State house statue Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

State house statue - Essay Example This is evidenced by not only the exposed chest, but also possession of a sword. In most occasions, the exposure of a man’s chest signifies an individual’s strength and boldness. On the other hand, possession of a sword is an indication of military participation of an individual. Thus, Washington played a significant role towards the close of the revolution. Although the congress was entitled to commemorate the first president of America, the statue was not designed in the right way. For instance, the sitting of Washington on a golden like seat portrays a bad picture to religious practices. To some extent, it is an indication of how Americans adore idols. Additionally, a half naked statue portrays a bad picture to the society; according to most societies, it is unethical for any person to expose private body parts. On the other hand, Washington’s possession of a sword is a sign of how he valued wars. From his offering of the sword, it is evident that Washington contributed towards the loss of many lives during his tenure as the president of America. From this, it is evident that the design of the statue does not honor Washington correctly. However, Washington deserves honor for not only being the first president of America, but also because of his contributions towards the success of the American

People resourcing(HR) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3250 words

People resourcing(HR) - Essay Example They are men and women who lead by example, team work, communication skills, and dedication. In the modern times, it is not enough to be highly skilful. One has to be adaptable to adjust with changes in technology and environment. The need for development of a strategic approach is correlative to the 'best fit, best practice' concept in management of human resource. Best fit is not simply use of the best man or woman for a particular job slot. It goes beyond to achieve the winning situation by harnessing the talents and skills of one employee for the purpose of achieving a specific target or goal. People sourcing align with the company's strategy and strategic human resource management has a stake in the company's performance and results. (Sandeep Krishnan and Manjari Singh). The importance of this approach is gaining ground as traditional management techniques based on 'one system fits all' approach is rapidly losing out in view of the frustration felt by both the management as well as the employees to fit into an outdated system which is no more suited for either. Instead, today the preference is for capability with communication skills. For instance, the capability of a particular employee may not be of very high order, but if his communication skills are noteworthy he may be the ideal choice to carry out a job, a project, or even a whole enterprise. ThModern day technology is designed to bring out the best even in the most mediocre individual provided he or she abides by the simple instructions codified as commands. The tremendous growth of information and communication technologies has exposed the new generation today to a system run efficiently with the help of sleek computers, printers, scanners and other gadgets which has left the system of the previous generation overwhelmed and on the throes of extinction. The system which was in vogue just a decade ago has been outpaced in terms of efficacy and communication methodologies. The present office scenario in most establishments, even in third world countries, presents an atmosphere of youthful exuberance blending with computer aided data systems in place. Handling men enjoins a host of activities and concepts. It has to do with operating, planning, control, research and development, and decision making. Indeed, the present age's requirement for 'best fit, best practice' approach is necessary in the highly competitive nature of doing work today. Even with

