Coleridge And The Explosion Of Voice Essays - Literature

Coleridge And The Explosion Of Voice Coleridge and the Explosion of Voice Coleridge is so often described in terms which are akin to the word, "explosive," and by all accounts he was at times an unusually dynamic,charismatic and unpredictable person. His writings themselves could also betermed "explosive" merely from their physical form; a fragmented mass, some pieces finished but most not, much of his writing subject to procrastination or eventual change of mind. Today I want to address a moment in his life which produced, as Richard Holmes has characterized it, an explosion of his poetic talent[1]--Autumn 1799, when he first met Sara Hutchinson, and wrote, amongst other poems, the ballad, "Love." In addressing this moment, I want to suggest that the voice of Coleridge at this time was explosive, vital and new, but only when set against the "ancient" balladic tradition with which he engaged. Whilst accepting the dynamism and the unpredictability of Coleridge, I want to show that his acceptance of a formal mode allowed him to find his own particular, romantic voice; for, as Stephen Parrish has pointed out, "for Coleridge, the passion was obscured unless the poet spoke in his own voice."[2] The ballad revival of the eighteenth century supplied Romantic writers with an archive of voices from the past, a past which many seemed to idealize as a time of true feeling, when Nature not only had its place but was also imbued with a raw power. Particularly in the late 1790s, Coleridge worked within such a tradition, and in so doing, found his own voice from the minstrelsy of the past. I want to begin by illustrating the literary environment in which Coleridge found himself at the end of the eighteenth century. Ancient ballad and song culture was being revived throughout Europe from the early eighteenth century onwards, possibly beginning with the "Ossian" fragments in Scotland. Although most British commentators were skeptical of the authenticity of Ossian, as Hugh Trevor-Roper reports, they were feted in other parts of Europe; and Germany in particular.[3] The title of this conference is "The National Graduate Romanticism Conference"; the proximity of "Romantic" and "National" in this tag is fortuitous, since it is important to realize the close relationship between the ballad revival and a sense of nationhood. In Johann Herder's famous essay on Ossian, the place of the song or ballad as a kind of national cultural archive is made plain.[4] He refers to the ballads as "the gnomic song of the nation," and continues, in letter form, to his "friend": What I wanted to do was remind you that Ossian's poems are songs, songs of the people, folk-songs, the songs of an unsophisticated people living close to the senses, songs which have been long handed down by oral tradition. Herder locks into the fashionable Rousseauian notion of the "Noble Savage." He goes on: Know then, that the more barbarous a people is - that is, the more alive, the more freely acting (for that is what the word means) - the more barbarous, that is, the more alive, the more free, the closer to the senses, the more lyrically dynamic its songs will be, if songs it has. The more remote a people is from an artificial, scientific manner of thinking, speaking and writing, the less its verses are written for the dead letter. The attraction of this national voice is its proximity to nature; and thus, proximity to a kind of raw reality. Herder makes clear that this "ancient" verse is a superior form for it is from "Nature" and not from "Art." The present age, he observes, has made the mistake of foregrounding Art over Nature: And if that is the way our time thinks, then of course we will admire Art rather than Nature in these ancients' poems; we will find too much or too little Art in them, according to our predisposition, and we will rarely have ears to hear the voice that sings in them: the voice of Nature. Indeed the general thrust of this essay is to cry out for a natural poetic voice, the kind of voice that he found so evident in the Ossian fragments. He complains at the recent German translation of Ossian, by Michael Denis, because he used the polished hexameters of the German neo-classical idiom; a hated, artful masking of the Natural Voice. At the end of the essay, Herder calls to his countrymen for a collection of German folk-songs. They are badly needed, he feels, to remind the nation of their own collective voice, a voice

The Future of Human Space Exploration

The Future of Human Space Exploration From Here to There: Human Space Flight People have a solid future in space, with regular flights to the International Space Station continuing to bring astronauts to low-Earth orbit for science experiments. But, the ISS isnt the only extent of our push to the new frontier. The next generation of explorers is already alive and preparing for journeys to the Moon and Mars. They could be our children and grandchildren, or even some of us reading stories online right now. Astronauts aboard the International Space Station in blue jumpsuits. NASA Companies and space agencies are testing new rockets, improved crew capsules, inflatable stations, and futuristic concepts for lunar bases, Mars habitats, and orbiting lunar stations. There are even plans for asteroid mining. It wont be long before the first super-heavy-lift rockets such as the next-generation Ariane (from ESA), SpaceXs Starship (Big Falcon Rocket), the Blue Origin rocket, and others will be blasting off to space. And, in the very near future, humans will be aboard, too.   Space Flight is in Our History Flights to low-Earth orbit and out to the Moon have been a reality since the early 1960s.  