Rivers Character Analysis

Look again at Rivers and Sassoon’s first meeting. What do we learn about Rivers and his methods, and Sassoon’s state of mind? Right from when these two characters meet, we see their personalities and their way of thinking shine through. Sassoon is very cautious of what he says, although after getting to know Rivers a bit, expresses his more personal thoughts. Rivers immediately analyses and assesses Sassoon from the very first paragraph in their meeting. Sassoon’s â€Å"pale skin, purple shadows under the eyes show â€Å"no obvious signs of nervous disorder† in Sassoon, but this immediately shows us, the reader, how Rivers is going to conduct his first interview with. Rivers has a very friendly attitude towards Sassoon, smiling at him when he takes his first sip of tea. This is because Rivers wants Sassoon to feel relaxed and open so he will express his innermost feelings, and therefore he can pin-point Sassoon’s cause of â€Å"neurosis†. Sassoon is surprised by River’s approach and begins to see him as an individual rather than ‘the doctor’. For River’s this allows personal views into consultation and Sassoon expresses his actual â€Å"hate† of civilians when they discuss his ‘after-dream hallucinations’. The hallucinations that Sassoon has been having and the nightmares he had of war scenes, shows how he has obviously been affected by the war. However even though we see Sassoon’s effects from his time at the front line, he shows his sanity right from the start. He jokes sarcastically about what if â€Å"the lunatic† (himself) went missing. He has been put in Craiglockhart as a mentally ill patient, but this was only because his friend Graves, didn’t want to see Sassoon get killed for his declaration. The declaration â€Å"had to be done† according to Sassoon, although both him and Rivers knew fighting a one man war against how the ‘great war’ was being fort was â€Å"futile†. Both characters know Sassoon isn... Rivers Character Analysis Free Essays on Regeneration (Pat Barker) Sassoon/Rivers Character Analysis Look again at Rivers and Sassoon’s first meeting. What do we learn about Rivers and his methods, and Sassoon’s state of mind? Right from when these two characters meet, we see their personalities and their way of thinking shine through. Sassoon is very cautious of what he says, although after getting to know Rivers a bit, expresses his more personal thoughts. Rivers immediately analyses and assesses Sassoon from the very first paragraph in their meeting. Sassoon’s â€Å"pale skin, purple shadows under the eyes show â€Å"no obvious signs of nervous disorder† in Sassoon, but this immediately shows us, the reader, how Rivers is going to conduct his first interview with. Rivers has a very friendly attitude towards Sassoon, smiling at him when he takes his first sip of tea. This is because Rivers wants Sassoon to feel relaxed and open so he will express his innermost feelings, and therefore he can pin-point Sassoon’s cause of â€Å"neurosis†. Sassoon is surprised by River’s approach and begins to see him as an individual rather than ‘the doctor’. For River’s this allows personal views into consultation and Sassoon expresses his actual â€Å"hate† of civilians when they discuss his ‘after-dream hallucinations’. The hallucinations that Sassoon has been having and the nightmares he had of war scenes, shows how he has obviously been affected by the war. However even though we see Sassoon’s effects from his time at the front line, he shows his sanity right from the start. He jokes sarcastically about what if â€Å"the lunatic† (himself) went missing. He has been put in Craiglockhart as a mentally ill patient, but this was only because his friend Graves, didn’t want to see Sassoon get killed for his declaration. The declaration â€Å"had to be done† according to Sassoon, although both him and Rivers knew fighting a one man war against how the ‘great war’ was being fort was â€Å"futile†. Both characters know Sassoon isn...