Far from the madding crowd Essay Example for Free

Far from the madding crowd Essay In Far From the Madding Crowd, Thomas Hardy examines different types of love. Consider the relationships Bathsheba has with Gabriel, Boldwood and Troy; consider also Troys relationship with Fanny Robin. What conclusions does Thomas Hardy wish us to draw about the nature of love? Support the points you make with close reference to the text. You must also mention the social context of the novel and any relevant literary tradition. Bathsheba is a very vain woman who likes to think very highly of herself, in the first appearance she makes in the novel, she is admiring herself in the mirror. The last word in Chapter 1 is vanity. Hardy has established some of the features of two of the main characters and made us curious about this development of the relationship between Oak and this vain but handsome girl. Bathsheba was not a conventional woman of her time. She was an unusual for a woman of her time because she was very independent. She also refused her first offer of marriage although penniless and living with her aunt. Women at this time relied heavily on marriage. Women at that time often also married for security. Bathsheba is quite teasing with men, for example, when Gabriel Oak holds her hand, she suggests: But I suppose you are thinking you would like to kiss it? You may if you want to. But when Gabriel says, I will. She instantly says, No you wont! This shows that she is teasing, and she can get some men crazy about her. Her relationship with Gabriel has its ups and downs. Gabriel cares for Bathsheba so much but as the novel goes on, Gabriel realizes that there is no chance that he will marry Bathsheba because two other obstructions are in the way, the similarly vain Sergeant Troy and Mr. Boldwood. Bathshebas relationship with Mr. Boldwood is very awkward because, she only sent the valentine letter as a prank. It all started off when Liddy and Bathsheba were writing a Valentine letter to little Teddy Coggan. But Liddy suggests, What fun it would be to send it to the stupid old Boldwood, and how he would wonder! Bathsheba does not agree to the idea at first and says, No, I wont do that. He wouldnt see any humour in it. She was right. But Boldwood takes it so seriously and becomes absolutely obsessed with her, My life is a burden without you, I want you I want you to let me say I love you again and again! When Bathsheba tells him the truth about the Valentines card, Boldwood does not want to and cannot accept the fact that it was a joke and a prank: No, no, no. Dont say thoughtlessness! Make me think it was something more that it was a sort of prophetic instinct the beginning of a feeling that you would like me. Then Troy comes into the novel. During that period of time, there were strict rules governing the etiquette of behaviour about men and women being alone together and they certainly would not publicly touch each other or their clothes. This makes their meeting highly irregular. Bathsheba would be particularly vulnerable in this situation. Troy is similarly vain and teasing like Bathsheba, this enchants her, Thank you for the sight of such a beautiful face! He also often repeats the word, Beauty aimed obviously at Bathsheba. When they depart after their first encounter, she is very happy and feels flattered. She looks in the mirror (as usual) and repeats Troys words, Goodnight beauty! Bathsheba is aware of her beauty, and she feels that if some handsome man in uniform compliments her on her looks, then that is very rewarding for her and it boosts her self-confidence. Also, Troys showmanship with his sword swept Bathsheba off her feet. Also, because Bathsheba would have been very nai ve and inexperienced in the ways of love, she found it very hard to resist Troy. Bathsheba and Troys relationship, was more of a sexual love than a real love: She felt powerless to withstand or deny him. He was altogether too much for her. Another sign of Bathshebas vanity was that, she only married Troy because he had said he saw a more beautiful woman. So, Bathsheba went all the way to Bath just for Troy. But later on in the novel, Troy does not show that same feelings as when they first met. Instead, Troy becomes more involved into Fanny Robin and regrets ever turning her down. The type of love Fanny Robin loves Troy with all her heart; she even walks miles just for him. Many young women in the Victorian times would have eloped to marry soldiers. This was called Scarlet fever. This would be a disgrace to the girl and her family. Hardys aunt Martha was said to have eloped with a soldier When she asks Troy when they will be wed, Troy does not even understand what she is talking about. Fanny asks, When will it be? Troy then asks What? Then Fanny tries to remind Troy, That you promised. Troy again, forgetful, I dont quite recollect Then Fanny desperately says, O you do! Dont speak like that. It weighs me to the earth. It makes me say what ought to be said first by you. Fanny wants to get desperately married, but Troy wants her mainly for sex and for more of a casual relationship. Troy gets very angry and upset when he sees the coffin with Fanny Robin and the baby in it. Tragically, Fanny died of childbirth. The baby was still born. Many deaths occurred due to lack of technology including childbirth. He completely forgets about what he had with Bathsheba and thinks of what he could have had with Fanny. Troys reaction to her death and his disregard for Bathsheba shows he is the type of man who only wants what he cannot have. When Fanny was alive, Troy showed little interest in her predicament. I think that the message Thomas Hardy is trying to get out is that love can only be true, not just for jokes and pranks (the valentines letter. ) Love also has to have two people involved not like Fanny Robin and Troy at the start of the novel. In conclusion, Hardy ended the novel happily, because he knew that is what the readers wanted to read. The story was printed into a monthly magazine and for a Victorian readership; a happy end involved a marriage. Bathsheba was first attracted by Troys good looks and superficial charm and preferred these qualities to the more traditional ones of security and love offered by Oak and Boldwood. But when Fanny dies, Bathsheba finally realizes that Troys is actually a womanizer and he is disloyal. Hardy, himself did not rate marriage very highly as he had an unhappy marriage. So by the end of the novel, Bathsheba becomes more sensitive to others and realizes that she should have accepted Oaks initial proposal, rather than Troys, and that she would have been much happier with Oak.