Human exploration of space actually began in 1961. Thats when Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first man  in  space. He was followed by other Soviet and U.S. space explorers who landed on the  Moon circled Earth in space stations and  labs and blasted off aboard shuttles and space capsules. Yuri Gagarin, the first human to fly to space. alldayru.com Planetary exploration with robotic probes is ongoing. There are plans for an asteroid exploration, Moon colonization, and eventual Mars missions in the relatively near future. Yet, some people still ask, why explore space? What have we done so far? These are important questions and have very serious and practical answers. Explorers have been answering them throughout their careers as astronauts. Living and Working in Space The work of the men and women who have already been in space have helped establish the process of learning  how to live and there.  Humans have established a long-term presence in low-Earth orbit with the International Space Station, and U.S. astronauts spent time on the Moon in the late 1960s and early1970s. Plans for human habitation of Mars or the Moon are in the works, and some missions- such as the long-term assignments in space of such astronauts as Scott Kellys year in space- test astronauts to see how the human body reacts on long missions to other planets (such as Mars, where we already have robotic explorers) or spend lifetimes on the Moon.  In addition, with long-term explorations, its inevitable that people will start families in space or on another world. Very little is known about how successful that will be or what we may call new generations of space humans. Astronaut Sunita Williams exercising aboard the International Space Station. NASA Many mission scenarios for the future follow a familiar line:  establish a space station (or two), create science stations and colonies, and then after testing ourselves in near-Earth space, take the leap to Mars. Or an asteroid or two. Those plans are in the long-term; at best, the first Mars explorers most likely wont set foot there until the 2020s or 2030s. The Near-term Goals of Space Exploration   A number of countries around the world have plans for space exploration, among them China, India, the United States, Russia, Japan, New Zealand, and the European Space Agency. More than 75 countries have agencies, but only a few have launch capability. NASA and the Russian Space Agency are partnering to bring astronauts to the International Space Station. Since the space shuttle fleet retired in 2011, Russian rockets have been blasting off with Americans (and astronauts of other nationalities) to the ISS. NASAs Commercial Crew and Cargo program are working with companies such as Boeing, SpaceX, and United Launch Associates to come up with safe and cost-effective ways to deliver humans to space.  In addition, Sierra Nevada Corporation is proposing an advanced space plane called the Dream Chaser, and already has contracts for European use.   The current plan (in the second decade of the 21st century) is to use the Orion crew vehicle, which is very similar in design to the Apollo capsules (but with more-advanced systems), stacked atop a rocket, to bring astronauts to a number of different locations, including the ISS. The hope is to use this same design to take crews to near-Earth asteroids, the Moon, and Mars. The system is still being built and tested, as are space launch systems (SLS) tests for the necessary booster rockets. Water recovery of the Orion crew capsule in testing. NASA   The design of the Orion capsule was widely criticized by some as a giant step backward, particularly by people who felt that the nations space agency should try for an updated shuttle design (one that would be safer than its predecessors  and with more range). Due to technical limitations of the shuttle designs, plus the need for reliable technology (plus political considerations that are both complex and ongoing), NASA chose the Orion concept (after the cancellation of a program called Constellation).   Beyond NASA and Roscosmos The United States is not alone in sending people to space. Russia intends to continue operations on the ISS, while China has sent astronauts to space, and the Japanese and Indian space agencies are moving ahead with plans to send their own citizens as well. The Chinese have plans for a permanent space station, set for construction in the next decade. The China National Space Administration has also set its sights on the exploration of Mars, with possible crews setting foot on the Red Planet beginning perhaps in 2040. India has more modest initial plans. The Indian Space Research Organization (which has a mission at Mars) is working to develop a launch-worthy vehicle and carry a two-member crew to low-Earth orbit perhaps in the next decade. The Japanese Space Agency JAXA has announced its plans for a space capsule to deliver astronauts to space by 2022 and has also tested a space plane. The far distant future may well hold new ways of getting around space. Here, two spaceships enter a wormhole in outer space to get to another part of the galaxy. Such travel isnt possible yet, so humans are still constrained to exploring near-Earth space. Corey Ford/Stocktrek Images The interest in space exploration continues. Whether or not it manifests itself as a full-blown race to Mars or rush to the Moon or trip to mine an asteroid remains to be seen. There are many difficult tasks to accomplish before humans are routinely jetting off to the Moon or Mars. Nations and governments need to evaluate their long-term commitment to space exploration. The technological advancements to deliver humans to these places are taking place, as are the tests on humans to see if they really CAN withstand the rigors of long space flights to alien environments  and safely live in a more dangerous environment than Earth. It now remains for the social and political spheres to come to terms with humans as a space-faring species.