Seneca Falls Womens Rights Convention - 1848

Seneca Falls Women's Rights Convention - 1848 The roots of the Seneca Falls Womens Rights Convention, the first womens rights convention in history, go back to 1840, when Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton were attending the Worlds Anti-Slavery Convention in London as delegates, as were their husbands. The credentials committee ruled that women were constitutionally unfit for public and business meetings. After a vigorous debate on the role of women at the convention, the women were relegated to a segregated womens section which was separated from the main floor by a curtain; the men were permitted to speak, the women were not. Elizabeth Cady Stanton later credited conversations held with Lucretia Mott in that segregated womens section for the idea of holding a mass meeting to address the rights of women. William Lloyd Garrison arrived after the debate about women speaking; in protest of the decision, he spent the convention in the womens section. Lucretia Mott came from a Quaker tradition in which women were able to speak in church; Elizabeth Cady Stanton had already asserted her sense of womens equality by refusing to have the word obey included in her marriage ceremony. Both were committed to the cause of abolition of slavery; their experience in working for freedom in one arena seemed to solidify their sense that full human rights must be extended to women, too. Becoming a Reality But it was not until an 1848 visit of Lucretia Mott with her sister, Martha Coffin Wright, during an annual Quaker convention, that the idea of a womens rights convention turned into plans, and Seneca Falls became a reality. The sisters met during that visit with three other women, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Mary Ann MClintock, and Jane C. Hunt, at the home of Jane Hunt. All were also interested in the anti-slavery issue, and slavery had just been abolished in Martinique and the Dutch West Indies. The women obtained a place to meet in the town of Seneca Falls and on July 14 put a notice in the paper about the upcoming meeting, publicizing it mainly in the upstate New York area: Womans Rights Convention A Convention to discuss the social, civil and religious condition and rights of woman, will be held in the Wesleyan Chapel, at Seneca Falls, N.Y., on Wednesday and Thursday, the 19th and 20th of July, current; commencing at 10 oclock, A.M. During the first day the meeting will be exclusively for women, who are earnestly invited to attend. The public generally are invited to be present on the second day, when Lucretia Mott of Philadelphia, and others, ladies and gentlemen will address the convention. Preparing the Document The five women worked to prepare an agenda and a document to be considered for passage at the Seneca Falls convention. James Mott, Lucretia Motts husband, would chair the meeting, as many would consider such a role for women to be unacceptable. Elizabeth Cady Stanton led the writing of a declaration, modeled after the Declaration of Independence. The organizers also prepared specific resolutions. When Elizabeth Cady Stanton advocated for including the right to vote among the proposed actions, the men threatened to boycott the event, and Stantons husband left town. The resolution on voting rights stayed in, though the women other than Elizabeth Cady Stanton were skeptical of its passage. First Day, July 19 At the first day of the Seneca Falls convention, with over 300 people in attendance, the participants discussed womens rights. Forty of the participants at Seneca Falls were men, and the women quickly made the decision to allow them to participate fully, asking them only to be silent on the first day which had been meant to be exclusively for women. The morning didnt begin auspiciously: when those who had organized the Seneca Falls event arrived at the meeting place, Wesleyan Chapel, they found that the door was locked, and none of them had a key. A nephew of Elizabeth Cady Stanton climbed in a window and opened the door. James Mott, who was supposed to chair the meeting (it still being considered too outrageous for a woman to do so), was too ill to attend. The first day of the Seneca Falls convention continued with a discussion of the prepared Declaration of Sentiments. Amendments were proposed and some were adopted. In the afternoon, Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton spoke, then more changes were made to the Declaration. The eleven resolutions including the one that Stanton had added late, proposing that women get the vote were debated. Decisions were put off until Day 2 so that men, too, could vote. In the evening session, open to the public, Lucretia Mott spoke. Second Day, July 20 On the second day of the Seneca Falls convention, James Mott, Lucretia Motts husband, presided. Ten of the eleven resolutions passed quickly. The resolution on voting, however, saw more opposition and resistance. Elizabeth Cady Stanton continued to defend that resolution, but its passage was in doubt until an ardent speech by ex-slave and newspaper owner, Frederick Douglass, on its behalf. The closing of the second day included readings of Blackstones Commentaries on the status of women and speeches by several including Frederick Douglass. A resolution offered by Lucretia Mott passed unanimously: The speedy success of our cause depends upon the zealous and untiring efforts of both men and women, for the overthrow of the monopoly of the pulpit, and for securing to women of equal participation with men in the various trades, professions, and commerce. The debate about mens signatures on the document was resolved by permitting men to sign, but below the womens signatures. Of about 300 people present, 100 signed the document. Amelia Bloomer was among those who did not; she had arrived late and had spent the day in the gallery because there were no seats left on the floor. Of the signatures, 68 were of women and 32 were of men. Reactions to the Convention The story of Seneca Falls wasnt over, however. Newspapers reacted with articles mocking the Seneca Falls convention, some printing the Declaration of Sentiments in its entirety because they thought it was ridiculous on its face. Even more liberal papers like that of Horace Greeley judged the demand to vote to be going too far. Some signers asked to have their names removed. Two weeks after the Seneca Falls convention, a few of the participants met again, in Rochester, New York. They resolved to continue the effort, and organize more conventions (though in the future, with women chairing the meetings). Lucy Stone was key in organizing a convention in 1850 in Rochester: the first to be publicized and conceptualized as a national womens rights convention. Two early sources for the Seneca Falls Womens Rights Convention are the contemporary account in Frederick Douglass Rochester newspaper, The North Star, and Matilda Joslyn Gages account, first published in 1879 as National Citizen and Ballot Box, later becoming part of A History of Woman Suffrage, edited by Gage, Stanton, and Susan B. Anthony (who was not at Seneca Falls; she did not become involved in womens rights until 1851).