The Architectural Theory of Semiotics

The Architectural Theory of Semiotics This essay will examine the architectural theory of semiotics and its relationship to the built work of Peter Eisenman, specifically his project titled House VI. This essay will define the theory of semiotics from Saussure through to Chomsky. It will then go on to describe how Peter Eisenman, influenced by the writings of Noam Chomsky would apply semiotic linguistic principles to his design process namely those of deep structure and also syntactic transformational; expression. In doing so Peter Eisenman would set architecture on the path towards breaking free from drawing as the main vehicle for design. Semiotics in architecture is the search for a deeper discourse with the built environment, a way of understanding the rich array of metaphor, ambiguity, rhetorical nuance and metonymy that can occur in architectural meaning. A meaning that does not change and evolve over time dependant on specific context, convention or simple accidents.[1] It is the attempt at better understanding of just how a building communicates. The general study of signs was known as semiology in Europe and semiotics in the United States, it is these theories that have been applied to graphic and visual communication. Both the theories of semiology and semiotics appeared around the same time in the early 1900s. This new scientific approach to language and signs was proposed in Europe by the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913) and parallel to this in the United States by Charles Sander Peirce (1839-1914). Both were looking at the fundamental building blocks and structure of language, and the necessary conditions for language to exist.[2] Ferdinand de Saussure theorised the synchronic approach, that language should not only be looked at in its historical context but also in how it relates to a specific moment independent of its developmental context.[3] Differentiating between language as a system of enabling communication and the way language is used by individuals through speech. Saussure sought to discover and better understand the underlying principles of language, the structure and signs that all languages share.[4] Both Saussure and Peirce sought to understand the structure of signs, looking at the structure would facilitate a better understanding of how meaning was extracted from a sign. Peirce looked at the relationships of the structures as a way of categorising the signs.[5]The categories that Peirce divided signs into were Icon, Index and Symbol. An Icon bears a physical resemblance to the thing it represents, an Index represents a direct link between sign and object, and a Symbol relies purely upon the reader of the sign having learnt the connection to the meaning. Saussure determined the meaning of a sign by using what he called value. What was important for Saussure was the relationship between signs in the same system. He took a positive versus negative approach judging a sign by not only what it means but what it doesnt mean in relation to something else. For example a book is not a magazine or film.[6] Semiotics looks at the oppositional relationship of things as key to communication and cognition, undestanding something by understanding what it is not.[7]This signification helps to categorise reality so we can understand it. However Saussure was only concerned with language at not the part of the reader of language in the process, which contrasts with Peirce who believed that the sign is affected by the person who is reading the sign. It would be Roland Barthes in the 1960s who would take this theoretical idea forward. Barthes saw the science of signs as encompassing a much broader range of systems than just language. Barthes linked semiotics to any system of signs no matter the content or limits of that system. Semiotic meaning can be derived from images, sounds, gestures and objects. The system of signification could cover many forms of social and ritual convention.[8] The semiotic theories would also start to link with architecture. Architecture being similar to language in that it too is system of signs. A very obvious example of this would be to compare a house to a hospital, both buildings give off different signs as to their function and purpose. Our ability to read this purpose occurs much in the same way as a book is read and understood.[9] To distinguish architecture from building requires an intentional sign which suggests that a wall is doing something more than literally sheltering, supporting, enclosing; it must embody a significance which projects and sustains the idea of wallness beyond mere use, function, or extrinsic allusion. Thus its paradoxical nature: the sign must overcome use and extrinsic significance to be admitted as architecture; but on the other hand, without use, function, and the existence of extrinsic meaning there would be no conditions which would require such an intentional act of overcoming.[10] The crossover of linguistic semiotic theory with architecture would occur more thoroughly around 1966 when Peter Eisenman began looking at the work of Noam Chomsky.[11] Eisenman at the time viewed both language and architecture and being made up of three semiotic categories, these being semantics, pragmatics and syntactics. These three categories contain similarities to Peirce and his division of signs into icon, index and symbol. Semantics refers to the relationship between form and icon, pragmatics form to function and syntactics the relationship of physical form to conceptual space.[12]Eisenman was also interested in another idea closely related to the early theories of semiotics, that of structuralism. Using structuralist principles to go beyond function in architecture to discover the innate order of things, subverting simplistic readings of space by adding complexity through architectural semiotics.[13] It was through the reading of Noam Chomsky that the idea of deep structure became apparent to Eisenman as a useful means of investigating architecture. This syntactical opposition of line, plane and volume generated a physical architecture from a series of abstract rules. The essence of Eisenmans theoretical musings at this time would be distilled into his Houses project. The most thorough exploration of this would occur in House VI. House VI was commissioned by Suzanne and Dick Frank. A small building, it would be one of Peter Eisenmans first built works. Construction would take place between 1972 and 1975.