William Shakespeares play Essay Example for Free

William Shakespeares play Essay Critics believe that William Shakespeares play The Tempest was written around 1610. It opens with a storm, which results in shipwreck, many of the main characters end up stranded. The first time we hear of Prospero is in Act I Scene ii were he is involved in a conversation with his daughter Miranda, during which she accuses him of causing the storm If by your art you have caused this storm. He admits it but in doing so ends up confessing to Miranda all about her past and how they came to be on the island Tis is time I informed thee farther, he does this to try and justify his actions. He has a slave called Ariel I thank thee, master, who comes and informs him of the results of the storm. All of the crew and passengers survived as Prospero asked Ariel not to harm any of them But are they, Ariel, safe? Not a hair perishd. We then begin to learn about another key character, Caliban, who is another of Prosperos slaves Thou most lying slave. Caliban believes that the island belongs to him and that Prospero, who now thinks he owns the island, stole it from his now deceased mother Sycorax This islands mine, by Sycorax my mother. When this conversation ends Ariel begins to start her next task. Ferdinand, who was onboard the ship, is enticed by Ariel song and begins to make his way in towards Miranda. Ariel is invisible at this point so Ferdinand thinks the beautiful sounds are coming from Miranda. Eventually the meet and, with a little help from the invisible Ariel and hidden Prospero, begin to fall in love. We then move onto Act II with the rest of the stranded passengers. Two of them, Antonio and Sebastian begin to gently bully a wise man named Gonzalo Look hes winding up the watch of his wit, they then move into a private conversation of their own. During which they form a plot to kill most of their fellow passengers including Alonso, King of Naples and Sebastians brother, whilst they are asleep. This would mean that they would have a huge power status, as Sebastian would become King of Naples and Antonio is already Duke of Milan. Their plan is foiled by Ariel awakening Gonzalo. Trincolo, jester, and Stephano, a drunken butler, come across Caliban in the woods. Under the influence of alcohol Caliban agrees to serve the drunken pair with the promise that they will kill Prospero. This will make them owners of the island and Caliban thinks they will treat him better than Prospero. However, an invisible Prospero hears them talking about him and sends some spirits to case them away Go charge my goblins. There is then a scene in which all the royal party are gathered, Prosepero at the head. He explains all that has gone on to everybody. He decides to give up his magic and return as Duke of Milan while Miranda and Ferdinand declare their love for one another. From the basic plot Prospero does not seem like a bad person but there are many fine details missed out in the summary. When Prospero arrived on the island its only inhabitant was Caliban who had grown up there. Calibans way of life was very different to Prosperos as he had not grown up with civilization. Prosperos personality appears to have more bad traits than good. His worst are a strong arrogance as he thinks he is life is not only different to Calibans it is also better, which is not true. He does seem to have a few positive traits the main one of these appears to be honesty as he shows his intentions about owning the island and re-gaining his Dukedom but this is counteracted by the way he is very sneaky and tries to influence the forces of nature. This is shown when he repeatedly makes himself or Ariel invisible and speaks to other characters although he were someone else. Two other characters, Caliban and Ariel, play a huge part in deducting his true colors. They appear to be his good side, Ariel and his bad side, Caliban we know he thinks this to as he refers to Caliban as this thing of darkness I acknowledge mine. There are two phases to explain this, one is that they are his yin and yang and the other is to say that they make up a doppelganger. Prosperos most intimate relationship with another character is with Caliban. As well as assuming power over the island he also assumes power and therefore control over Caliban himself. He is infact prejudice against Caliban and thinks Caliban is not fit to rule the island. In the beginning he taught Caliban how to speak and in return Caliban showed him all the special features on the island. But Prospero betrayed Caliban because now he knew all the secrets of the isle Caliban had nothing over him. To try and get back at Prospero Caliban tried to rape Miranda, which Prospero saw as something, a savage would do. He also had another motive; he wanted Miranda to get pregnant so that there would, in theory, be more of Caliban than of Prospero. However as this did not work the idea could never be put into practice but it is the same kind of thing that Caliban thinks could have happened with Trincolo and Stephano. Prospero tries to colonize Caliban but this is not right as Calibans way of life is as respectable as Prosperos within the island community. Prospero also has an unusual relationship with Ariel another of his slaves. Prospero freed Ariel from a cage in which he had been placed by Sycorax. This put Ariel in debt but Prospero always allows him to be his own person and does not try to control him. Also when Ariel has served Prospero for long enough he is allowed to be free I shall miss thee but yet thee shalt have freedom. One of the things that Ariel did for Prospero is teach him to forgive and forget, it was he who spurred Prospero to let the royals free Your charm so strongly works em that if you now beheld them your affections would become tender Dost thou think so, spirit? His final relationships are with his family, Miranda and Antonio. He is very protective of Miranda as she is the only family he has known for a long time. But his relationship with Antonio is a little more complicated. For you, most wicked sir, whom to call brother would even infect my mouth, I do forgive thy rankest fault-all of them; and require my dukedom of thee, which perforce I know thou must restore. This is Prosperos way of forgiving Antonio. It is not very kindly and he insists on reclaiming his title. This portrays that they have a very stretched relationship and Prospero, given the choice, would not be brother to Antonio.

