modern attractions into the movies. The films try to be what the society is at that moment so that people will want to see the movie and think that it is the coolest and top movie that there is.Modern Representation of Families in Society A modern Canadian society is represented through a TV show calle d Degrassi: The Next Generation. This TV show is about young adults in a high school trying to fit in, living through every day situations, and trying to understand life. The TV show focuses on many different life situations and unique kinds of people. These characters face various challenges such as poor self image, sex, AIDS, cheating, death and suicide, depression, bullying, homophobia, racism, eating disorders, peer pressure, child abuse, sexual identity, gang violence, self-injury, teenage pregnancy, and drug abuse.These are all topics that teens experience in high school, and there is no sugar-coating. In my point of view, this realistically relates most to the young adults and the adults in the show, also face daily modern situations such as divorce, abuse, economic problems, and identity issues. Degrassi is not for everyone, mainly because it's an honest account what it's like to be a teen in a society which values cliques and confrontation over truth and real growth. Teenag ers in society are beginning to learn their purpose in life and try to create their existence in society a worthy one.They believe that they can change the world and put their education towards a worthy cause. In the show, there are many cases of modern problems which demonstrate to the public that those are the situations that need to be changed. For example, teen pregnancy. Teen pregnancy is high in America. 1 in 20 young females will become pregnant before they graduate high school. Teenagers need to realize that they do not live in a Barbie perfect world but have complications to face.With this TV show, teenagers, and young adults can realize the world issues out there and can fix them before they get out of hand. The audience gets a warning of the real world and chance for them to redeem themselves. The TV show is like a window into the modern world. The audience seems weak and confused on their path in life but if they get an opportunity to see the outcome of their actions, (s uch as having sex which can lead to pregnancy) they can learn what not to do. Television is a part in our modern society and media survives on the audience’s remarks.Basically, people enjoy watching what they can relate to or what they are interested in. This show is important to society in general for the Canadian community. The issues portrayed in the television show is the most realistic representation of modern society. It is based on real life stories and events that happened. It is important that television portrays the real society at that moment because people start to act according to them. For example, ideas and themes become main stream in society so do they become more common on television.Women would never sleep in the same bed as her husband on television. This is because at the time â€Å"Leave it to Beaver† was being aired, it was a social taboo to talk about sex, or sexuality, even between married couples. Today, we have shows about single moms and sex uality is openly displayed by characters on TV. This shows a change in our cultures values and how we need to be completely and clearly informed every moment we get in our lives so we can learn from TV characters’ mistakes.