Discussion Topics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 9

Discussion Topics - Essay Example If not, there will be a total disaster. For instance, last summer, I volunteered in a health organization. Things there were not smooth because of the lack of communication between the manager and supervisor. The power games in the sector, according to Metoyer (2009), are based on resource and technical skill. The political roles displayed by Metoyer (2009) are sub-divided into three parts; firstly, decisional, which relies heavily on information; secondly, interpersonal, which ensures that information is well conveyed and; lastly, informational, which is the back-bone of all these roles and managerial tasks. All these need to be harmonized in the best way possible to have an effective team and ensure no conflicts occur (Johnson, 2008). In case of a conflict, it needs to be effectively resolved to avoid future reoccurrences. Conflicts are solved depending on the nature of the problem (Metoyer, 2009). The manager plays an important role to harmonize the two parties in conflict. A good manager resolves conflicts when perceived in the early stages to avoid the situation to escalate further (Johnson, 2008). The manager should resolve the conflict, appoint a unit to address employee issues and develop a system of encouragement by offering rewards to individuals who do an outstanding job. This, in turn, will initiate team building, as well as create healthy competition among the

History see below Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

History see below - Essay Example In 1720 Charles issues a Pragmatic Sanction to establish the legal basis for transmission of the Habsburg lands to Maria Theresa; the sanction also declared that the Habsburg inheritance was indivisible. The following years the Austrian diplomacy concentrated on persuading the European countries to accept the Pragmatic Sanction. Nevertheless Charles's concessions did not prevent the outbreak of the Austrian Succession War (1740-48) right after his death in 1740. Beside this Frederick William I, the "sergeant major" King of Prussia, died on 31st May 1740 and Prussian throne passed to his ruthlessly ambitious son, Frederick.1 On December 16, 1740 Frederick II having not agreed to the Pragmatic Sanction invaded the rich Habsburg province of Silesia, meanwhile the while French military forces invaded Bavaria. The next year nearly all the powerful countries of Europe were involved in the war, but still the long-suffering military struggle was for Silesia between Prussia and Austria followed by the Convention of Klein-Schnellendorf in October 1741 and finally the Maria Theresa's truce with Frederick II; still it came too late to prevent a Franco-Bavarian occupation of Bohemia the following month; and this ended up with in January 1742 by the election of Karl Albert (elector of Bavaria since 1726) as the new Holy Roman emperor.2 From the beginning of 1742 year the French troops threatened Flanders, a land dominated by Austria and the Dutch Republic. A Pragmatic Army named from Charles VI's Sanctions assembled to counter the French invasion, with troops from Austria and various German states including Hanover. George II, King of England and Elector of Hanover, resolved to send English troops to join the Pragmatic Allies. Ostensibly the army was to fight for Maria Theresa, but George's concern was that the French intended to pass through the Low Countries and invade his beloved Hanover.3 The English forces were sent to Flanders in mid-1742. The first Silesian War was over on the 11th of June 1742 with the signing the separate peace between Prussia and Austria at Breslau. In 1743 the French were almost completely forced out of the empire, and in March and April 1744 Louis XV (ruled 1715-1774) formalized hostilities by declaring war first on Great Britain and then on Austria.1 The death of Charles VII in January 1745 drastically changed the political situation. Max Joseph, his successor as elector of Bavaria, was aware of the impossibility of the Bavarian position, promised to vote for Maria Theresa's husband, Francis Stephen of Lorraine, grand duke of Tuscany, to be the next emperor, which he accordingly became in October.2 On 11 May 1745 Maurice de Saxe, marshal of France, defeated the combined Anglo-Austrian-Dutch army at Fontenoy, and went on to capture a string of fortresses in

Essay question Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 6

Question - Essay Example Or symbolically, that we may be consumed by our problems and challenges because it is too much for us to handle. The words of Christ here may be stern and rebuking but this gave assurance to the faithful that nothing will happen to them even in the midst of the strongest storm if He is with them. The message of the story is that if we have enough unwavering faith in Jesus Christ, our personal storms or problems will take care of its own. And that we should not worry of drowning just like the disciples did because if we have faith in Jesus, no harm would come to us even if the strongest storm will come upon us. Or in short, we should not be afraid of any challenges that life may confront us if we have in Jesus. 3. In Matthew 8:18-22, Jesus revealed the cost of discipleship when the crowd gathered around him and a teacher of the law manifested his willingness to become His disciple and follow wherever he may go. And Jesus told,   Jesus replied,  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Manhas no place to lay his head† (Matthews 8:18-20). Jesus answer was allegory of how demanding the work of a disciple is. It means that they will not have rest for they will live the life of the disciple. Then another disciple ask Jesus to first let him go to bury his father before following him as disciple. Jesus reply here is stern statement and to the modern day reader, this may sound insensitive for Jesus Christ because he will not entertain any sentimentalities from his disciples saying â€Å"Follow me,  and let the dead bury their own dead.† This only manifests the demands to become a disciple of Jesus Christ that one must have an unwavering faith and dedication that things will take care of their own when they follow Jesus. This is supported by the following verses in Matthews when a storm was upon them and the disciples panicked and woke up the sleeping Jesus to save them from