Music Essay -- essays research papers

Mozart, Wofgang Amadeus (1756-1791) Austrian born, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was regarded to be the greatest child prodigy the world has ever known. At age four, he heard his older sister playing a harpsichord minuet. Mozart begged his father to let him try the piece, and by ear, he played the piece perfectly. Throughout his life, tragedy struck. He was one of the most talented composers ever to walk the face of the earth, yet he led a life filled with much unhappiness. Upon traveling to Italy, Mozart fell in love with the Italian opera. One of his most famous peras is The Escape from the Seraglio, in which the heroine was named after his wife Constanze. Although many of the people in Vienna greatly praised this opera, Mozart's patron, Emperor Joseph, was not a fan of the style. Even though Mozart had his streaks of bad luck and his family was often in debt, his marriage to Costanze held many moments of happiness. On Sunday mornings, Haydn and two other musician friends from Vienna would show up at Mozart's residence and would play string quartets. Haydn is quoted as telling Mozart's father, "I declare to you upon my honor that I consider your son the greatest composer that I have ever heard (Kaufmann, 67)." Mozart composed many operas of which his most loved are The Marraige of Figaro, Don Giovanni, and Cosi Fan Tutte. His last opera, The Magic Flute, has charm and intelligence, even though it was written when he was sick and depressed. Ironically, during the sam...

What Is the Best Way of Explaining Football Hooliganism?