5 questions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 1

5 questions - Essay Example The business would be mainly financed by my own money ( savings); however, a loan would also be secured to ensure that all the physical set-up of the place as well as operational expenses would be covered for the first six months of operation. The planning part is executed well since the owners have already prepared a reasonable budget. There is also a need to spend for marketing by hiring a public relations agency that can suitably promote the restaurant to its target market. The cafà © can be considered competitive for three good reasons 1) the food selection that is considered healthy for the heart 2) the cozy and intimate ambience that is different from other competitors since our cafà © has a love theme 3) excellent service to the customers. As for the third reason, the owners have decided to give attention to the training and development of its crew since good service is highly correlated with profitability. In conclusion, this cafà © business would be profitable on the assu mption that quality service and good promotions would be implemented by the

Build a Model (Micro) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Build a Model (Micro) - Essay Example Therefore higher the percentage of students with disability, lower will be the API. API is highly dependent on the credential of the teachers. Higher the percentage of full time teachers in a school the better will be the API. In other words higher the dependence of a school on part time teachers, lower will be its API. In this model we want to visualize that how the parental education will affect the school performance. Ceteris Paribus, we see that Y = aX1 + z where z is a constant and a>0. If we want to plot this relation we have to measure average parent education on x axis measured in unit years and API being dependent variable on y axis. API is a unit free measure. The curve will be an upward sloping curve with a slope of dY/dX1 = a. Here we have done a cross sectional study with API of ten schools. API of year 2000 has been recorded and average parent education across various schools has been recorded. Now in this model we want to see how the API gets affected if we introduce a third variable say average class size. If the average class size increases, given the average parental education factor unchanged, then the API will fall and the curve will shift downwards. Due to increase in class size, given a fixed number of teachers, the teacher student ratio will fall leading to a poor academic growth of the students and lower API. The data and the diagram below show the effect. Here API 2000_revised is the API with new variable

Justice and Injustice in Molieres Tartuffe Essay -- Tartuffe Essays

Justice and Injustice in Tartuffe  Ã‚   A theme of the play Tartuffe is justice. Justice, or the lack of justice, can be seen in the relationship between father and son, father and daughter, and guest and host. Lacanian philosophy, which focuses on language and the conflict that the male feels due to a disintegration of oneness, can be used to look at injustice as it manifests itself in the male conflict within the play.   Ã‚  Ã‚   According to Lacan, a male child experiences conflict with his father, who is associated with language and thus otherness. Once a child enters into the world of language he loses his sense of unity with his mother. In Tartuffe the father, Orgon is in conflict with his son, Damis. Damis is a rash person who does not think things completely through before choosing a course of action, as seen when he says abruptly, "I'll go and tell [Tartuffe] off-, I'm out of patience" (3. 1. 10). He verbally spars with his father, who is completely infatuated with the behavior of Tartuffe, to see Tartuffe for what he is. After eavesdropping on the conversation between Elmire, the wife of Orgon, and Tartuffe, Damis is convinced that he has the evidence that he needs to convince Orgon of his position, as indicated when he says, "And now I've proof that can't he disbelieved Proof that was furnished me by Heaven above" (3.4.24-25). 1 le then goes to destroy his father's view of Tartuffe.   Ã‚  Ã‚   Orgon, however, upon hearing that Damis has caught Tartuffe trying to seduce Elmire, immediately takes a defensive stance and instead of believing his own son, claims the accusation is false and defends the stranger saying, "Ah, you deceitful boy, how dare you try / To stain his purity with so foul a lie?" (3.6.15-16). He scolds him:... ...time a just man before he met Tartuffe.   Ã‚  Ã‚   There is much injustice in the play Tartuffe. This injustice as well as the justice that triumphs often comes through the use of language for the purpose of establishing either law or love. Sometimes a character takes on this language by association with other characters, and other times in reaction to the use of this language by other characters. Regardless of the source, language is a common medium for the expression of justice or its opposite. This language is used by characters as a result of the conflict that a male feels as described by Lacan, which more often that not, results in the expression of injustice. The expression of injustice is language-based because the male, by being exposed to language, is thrust into a world of alienation, and has experienced injustice from his first experience with language.   

American Colonies in Early 1600 and 1700.