[14] The building acts as a record of the abstract series of rules used in the process of design, with the Chomsky influenced theories of syntax and deep structure crucial to the transformative process. The building would become the manifestation of a system of relationships, with the system acting as generator of both form and meaning. The semantic generator of form is replaced by the syntactic. [15]The axonometric drawings dont just represent the house they become the house. As Eisenman states The diagrams for House VI are symbiotic with its reality; the house is not an object in the traditional sense that is the result of a process-but more accurately a record of a process.[16] The priority of the drawings in considering the house remove the pressure placed upon a finished building to deliver complete meaning. The building forms only a part of the conversation, as technical drawings are used to enhance the experience. Drawings and finished building-the entire process- should be viewed holistically, each providing an important summation of the architectural intent.[17] The axonometric drawings reveal the starting point for the design of House VI and the syntactic structure that these would form. The starting point is a cube divided by a four square and nine square grid. Eisenman then starts a series of simple movements of this grid in the process creating two centres. The hierarchy of these overlayed patterns develops the expressive interrelationship.[18]However rather than a further refining of this relationship, instead Eisenman materialises the expressions of the inherent geometries through axonometric sketches which turn the competing axes of the four and nine square grid into walls or voids cutting through the building.[19] In House VI Eisenman attempts to move away from the idea of function as the driving narrative of design, and along with this the overarching human scale design considerations which restrict architecture. This moves Eisenman towards an autonomous architecture, a conceptual matrix[20] that fragments the relationship between concept and percept. House VI seeks to place the viewer not at the end point of design but instead engaged actively in continual intrepretation and reinterpretation of process. This engagement with the viewer enables a reanimation of the process, a conversation between the viewer and the building that undermines the physicality of House VI as an object instead making it an active part of its surroundings. The concept at odds with the viewers historical perception of a general solidity normally associated with building.[21] Eisenman attempted to introduce an architectural system free of external reference, autonomous, not restricted by function and the classical notion of architecture as referential to the human body. Eisenman saw traditional architectures primary concerns being semantic through the linking of physical indicators to the external meaning, form and function. He viewed the possiblities of a semantic architecture as having been exhausted by both modernist and classical architecture. To unlock new variations in architecture the syntactic dimension needed to played with. Semantic architecture sought solutions to problems and was dependent on preconceived external requirements.[22]Through his exploration of linguistic theory the semantic became absorbed by the syntactic. It was Eisenman interest in Noam Chomsky as mentioned earlier that gave him the knowledge base to theorise a generation of form previously undiscovered by both classicist and modernist architecture. Form in its syntactic nature led to an antifunctionalism that enclosed any meaning generated by the form back within itself, creating an interplay of oppositions and empty positions.[23] House VI can almost be seen as design itself, with the rules the of transformational process inscribed within the final object. What these explorations into syntax sought to achieve was a design not limited by cultural preconceptions of function. These preconceptions Eisenman theorised were limiting the developmental possibilities of architecture. How could a design be achieved without being slave to the aesthetic experiences of the architect? Removing ego would allow for an exploration into multiple manipulations never previously conceived. Eisenmans work is driven by the continual process of thinking and rethinking both philosophy and architecture. It is an attempt to broaden the critical search for inspiration away from the architectural precedent by incorporating other fields of inquiry into the discussion. This reactivation of architectural dislocation moves it away from the complacent relationship of tradition, extending the possible search parameters of occupiable form.[24] The architectural development of Eisenman as an architect can be seen a continued battle against complacency in the profession. Eisenman sees House VI as still having the ability to provide shelter, the main driving function of the house. However this need is not pushed to the point of romanticism and nostalgia. The living room does not require the need to have a beautiful view, columns in the dining area do not hinder any activity in that area nor do they aid functionally or decoratively the area. The design of House VI is not driven by the need to accommodate every whim of its occupants, it is driven by the syntactic rules set out at the project start.[25] Critics of Eisenmans work suggest that his writings describing his theories do not describe his design process in a concise manner, that they deliberately ambiguous in order to allow Eisenman to close a critical examination. It is suggested that Eisenman uses jargon and rhetoric as a way to control the critical debate, to conduct it on his own terms. Eisenman can be seen as distancing himself from his own work, through the claims of an autonomous design process, the object is separated from creator.