An Analysis Of Shaffers Equus

An Analysis Of Shaffers Equus The play is in two acts, the first consisting of twenty-one; the second of thirty-five scenes. It is not realistic in that it includes flashbacks performed onstage (like a movie). However, it is an explanatory one with Shaffers notes while read. It is a play consisting of individuals rather than types. Each character has his/her individuality along with his/her own perspective of life. We learn about the characters from what other characters tell about them; from what they tell about themselves; as well as from Shaffers explanation about them within parentheses. Although it is an open ended play it goes far from the lineer plot structure with its amazing climax. The forward and backward action of the play makes it a different one. Moreover while the play has speech when the time is present, it contains action when it is backward. It is a symbolic play and can be called a journey into the mind of Alan Strang, a seventeen year old boy. It analyzes Alans religious obsession with horses which is based on his complicated feelings due to his religious background and his increasing sexual side as a teenager. This confusion of religion, in fact, is a consequence of some signals from his religious, middle-class mother and his atheist, working-class father. Alans perception of religion and sexuality is conflicted and his way of praying becomes a fear of a horse spirit named Equus. He ends up with blinding six horses in the stable because of the fact that they have watched him with a girl. Rosefeldt states that Equus is inspired by a real-life event of which the author had very little details. Someone told Shaffer about a boy who blinded horses (Rosefeldt 89). Equus, the horse gradually becomes a source of freedom and worship for Alan. As he worships Equus passionately, Alan goes away from being normal. There are two main characters in the play, Martin Dysart and Alan Strang, the protagonist. While the play is Alans story, it soon becomes Dysarts story, too. Dysart is a psychiatrist and is asked to treat Alan Strang. Dysart admits to treat Alan as a patient, believing his lawyer friend Hesther Salomon that the boy has something special. In Act I, the audiences learn that Alan comes from a Christian mother Dora Strang and an atheist father Frank Strang who have argument in agreeing how to raise Alan. Alans mother tries to impose religion on Alan and does not avoid talking about sex as well. As he grows up and becomes a teenager, his mothers words become confusing for him. Alans obssesion with the horses is actually a typical result of his mothers words: Dora. I used to tell him a funny thing about falling off horses. Did you know that when Christian cavalry first appeared in the New World, the pagans thought horse and rider was one person? Dysart. Really? Alan. (sitting up, amazed) One person? Dora. Actually, they thought it must be a god. Alan. A god! Dora. It was only when one rider fell off, they realized the truth. Dysart. Thats fascinating. I never heard that before . . . Can you remember anything else like that you may have told him about horses. Dora. Well, not really. They are in the Bible of course. He saith among the trumpets, Ha, ha. Dysart. Ha, ha? (Equus 11) Dora has also let Alan watch some Western films without his fathers knowledge (Equus 12). She is the one in the play introducing the word equus stating that it is a Latin word for horse by which Alan is fascinated since he has not heard a word with two Us (Equus 12). As for Frank, he has never approved of his wife teaching Alan Bible since he is an atheist. For Frank, Alans psychology has been corrupted because of Doras teachings of Bible. Alan has been having nightmares in which he keeps saying Ek! . . . Ek! . . .Ek! (Equus 14). Dysart first tries psychotherapy to learn the reasons for Alans problems. However, those therapies consequently reveal some interesting clues about Dysarts own problems. Alan is a clever boy and he tries to work on Dysarts psychology in the way Dysart does: Dysart. Do you dream often? Alan. Yes, do you? Dysart. Yes. Do you have a special dream? Alan. No. Do you? Dysart. Yes. What was your dream about last night? Alan. Cant remember. Whats yours about? Dysart. I said the truth. Alan. Thats the truth. Whats yours about? The special one. Dysart. Carving up children. (Equus 14) Shapiro who analyzes the play technically, suggests for the relationship between Dysart and Alan: [T]he symbolic aspect is in the phrases Dysart uses to set the scene in motion. What they symbolize is Dysarts dishonesty, as Alans symbolic event also revealsAlan is playing a symbolic event with an iconic, truculent aspect, the object of which is the audiences recognition of Dysarts dishonesty In this case the audience knows from the Nurses previous indexical event that Dysart knew about Alans nightmares. Thus, they should recognize that Dysart began the interview with a lie. Consequently, the interview cannot proceed until Alan turns indexical. He will do this once Dysart becomes truthful. Hence, Alan suggests that they interview each other. (Shapiro 111) In the tenth scene of the first act, the audience is again introduced to a flashback. During this second therapy, Alan goes back to the time when he was six years old: Horseman. Whoa! . . . Whoa there! Whoa! . . Sorry! I didnt see you! . . . Did I scare you? Alan. No! Horseman. (looking down at