America’s colonial history can be described in terms of the economic, political and social events of the early sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The two centuries came with two sets of societies altogether. No historian will contest the fact that the start of the 1600 and its formative years marks the starting point of the American colonies’ history of existence. The American native society had a tight hold of their territories albeit without any form of a structured government but had a well organized defense outfit to check  intruders (Adams, 1921).The invasion by the English and other European giants and subsequent formation of the thirteen colonies was characterized by tribal and cross culture fights pitting mainly the native tribes against the colonizing English between 1600-1650. This points to an era of cultural disorientation and societal instability. Disease, poor weather and tribal warfare made it impossible for meaningful political, social and economic e ndeavors to materialize. Small-scale farming was the main economic activity in this era. The introductionof tea and tobacco in early 1600 gave the American colonies the opportunity of agriculture for trade and subsistence. The 1700 came with a different social, economic and political arrangement (Adams, 1921). The thirteen colonies each had an elaborate governance structure. The American colony of Pennsylvania had its first constitution in1701, no doubt then that the society already had a sense of respect for human rights and freedoms as they would call it ‘the Charter of Privileges’. This new set of laws guided governance and people’s conduct within and without the society (Schlesinger & Arthur, 1993).AMERICAN COLONIES IN EARLY 1600-1700Agriculture took a new angle during this era. Large scale farming replaced the old fashioned small scale and subsistence farming of the early 1600. Big plantations were put up by wealthy landowners of the southern colonies who al so engaged in hunting. This agrarian culture effectively put to an end the perennial hunger of the previous decade. There is a marked difference in the educational setup of the two eras. The early sixteenth century saw nothing much of formal education.Public schools were established and grammar schools became common place between 1700 and 1750. College education gained value and in effect Yale College was founded in 1701. Later, a pioneer journal was published and the freedom of the press and liberties was enacted (Schlesinger, 1993). The era of 1600-1650 had witnessed a culture of ignorance and disenfranchisement coupled with religious and cultural intolerance. Impunity went unpunished resulting in many killings and murders with anti-establishment figures being banished or executed.The society of the 1700-1750 era led a different lifestyle compared to that of 1600-1650. These people were a lot more economically stable (Gipson, 1936-1970). A pointer to this is their love for fashion and big life contrary to their early sixteenth century counterparts where starvation and hard labor punctuated their lives. The former had enough to spend and spare and even dress well owing to a healthy economy while the latter barely managed to scrape through life. The Great Awakening movement by Jonathan Edwards in the 1730s and 1740sdemonstrates a great difference in religious faiths of the two eras as he calls his group ‘new lights’ and the previous religions ‘old lights’. With this evangelistic movement, the religious and social orientation changes and differs greatly from that of the 1600 – 1650 era.REFERENCESAdams, Truslow. J [1921]. The Founding of New England. Atlantic Monthly Press. New York.Gipson, L [1936-1970] The British Empire Before the American Revolution (15 volumes) Pulitzer Prize.Schlesinger, Jr. , Arthur M. [1993] The Almanac of American History. Nobles Books, Greenwich, CT.

When Were the Elements Discovered (Timeline)