[26] Mark David Major and Nicholas Sarris criticise Eisenmans theoretical writings and the objects they refer to by suggesting that the theories arent quite of the analytical quality that Eisenman would have us believe, and the objects express more traditional notion than Eisenman would like. This is their cloak and dagger theory of Eisenman and his architecture. They describe Eisenman of using theories that cannot be objectively used to discuss other architecture, perpetuating a myth of Eisenman as architectural genius. Major and Sarris go on to describe Eisenmans writings of House VI as being closer to what is the architectural ideal rather than pursuing an analytical discourse. They suggest that Eisenman is doing both architecture and himself an injustice because rather than seeking to expose the application of the elegant and simple rules of composition used in the design of House VI he instead obscures them with rhetoric. Finally they put forward that the rules that Eisenman has laid out for himself do not strictly limit the architectural possibilities open to him and that aesthetic and tradition considerations could still subconsciously influence the design.[27] House VI acts as a commentary on architectural form, the principles of composition and the processes involved. Eisenman uses House VI to highlight the historical failures of architectural composition by highlighting drawings hold over the profession, but in doing this he limits the scope of his critique to traditional drawing based architecture.[28]The problem with drawing being in its ability to describe or show process. A finished architectural drawing becomes an object rather than an act of design. What Eisenman was attempting to achieve with House VI was the display of the design process, however paradoxically by displaying the process he in turn made it an image. The images can be reanimated through writing but the process itself is doomed to ambiguity. Eisenman used House VI to push at the boundaries between process driven design and drawing, but was ultimately limited at this time due to drawing being his primary medium of communication.[29]Eisenman saw the reliance on drawing as stumbling block in his search to free architecture from its emphasis on form and function. What he achieved with House VI however was for the first time to bring the industries reliance on drawing into question. House VI with its grids used a traditional method of architectural practice common since the Renaissance, but he managed to turn that process in upon itself revealing a infinite possibilities in turn made form utterly meaningless. The shifting priorities of design were brought forward with House VI and in doing so Eisenman shifted the future of architectural practice. Eisenman through his study and introduction of semiotics sought to not only break free from the not only the cultural practices of his profession but also its limiting historical traditions. Drawings role in the design process reached a visibility not seen before in architecture. House VI helped to define the limitations of drawing on the design process, by using an approach such as semiotics and applying it to the design process, drawing was held up in the spotlight. This led to the questioning of the role of drawing and attempts to seek other modes of representation. What Eisenman achieved with House VI was to pave the way for computational design, this was by no means the original intent with the idea of using computers not even thought of at this stage.[30] But in opening the architectural discipline up through the science of semiotics and the syntactic approach of House VI he enabled and eased of that future possibility to take place. Eisenmans buildings encourage exploration in architecture through the non-traditional means not as the only course of action but instead as an important alternative. [1] (Mallgrave and Goodman 2011) [2] (Crow 2010)p7 [3] (Mitrovic 2011)p148 [4] (Crow 2010)p15 [5] (Crow 2010)p30 [6] (Crow 2010)p41 [7] (Hattenhauer 1984)p72 [8] (Crow 2010)p54 [9] (Davies 2011)p24 [10] (Patin 1993)p88 [11] (Patin 1993)p91 [12] (Patin 1993)p88 [13] (Chapman, Ostwald and Tucker 2004)p389 [14] (Luce 2010) [15] (Patin 1993) [16] (Luscombe 2014)p560 [17] (Luscombe 2014) [18] (Luce 2010)p127 [19] (Luce 2010)p129 [20] (Luscombe 2014) [21] (Luce 2010)p132 [22] (Patin 1993)p89 [23] (Patin 1993)p91 [24] (Benjamin 1989)p50 [25] (Benjamin 1989)p51 [26] (Major and Sarris 1999)p20.2 [27] (Major and Sarris 1999)p20.4 [28] (Luce 2010)p132 [29] (Luce 2010)p132 [30] (Luce 2010)p134 Bibliography Benjamin, Andrew. â€Å"Eisenman and the Housing Tradition.† Oxford Art Journal Vol.12, 1989: 47-54. Chapman, Michael, Michael J Ostwald, and Chris Tucker. â€Å"Semiotics, interpretation and political resistance.† Contexts of Architecture. Launceston: ANZAScA, 2004. 384-390. Crow, David. Visible Signs: An Introduction to Semiotics in the Visual Arts. Lausanne: AVA Publishing, 2010. Davies, Colin. Thinking About Architecture. London: Laurence King Publishing, 2011. Hattenhauer, Darryl. â€Å"The Rhetoric of Architecture: A Semiotic Approach.† Communication Quarterly, 1984: 71-77. Luce, Kristina. â€Å"The Collision of Process and Form.† Getty Research Journal No.2, 2010: 125-137. Luscombe, Desley. â€Å"Architectural Concepts in Peter Eisenmans Axonometric Drawings of House VI.† The Journal Of Architecture, 2014: 560-611. Major, Mark D, and Nicholas Sarris. â€Å"Cloak and Dagger Theory.† Space Syntax Second International Symposium. Brasilia: Bartlett School of Graduate Studies, 1999. 20.1-20.14. Mallgrave, Harry F, and David Goodman. An Introduction to Architectural Theory 1968 to the Present. Chicester: John Wiley and Sons, 2011. Mitrovic, Branko. Philosophy for Architects. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2011. Patin, Thomas. â€Å"From Deep Structure to an Architecture in Suspense: Peter Eisenman, Structuralism, and Deconstruction.† Journal of Architectural Education (Taylor Francis, Ltd) 47, no. 2 (November 1993): 88. Sargazi, Mohammad Ali. â€Å"Explaining the Meaning of the Symbols in Architectural Semiotics and Discovery.† Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Vol 1, 2013: 129-134.