him) Thats a terrific castle! Alan. Whats his name? Horseman. Trojan. You can stroke him, if you like. He wont mind. (Equus 19) In this scene Alans parents arrive and warn the horseman. His father takes him from the horsemans shoulders and they get angry with the horseman. Frank who is strictly against riding horses is sad to see Alan hurt, however Alan is glad to have ridden a horse. He explains his act saying I wanted to laugh! (Equus 20). It is here clear that Alan as a boy, demands to have joy; no matter how his parents think. It is the passion destroyed by his parents. What Dysart really wants to learn is the reason why Alan blinded the six horses in the stable. As a psychiatrist, Dysart wants to go into the deepest places of Alans psychology in order to give some meaning to this act of Alan. However, Alan neither explains why he blinded the horses nor tells something that can help Dysart find some reason behind it. He continues playing with the psychiatrist. In the eleventh scene we are told that Alan, when he was twelve, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ insisted on buying à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ {the picture of Christ loaded down with chains} with his pocket money, and hanging it at the foot of his bed where he could see it last thing at night (Equus 21). However, Frank, the atheist father tore and threw it away. Instead of the picture, he put a photograph of a horse which made Alan happy. In the fifteenth scene, Dysart has finally managed to have more clues about Alans situation. He has learnt from Frank about a girl in Alans life and decided to ask some questions about the stable. Alan takes the audience to the previous year when he first talked to Jill a middle-class girl in her early twenties. At this time, Alan is working in a shop and Jill has come to the shop in order to buy some blades for a clipping machine to clip horses (Equus 29). Jill is working in a stable owned by Harry Dalton. She suggests Alan ride horses however Alan is here hesitant since he knows his parents would be against it. He finally agrees to go to the stable and meet Dalton. As soon as he arrives the stable, Dalton tells him about the horses and teaches him how to ride a horse. Here we are introduced to Nugget, a horse which will soon have an important part in the play. When Alan is left alone with the horses in the stable, his passion returns. What Dysart wants to learn is whether Alan ha d a date with Jill; however Alan is again escapist in his answers and he instead tries to question Dysart about his own dates. It is in scene seventeen where the audiences come to realize the inner conflict of Dysart. Alan tries to catch Dysart from his weakest point. Dysart has never had any sexual relationship with any women in his life, including his wife. He is nervous when he is asked why he does not have any children and suddenly needs cigarettes. His soliloquy in this scene is a clear evidence about this psychiatrists psychology: What am I, then? . . . Wicked little bastard [Alan] knew exactly what questions to try. Hed actually marched himself round the hospital, making enquiries about my wife. Wicked and of course, perceptive. Ever since I made that crack about carving up children, hes been aware of me in an absolutely specific way. Of course, there is nothing novel in that. Advanced neurotics can be dazzling at that game. They aim unswervingly at your area of maximum vulnerability. . . Which I suppose is as good a way as any of describing Margaret. (Equus 32) The next scene reveals Dysarts problems with his wife Margaret. Dysart explains Hesther why they did not have any children. He blames Margaret for this. He states that Margaret sits beside [their] salmonpink, glazed brick fireplace, and knits things for orphans; for him, his wife is a domestic monster who is the Shrinks Shrink (Equus 34). While Dysart likes to read about Ancient Greece, Margaret hates such things. Their marriage is including two different persons, being very similar to Alans parents marriage. Shaffer prefers to give this marriage from one point of view that of the husband. We never meet the wife. Dysart is unhappy and uncomfortable in his marriage. He tells his friend, Hesther: Do you know what its like for two people to live in the same house as if they were in different parts of the world? Mentally, shes always in some drizzly kirk of her own inheriting: and Im in some Doric temple clouds tearing throuh pillars eagles bearing prophecies out of the sky. (Equus 34) In this scene Dysart seems to cure himself; it is his confrontation with his own confused psychology. He is obsessed with the concept of normal. According to Hesther, Dysart is trying to restore Alan to a normal life and Dysart is confused when he thinks about the meaning of normal and being a normal person. For Hesther, it is the smile in a childs eyes (Equus 35), and for Dysart, [i]t is also the dead stare in a million adults (Equus 36). Rosefeldt explains Dysarts psychology as follows: More than any other character, Dysart is aware that he is trapped in a chain of substitutions. Dysart longs to reach the passion of pagan worship. His wife reduces the sacred acrobats to absurred [50] freaks and equates the heroes of the Iliad with ruffians [50]. He cries out, Oh the primitive world. . . what instinctual truths were lost with it [50]. Alienated and alone, Dysart knows he has lost contact with these primitive truths and is hopelessly trying to regain them. For communicating with the gods, Dysart substitutes the vicarious experience of reading books on the cultural shelf [50]. Instead of reaching up to the gods, he brings home Kodachrome snaps of Mount Olympus [50]. The power of the gods rests in the Hellenic pantheonAlso, Dysart touches a reproduction statue of Dionysus [50}. The power and essence of the god is replaced by the physical presence of the god, which is replaced by