Heres a helpful table chronicling the discovery of the elements. The date is listed for when the element was first isolated. In many cases, the presence of a new element was suspected years or even thousands of years before it could be purified. Click on an elements name to see its entry in the Periodic Table and get facts for the element. Ancient Times - Prior to 1 A.D. GoldSilverCopperIronLeadTinMercurySulfurCarbon Time of the Alchemists - 1 A.D. to 1735 Arsenic (Magnus ~1250)Antimony (17th century or earlier)Phosphorus (Brand 1669)Zinc (13th Century India) 1735 to 1745 Cobalt (Brandt ~1735)Platinum (Ulloa 1735) 1745 to 1755 Nickel (Cronstedt 1751)Bismuth (Geoffroy 1753) 1755 to 1765-- 1765 to 1775 Hydrogen (Cavendish 1766)Nitrogen (Rutherford 1772)Oxygen (Priestley; Scheele 1774)Chlorine (Scheele 1774)Manganese (Gahn, Scheele, Bergman 1774) 1775 to 1785 Molybdenum (Scheele 1778)Tungsten (J. and F. dElhuyar 1783)Tellurium (von Reichenstein 1782) 1785 to 1795 Uranium (Peligot 1841)Strontium (Davey 1808)Titanium (Gregor 1791)Yttrium (Gadolin 1794) 1795 to 1805 Vanadium (del Rio 1801)Chromium (Vauquelin 1797)Beryllium (Vauquelin 1798)Niobium (Hatchett 1801)Tantalum (Ekeberg 1802)Cerium (Berzelius Hisinger; Klaproth 1803)Palladium (Wollaston 1803)Rhodium (Wollaston 1803-1804)Osmium (Tennant 1803)Iridium (Tennant 1803) 1805 to 1815 Sodium (Davy 1807)Potassium (Davy 1807)Barium (Davy 1808)Calcium (Davy 1808)Magnesium (Black 1775; Davy 1808)Boron (Davy; Gay-Lussac Thenard 1808)Iodine (Courtois 1811) 1815 to 1825 Lithium (Arfvedson 1817)Cadmium (Stromeyer 1817)Selenium (Berzelius 1817)Silicon (Berzelius 1824)Zirconium (Klaproth 1789; Berzelius 1824) 1825 to 1835 Aluminum (Wohler 1827)Bromine (Balard 1826)Thorium (Berzelius 1828) 1835 to 1845 Lanthanum (Mosander 1839)Terbium (Mosander 1843)Erbium (Mosander 1842 or 1843)Ruthenium (Klaus 1844) 1845 to 1855-- 1855 to 1865 Cesium (Bunsen Kirchoff 1860)Rubidium (Bunsen Kirchoff 1861)Thallium (Crookes 1861)Indium (Riech Richter 1863) 1865 to 1875 Fluorine (Moissan 1866) 1875 to 1885 Gallium (Boisbaudran 1875)Ytterbium (Marignac 1878)Samarium (Boisbaudran 1879)Scandium (Nilson 1878)Holmium (Delafontaine 1878)Thulium (Cleve 1879) 1885 to 1895 Praseodymium (von Weisbach 1885)Neodymium (von Weisbach 1885)Gadolinium (Marignac 1880)Dysprosium (Boisbaudran 1886)Germanium (Winkler 1886)Argon (Rayleigh Ramsay 1894) 1895 to 1905 Helium (Janssen 1868; Ramsay 1895)Europium (Boisbaudran 1890; Demarcay 1901)Krypton (Ramsay Travers 1898)Neon (Ramsay Travers 1898)Xenon (Ramsay Travers 1898)Polonium (Curie 1898)Radium (P. M. Curie 1898)Actinium (Debierne 1899)Radon (Dorn 1900) 1905 to 1915 Lutetium (Urbain 1907) 1915 to 1925 Hafnium (Coster von Hevesy 1923)Protactinium (Fajans Gohring 1913; Hahn Meitner 1917) 1925 to 1935 Rhenium (Noddack, Berg, Tacke 1925) 1935 to 1945 Technetium (Perrier Segre 1937 )Francium (Perey 1939)Astatine (Corson et al 1940)Neptunium (McMillan Abelson 1940)Plutonium (Seaborg et al. 1940)Curium (Seaborg et al. 1944) 1945 to 1955 Mendelevium (Ghiorso, Harvey, Choppin, Thompson, and Seaborg 1955)Fermium (Ghiorso et al. 1952)Einsteinium (Ghiorso et al. 1952)Americium (Seaborg et al. 1944)Promethium (Marinsky et al. 1945)Berkelium (Seaborg et al. 1949)Californium (Thompson, Street, Ghioirso, and Seaborg: 1950) 1955 to 1965 Nobelium (Ghiorso, Sikkeland, Walton, and Seaborg 1958)Lawrencium (Ghiorso et al. 1961)Rutherfordium (L Berkeley Lab, USA - Dubna Lab, Russia 1964) 1965 to 1975 Dubnium (L Berkeley Lab, USA - Dubna Lab, Russia 1967)Seaborgium (L Berkeley Lab, USA - Dubna Lab, Russia 1974) 1975 to 1985 Bohrium (Dubna Russia 1975)Meitnerium (Armbruster, Munzenber et al. 1982)Hassium (Armbruster, Munzenber et al. 1984) 1985 to 1995 Darmstadtium (Hofmann, Ninov, et al. GSI-Germany 1994)Roentgenium (Hofmann, Ninov et al. GSI-Germany 1994) 1995 to 2005 Nihonium - Nh - Atomic Number 113  (Hofmann, Ninov et al. GSI-Germany 1996)Flerovium - Fl - Atomic Number 114 (Joint Institute for Nuclear Research  and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 1999)Livermorium - Lv - Atomic Number 116 (Joint Institute for Nuclear Research and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 2000)Oganesson - Og - Atomic Number 118 (Joint Institute for Nuclear Research and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 2002)Moscovium - Mc - Atomic Number 115 (Joint Institute for Nuclear Research and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 2003) 2005 to Present Tennessine - Ts - Atomic Number 117 (Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Vanderbilt University and Oak Ridge National Laboratory 2009) Will There Be More? While the discovery of 118 elements completes the periodic table, scientists are working to synthesize new, superheavy nuclei. When one of these elements is verified, another row will be added to the periodic table.