The Dangers of Fossil Fuel Use :: Fossil Fuels Essays

The Dangers of Fossil Fuel Use Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary defines the term fossil fuel as â€Å"a fuel, as coal, oil, or natural gas, that is formed in the earth from plant or animal remains.† The major fossil fuels include coal, petroleum, and natural gases. Here in the United States, and all over the world, fossil fuel functions as an extremely beneficial resource. We use gas to fuel our cars and depend on electricity produced from coal and oil to heat and cool our homes. But, these positive aspects do not come without drawbacks. Environmental health, climate change, acid rain, and air pollution are among the top problems with fossil fuel production and consumption. (http://environment.about.com/library/weekly/aa050700.htm) Fossil fuel use creates severe impact on the environment in all stages of use: recovery, transportation, preparation/refining, storage, and end use. Recovery, the first stage is basically the process of coal mining. This includes the destruction of topsoil, and the risk of gushers or accidents. Also, recovery leads to discolored local creeks and rivers because of the acidic run-off of these waters (Lecture 3/11/02). Next, these resources must be transported all over the world, where they will go into the preparation and refining stage. During this stage, there is a risk that refuse or sludge will result from coal cleaning parts (Lecture 3/11/02). Also, air and water pollution may result from the process of petroleum refining, which involves the change of the chemical composition of petroleum to produce desirable chemicals and fuels. However, that means that the undesirable results are released to pollute the atmosphere. (Lecture 2/22/02) After being properly refined, the resources are stored. This stage may cause environmental problems such as gasoline leaks in underground tanks at gas stations. Finally, end use results in the release of pollutants from combustion. These pollutants include unburnt hydrocarbons, particulate matter, such as ash or soot, and sulfur and nitrogen oxides (Lecture 3/11/02). The combination of these pollutants often results in smog, a problem most pressing in California (http://www.sparetheair.org/). Major challenges exist concerning environmental problems with fossil fuel use. One challenge is to reduce fossil fuel use, in general, while also accommodating the increasing population and industrialization (Lecture 3/18/02). A second challenge is to remember to put human life before the need for industrialization. The National Resource Defense Council states that every year, some â€Å"64,000 people may die prematurely from cardiopulmonary causes linked to particulate air pollution".