the statue of the god, which is replaced by a reproduction of the statue. (Rosefeldt 92) Dysart, in order to learn more about Alan, now chooses hypnosis technique and Alans problems are revealed as follows: Dysart. Now, Alan, youre going to answer questions Im going to ask you. Do you understand? Alan. Yes. Dysart. Good. Now I want you to think back in time. You are on that beach you told me about. The tide has gone out, and youre making sandcastles. Above you, staring down at you, is that great horses head, and the cream dropping from it. Can you see that? Alan.Yes. Dysart.You ask him a question. Does the chain hurt? Alan.Yes. Dysart. Do you ask him aloud? Alan. No. Dysart. And what does the horse say back? Alan.Yes. Dysart.Then what do you say? Alan.Ill take it for you. Dysart. And he says? Alan.It never comes out. They have me in chains. Dysart.Like Jesus? Alan.Yes! Dysart.Only his name isnt Jesus, is it? Alan.No. Dysart.What is it? Alan.No one knows but him and me. Dysart.You can tell me, Alan. Name him. Alan. Equus. (Equus 37) Alan is now unconscious with the effect of hypnosis. In his imagination, the horse is chained like Jesus. Now it is clear that Alans imagination has been influenced by his mothers teachings of Bible as stated before by Frank. For Alan, Equus lives in all horses and is chained because of the sins of the world (Equus 38). When Alan goes back to the time he was twelve, looking at the picture of Equus, Dysart asks him questions about the stable. The stable is the temple of Equus where Alan washes and brushes him. Equus wants to be ridden by Alan but he does not show Alan how to ride him: He showed me nothing! Hes a mean bugger! Ride or fall! Thats Straw Law (Equus 39). Equus is no pagan idol; he is unmistakably the Judeo-Christian God, born in the straw [39] (stable of Bethlehem) and wearing the sandals [40] of Christ. As Christ suffered for mankind, Equus takes the punishment for Alans sake. The Ark of the Covenant symbolizing the contract between God and man becomes the Ark of the Manbit [41], which Alan holds in his mouth. The lump of sugar becomes Equus Last Supper [42]. Alan beckons Equus, Take my sins. Eat them for my sake [43]. Equus is Jesus, the Son of God, the Redeemer who takes away the sins of the world. Just as Christ launched his attack against the House of Mammon, Alan launches Equus against their mutual foes: The Hosts of Philco and The Hosts of Remington, the rulers of the shallow and materialistic world of substitutions. Equus is Alans redeemer, the Godslave [43]. (Rosefeldt 92) Alan rode Equus every three weeks in Daltons stable. He stole the stables keys and went there secretly to ride Equus. Dysart wants Alan to remember a scene in the stable: He throws out his arms and shows himself fully to his God, bowing himself before Nugget (Equus 41). Alan is pleased to touch Nugget but he is distressed when he remembers his eyes. He gives Nuggets sugar, the last supper before Ha ha. Here [Alan] whispers his Gods name ceremonially: Alan. Equus! . . . Equus! . . .Equus! (Equus 42), and he says: Stay, Equus. No-one said Go! . . . Thats it. Hes good. Equus the Godslave. Faithful and true(42). The Equus voice increases in volume Alan. (Shouting) WEE! . . . WAA! . . . WONDERFUL! . . . Im stiff! Stiff in the wind! My mane, stiff in the wind! My flanks! My hooves! Mane on my legs, on my flanks, like whips! Raw! Raw! Im raw! Raw! Feel me on you! On you! On you! I want to be in you! I want to BE you forever and ever! Equus, I love you! Now! Bear me away! Make us One person! He rides Equus frantically (Equus 44) The end of Act I is the climax, a strange combination of religion and sexuality. Equus is now the god that rules Alan. The word AMEN! ends Act I (Equus 44). In Act II, Frank is interestingly absent in the play. (That may be symbolic but we do not know why). Dora seems to realize her faults in rising Alan. She comes to see that it is not the child but the parent who is faulty. She sees Alan as a little victim who has done nothing at all (Equus 47). However in her speech to Dysart, she strangely puts the blame on Alan and blames Dysart for questioning her family as if they are guilty: Dora. (ignoring him; more and more urgently) Look, Doctor: you dont have to live with this. Alan is one patient to you: one out of many. Hes my son. I lie awake every night thinking about it. Neither of us sleeps all night. You come to us and say Who forbids television? Who does what behind whose back? as if we are criminals. Let me tell you something. Were not criminals. Weve done nothing wrong. We loved Alan. We gave him the best love we could. All right, we quarrel sometimes all pparents quarrel we always make it up. My husband is a good man. Hes an upright man, religion or no religion. He cares for his home, for the world, and for his boy. Alan had love and care and treats, and as much fun as any boy in the world. I know about loveless homes: I was a teacher. Our home wasnt loveless. I know about privacy, too not invading a childs privacy. All right, Frank may be at fault there he digs into him too much but nothing in excess. Hes not a bully . . . (Equus 47) This speech of Dora reveals both her and Franks faults although she typically insists that they have been good parents to Alan. Shaffer uses this technique for many characters in this play in order to be effective: The character is here revealing herself through her own words; that is to say Shaffer lets the character talk about herself in order to achieve objectivity. Dora, the religious mother lastly puts the blame on the Devil thinking that Devil came to Alan. She is portrayed as a typical irresponsible mother who is unaware of the process her son grows up: I only knew he was my little Alan, and then the Devil came (47). Both of the parents fail in dealing with their teenager son. It is a step of Alan for adolescence in which Alan is learning about life. Parents quarrelling is not something as trivial as Dora thinks. It really affects the child since he stays between two different versions of beliefs, two different truths those of the mother and of the father. Alans crisis has in fact begun when Jill Mason attempted to seduce him one night when Alans horse god, Equus was there in the stable. Alan blinds six horses with a metal spike (Equus 3) in the second act of the play and it is seen as a consequence of his guilt and shame. Although he does not want to remember anything about Jill, Dysart makes him tell about all at last. It is the most important flashback after the one about Equus. Dysart encourages Alan to remember it in order to get over it. Everything begins with Jills inviting Alan out. Although he has to go home, he accepts her offer and they go to the cinema. At the cinema, Alan tells Jill, there was no girl except for her. Soon, it is understood that the film is a pornographic one. Dysart asks him: Was that the first time youd seen a girl naked? and Alan says Yes! (Equus 58). Then suddenly, Alan realizes that his father is at the cinema, too. With the fear of being caught at such a film, he tries to hide himself. When he is caught, Frank shouts at Alan and the three leave the cinema. Outside, Alan tries to speak to his father: Alan. I I Ive never been there before. Honest . . . Never . . .(to Dysart) He didnt seem to hear. Jill tried. Jill. Its true, Mr.Strang. It wasnt Alans idea to go there. It was mine. (Equus 59) Alan. (to Dysart) The bus wouldnt come. We just stood and stood . . . Then suddenly he spoke. Frank. (stiffly) Id like you to know something. Both of you. I came here tonight to see the Manager. He asked me to call on him for business purposes. I happen to be a printer, Miss A picture house needs posters. Thats entirely why Im here. To discuss posters. While I was waiting I happened to glance in, thats allI had no idea they showed films like this. Im certainly going to refuse my services. Jill. (kindly) Yes, of course. Frank. So long as thats understood. (Equus 59) Interestingly enough, Frank explains why he himself is there instead of asking Alan why he is there. He has certainly come to the cinema for the same reason with Alan and Jill. Thus Alan and Frank are scared of each other. Frank leaves them and Alan stays with Jill. More importantly, Alan has been now introduced to the adult life with the film. He wants to make love with Jill. She takes Alan to the Stables because they cannot go to Alans or Jills house. Alan does not want to go to the Stables; he prefers a home. Alan. Why not your place? Jill. I cant. Mother doesnt like me bringing boys back. I told you . . . Anyway, the Barns better. Alan. No! Jill. All that straw. Its cosy. Alan. No! Jill. Why not? Alan. Them! Jill. Dalton will be in bed . . . Whats the matter? . . . Dont you want to? Alan. (aching to) Yes! Jill. So? Alan. (desperate) Them! . . . Them! . . . Jill. Who? Alan. (low) Horses. Jill. Horses? . . .Youre really dotty, arent you? . . . What do you mean? He starts shaking Oh youre freezing . . . Lets get under the straw. Youll be warm there. Alan. (pulling away) No! (Equus 62) Alan does not want to be seen by the horses since he thinks it would be a shameful act according to his religion. Although Jill shuts all the doors in order not to be seen by the horses, he is not comfortable. Alan cannot help but think of Equus and he sees Equus instead of Jill. Thus, his attempt to make love with Jill fails. Angrily, he shouts at Jill: Get out! (Equus 65). His psychology in this scene is horrible: Alan. (to Dysart) He was there. Through the door. The door was shut, but he was there! . . . Dysart. Laughing? Alan. (to Dysart) Mocking! . . .Mocking! . . . Standing downstage he stares up towards the tunnel. A great silence weighs on the square. (To the silence:terrified) Friend . . . Equus the Kind . . . The merciful! . . .Forgive me! . . . Silence. It wasnt me! Not really me. Me!. . . Forgive me! . . .Take me back again! Please! . . . PLEASE! (He kneels on the downstage lip of the square, still facing the door, huddling in fear) Ill never do it again. I swear . . . I swear! . . . Dysart. And He? What does He say? Alan. (to Dysart whispering) Mine! . . . Youre mine! . . . I am yours and you are mine! . . . (Equus 67) Equuss Nuggets eyes are rolling and Alan is sure that he has seen them make love. Eyes! . . . White eyes! . . . never close! Eyes like flames coming coming! . . .God seest! God seest! . . . NO! . . . (Equus 68). Alan stabs out Nugget and other five horses eyes. He yells in hysteria as he collapses on the ground (Equus 68). Dysart is about to finish his process of normalizing Alan. However he does not know whether he should be happy to have this patient cured. He calls it madness (Equus 68). In the end, Dysart appears to have cured him. {Equus is a] troubling play about a psychiatrists struggle to understand the passionately conceived but torturous personal mythology of Alan, a disturbed adolescent. If a psychologist of religion had gone after the young mans associations to G-o-d, he or she might have retrieved references to the pallid secondhand God of Alans parents, but would likely have missed Alans dramatic psychic creation of a personal diety he called Equus. Although it might be argued that this is the kind of exceptional case that falls more into the psychopathology of religion and is no basis for generalization, I am more and more struck by how distinctive and sometimes quite original are the spiritual formulations of individuals. (Mc Dargh 90) The play really includes the idea of passion versus reason. It is about a psychiatrist who thinks he can solve everything by reason and at the same time about an adolescent who is filled with passion but forced by his family to leave his passion. The battle of passion and reason in the case of Alan seems to end with the defeat of passion; however, Shaffer certainly