Analysis of Macbeth :: Macbeth William Shakespeare Plays Essays

Analysis of Macbeth Macbeth is a character of powerful contradictions. He is a man who, for the sake of his ambition, is willing to murder his king and his best friend. At the same time, he has a conscience that is so strong that just the thought of his crimes torments him. In fact, even before he commits his crimes the thought of them makes him miserable. Is Macbeth a horrible monster or is he a sensitive man- a victim of witches and his own ambitions? Or is he both? If he is both, how can the two sides of his nature exist side by side? To answer those questions, let's first look at what he does. Then we will look at how he feels about what he does. In the play, of course, the two go together. His actions are monstrous. If Macbeth were a criminal brought to trial, the list of the charges against him would be long: 1. He murders his king, who is also a relative. The crime is treasonous and sacrilegious, since every king is set on his throne by God. Macbeth's guilt is even blacker because the King was his guest at the time of the murder. A host has responsibility to protect his guest. 2. He hires men to kill his best friend, Banquo. He wants the men to kill Banquo's young son, Fleance, too, but Fleance escapes. 3. He sends men to kill Macduff's wife and children. 4. Having taken the crown by murder, he keeps it by deception. He plants spies in all the nobles' homes and spreads lies about Malcolm, who should rightfully inherit the throne. 5. More crimes are referred to but not specified. Macbeth rules by terror, since he does not deserve- or have- anybody's loyalty. Describing Scotland under Macbeth's rule, Macduff says, "Each new morn / New widows howl, new orphans cry, new sorrows / Strike heaven on the face..." (Act IV, Scene iii, lines 4-6). So Macbeth does horrible things, but that is not the whole story. Macbeth is different from some of Shakespeare's other villains like Iago (in Othello) and Richard III. The latter enjoy doing evil; they have renounced what we think of as normal ethics and morality. Macbeth's feelings are more complicated. In the beginning of the play, at least, he appears to have a conscience that tells him what he's doing is wrong.

Essay --

On BBC documentary called Seven Ages of Britain, which was hosted by David Dimbleby, one of the most famous contemporary artists, Damien Hirst, was once asked that did he pay for all the diamonds to make For the Love of God (2007, figure 1), which is so called as the diamond skull because it is made of a plenty of diamonds. Hirst answered that artists used what around him or her, and money was around him. Therefore, he thought that what he could do with money, and he could do something amazing with them. Consequently, he created For the Love God. What should be spotlighted is the point that an artist creates his or her works with materials, which are around them. As Damien Hirst said that money was around him, money was around people in the world whether the amount of money is great or humble. In short, money is one thing that people, including artists, could easily find in their routine life. Therefore, there has been a possibility that artists could try to create his or her works with money. Or at least, some artists see money as their potential art medium. There are several artists who actually tried to make his or her works with money. It is not saying that artists make money by their works, or artists make their works with supporting of their rich patrons. Also, it is not saying that artists design the currency. However, artists who create his or her works with money are artists who are using actual money as their medium in this paper. Furthermore, those art works, which are using money as their important medium, would be called as ‘money art’ in this paper. In short, there are some artists internationally who create money art; for example, Andrà © Levy, Justin Smith, Hasegawa Yosuke, and so on. Among money art artists, I wo... ...ously representing the real world. He uses various banknotes form other counties. For example, he uses U.S. dollars ($), British pounds ( £), Japanese yens ( ¥), Korean wons (â‚ ©), European euros (â‚ ¬), and so on. These currencies are representing their countries. He does not cover their nationalities, so it is possible to say his works are representing their nationalities. Also, the currency represents economy and politic. Even though he tried to cover money’s economical value, it is impossible to remove its value as economical index because it is money. Also, most of figures portrayed on money are political figures of their country. Therefore, money is a metaphor of one nation’s political and economic status. Hasegawa Yosuke illustrates Globalization of today’s world by putting his moneygami together. Shortly, his money origami works are representing the real world.