prefers a combination of two. It is not only Alans but also becomes the inner conflict of Dysart. While the horses represent freedom and sexuality, Martin Dysart represents reason as a doctor. During the play, the two characters have difficult times. Dysart shows a change in his attitude towards passion. As for Alan, he is treated by the psychiatrist to become normal. Alan is caught up between his own creation of religion and what is expected by him. He has to feel himself acceptable (Equus 68) since reason rather than passion is what is accepted by society. Dysart lacks passion and is jealous of Alan (Equus 50); he is u ncomfortable in this process of normalizing. He gradually gets worried that he should not cure Alan because this would be the end of Alans passion, so he does not want to give an end to that passion which he lacks but desires. Dysart confesses to Hesther, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦that boy has known a passion more ferocious than I have ever felt in any second of my life. And let me tell you something: I envy it (Equus 50). Dysart is thus obsessed with passion saying Passion, you see, can be destroyed by a doctor. It cannot be created (Equus 69). It is a disturbing play in which Shaffer makes use of sound effects to make it psychologically effective. The horses are performed by actors who wear horse masks. As for the scene props, Shaffer makes use of light in order to emphasize his themes (Innes 228). Light is used in the play as an indication of Alans psychology. There are dream sequences, and a scenic structure that cuts across the logic of time as well as cause and effect following the irrational associations of the subconscious, plus ritual chanting, stylized masks and mythic archetypes (Innes 228). Shaffer ignores the three unities of Aristotle; there are scenes belonging to different places and different times; and there is no unity of action. However, Shaffer directly connects the past action of the play to the plot of present events; and the scenery connects more with the psychological life of the character than to the surface plot. As for the setting, it changes from scene to scene it is both internal and external; even in a single scene being both internal and external. It begins when Alan is seventeen years old and goes back to the previous years. The point of view is also variable; Shaffer lets the audience see the things from each characters point of view and Shaffer uses the omniscient narrator in order to emphasize each point of view. The play is about an adolescent who has deep complicated conflicts in his relationships with his parents and his first flirt Jill. à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ {The play is not only} an extremely useful source book for an understanding of madness and family processes, it is also an affirmation of the dramatherapists long-held credo: that art can tell us things that science cannot (Davis xiii). Shaffer is successful at portraying the psychology of characters and Equus is a good work of drama in which the themes of passion, reason and worship and the idea of normal and abnormal are linked by Shaffer in order to make his audience question their beliefs and society.

The Debate Over the Glen Canyon Dam Essay -- Nature Environmental Essa

The Debate Over the Glen Canyon Dam Over the years Glen Canyon Dam has been the spark for hundreds of debates, rallies, and protests. These debates have been going on for almost forty years now. The fact is that the dam created a huge lake when it was built, this is what bothers environmentalists. This lake is called Lake Powell and thousands of people depend on its tourists for income. The lake also filled up a canyon called Glen Canyon, some people say it was the most beautiful place on earth. The anti-dam side of the debate has its basis in the fact that Lake Powell is currently covering Glen Canyon. It was very remote so few people got to witness its splendor. This is probably the reason the dam was built in the first place, ignorance. The lake supports a small city called Page, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of people who vacation there. The people who live in or around page and the people who use the lake for recreation are the people who like the dam and they hold up the pro-dam side of the debate. The argument is: why should we drain Lake Powell when thousands upon thousands of people enjoy it each year compared to the few hundred if that that might have ventured into Glen Canyon if it were still there. Also people argue that the rock formations, plant life, and even streams and rivers of the old Glen Canyon have long since been destroyed and it will never be the same even if we were to drain the lake. This Paper will describe and analyze three articles pertaining to the ongoing debate for and against Glen Canyon Dam. Two of these articles were found in the 1999 edition of A Sense of Place, and the third was downloaded off a site on the Internet (http://www.glencanyon.net/club.htm). These articles wi... ...ion that the proposal to drain Lake Powell is not a very good one " First off two Club members in page, AZ quit the club over the Lake Powell proposal" (www.glencanyon.net/club). The writer thinks that the board is wrong to propose such an idea "Lake Powell violated the club's policy that major decisions should start at the ground and work their way up" (www.glencanyon.net/club). The author seems to want to clear guilt of the proposal from the club members. The author's point of view seems to be of someone who is involved in the Sierra Club organization itself, whether the author is or isn't a member they have something to do with the organization. The author is in a protective mode, "The Board (of the Sierra Club) pulled this idea out of thin air" (www.glencanyon.net/club) trying to state the fact that not all members are in favor of the plan to drain the lake.