What is the best way of explaining football hooliganism? â€Å"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealousy, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words: it is war minus the shooting. † (Oswell, 1945) The best way to explain football hooliganism is to perceive it in the same context as war. Like war, football hooliganism has different factors that all contribute to the overall goal.Although the goal of each is initially considered as overtly different – war, to some, is demonstrated as a positive thing, especially within the social movement of futurism, while football hooliganism is, as a whole, a negative as portrayed mostly by the media – there are however, similarities among the two that have yet to be further explored. To demonstrate this I will gain further insight into, what I believe are, the similarities of war and football hooliganism. I will do this by studying and explaining the three main attributes of each, which are; Territory, masculinity, and the moral codes each social group follows.With territory I will compare how the two groups defend and protect their ‘homelands' and how they achieve a sense of pride by claiming someone else's land. Although they conduct this in different ways, I will hopefully be able to present how similar their process of achieving this are. Through the study of masculinity, I will explore the symbolic meaning that each present, in order to achieve a high status of being a ‘real man'. How they vilify their rivals is also studied, in order to make them feel less worthy or ‘manly', including how fashion and uniform play an important role.Before concluding my findings, I will explore how moral codes set internal ‘laws' within each social group, to which each must abide in their realms of fighting, focusing specifically on the rule that non-combatants or ‘civilians' are not to be ha rmed during combat, and how each group distinguishes combatants and civilians from one another. I will support my claims by using my own methodological research – in which I interviewed an anonymous football hooligan, who we will name as ‘Darren' – I will also use Anthony Kings' The post-modernity of football hooliganism (1997) journal article, T. W.Reesers Masculinities in theory: An introduction, and Michael Byers' Understanding international law and armed conflict – War Law (2005). By using the various sources, as said above, I hope to be able to support my claim that football hooliganism can be explained in the same context as war, through three important components – Territory, masculinity and moral codes – in which I have identified similarities among the two social groups. â€Å"†¦ Hooliganism's central confrontation involved the ‘taking of the ends', where fans would seek to infiltrate the opponent's terrace and assert the ir claim to the space.This ritualistic combat was hyperbolically described as war (between nations) by many fans, but rarely involved the conquest of a complete terrace. † (King, 1997) The above quote – taken from Anthony Kings' article on the post-modernity of football hooliganism – shows us that the idea of hooliganism has similarities with the concept of war. This is not only shown through my own evidence, but also by football hooligans themselves. During colonisation, the British army would claim other territories in different countries and claim them as part of Britain.They would do this by capturing towns and cities, and forcing the surrender of the national people. The ultimate aim was to protect Britain and also show the world that we were a strong, independent country, with a powerful army, that could take over other nations with ease. Today, war is conducted differently. Colonisation is a thing of the past, instead of taking over and claiming other nati ons, the British army demonstrate their presence in other countries, and set up base camps within foreign towns as their own to claim these as part of their territory.Football hooligans use a technique similar to that of the colonisation period. On a match day, hooligans will show their strength and power by attempting to claim something of the oppositions. This varies from terraces to pubs, and sometimes to streets. During my interview with ‘Darren', he supported this claim by stating, when asked for an explanation of football hooliganism, â€Å"†¦ Just taking liberties, going to other people's manors, in their pubs, taking over, calling them out, defending our territory, and taking over theirs†¦ †(Darren, personal interview, Jan 2012).Most hooligans will confirm that the method of taking ‘enemy' territory is trashing the place they have ‘captured'. This is significant to the process of claiming territory as it places a mark on the oppositions nam e, letting them and other ‘firms' know that they the ability to control, sometimes with the use of specialised stickers with the perpetrators signature (which is usually the clubs emblem and a short message). In terms of similarities with war, when the British army would claim a territory for their own, they would mark it with the union jack flag, showing that they were now ‘in charge' so to speak.As shown above, in terms of territory, we can see the similarities between war and football hooliganism through the way in which they both mark their territory and set about claiming oppositions territory. Within both social groups, soldiers and hooligans both have the belief that they are fighting for something, a higher being than themselves: for soldiers it is for Queen and country; for hooligans it is for their team and local area. They both organise, plan and prepare for the execution of their actions, both knowing the risks of their actions, and are willing to take the ri sks to fight for what they believe is the ultimate cause.According to T. W. Reeser (2010), one way in which to view masculinity is to look at it as an ideology, instead of an individualised creation. Observing masculinity within this context allows us to see various concepts of masculinity within different institutions and groups. This theory can work on many levels and can be associated with many institutions such as the army, sports and the business world. If we view the ideology of masculinity within the army, it shows us that the state needs the army to present themselves as the best they can be, an example being the army's slogan – ‘army, be the best'.The way in which soldiers are disciplined and taught how to present themselves is all part of their training in masculinity. As a soldier, the uniform is what sets you apart from the public. It is the symbolic meaning of the uniform and weapon that a soldier possesses that is important in showing others their ideology of masculinity. When we, as the public, see a male soldier, in camouflage uniform holding a gun, we instantly see what is meant to be a ‘real man'. The uniform, particularly honorary medals, shows us that the person has served his country and fought against others in battle.The uniform represents the country that the soldier is fighting for and the gun is his weapon that he uses against the opposition, to disarm and hurt them. They affirm their masculinity through organised and planned attacks, when they succeed in disarming the opposition, or a bullet that reaches its target, is a soldiers way of removing the oppositions masculinity and building on their own. Football hooligans follow the same ideology of masculinity that soldiers do. They learn from their peers how to behave and act, and have a ‘uniform' to abide by, which, like soldiers, is a symbol of their masculinity.The uniform football hooligans wear is not as much a statement of authority, but a statement of fa shion. The uniform is known as the ‘casual look', which involves wearing top brand names of polo t-shirts, jumpers, jeans and trainers, and in some cases what is known as the goggle coat, a coat which disguises your face but allows the hooligan to see through a pair of inbuilt goggles. They use this uniform to tell each other apart, a way of knowing who is there to fight and who is not. â€Å"The casual look, its a way of telling people apart, you know who is who. (Darren, personal interview, Jan 2012) Darren supports this in the above quote. The casual look is a uniform which symbolises their masculinity to others around them. As soldiers will use their guns as another sign of masculinity and to vilify their opponents, hooligans instead will use their chants and songs. The chants and songs are specifically created to vilify their rivals, and mostly speak of the opposition as being sexually perverse, diminutive phallic references and mocking their sexual performance.This is s upported by Anthony King in his article on the post-modernity of football hooliganism. â€Å"Through the support of a football team, the male fan affirms his status as a man (in the eyes of his peers and himself) and also articulates the nature of that manhood. A central practice in the re- constitution of manhood in football is the communal chanting in which fans participate. Through these songs, male fans re-affirm and re-negotiate the partially sub-conscious idea of their masculinity. † (King, 1997)In terms of masculinity within the army and football hooliganism, we can see that the similarities are, the way each uses a uniform and weapon as a symbol of their masculinity. Although the uniform and weapons are different, the way each presents themselves within their uniform and the way they use their weapon to vilify and remove their rivals masculinity is similar. It is a way in which each know who their rivals are. Which also links in with the moral codes that each social g roup abides by. Any armed conflict involves two broad categories of individuals: Combatants and non-combatants (who are also referred to as civilians). International humanitarian law protects both categories of person, though non-combatants are shield more than those who take up arms† (Byers, 2005) In the above quote, Michael Byers explains the humanitarian law that armies around the world are expected to follow. The British army abide by these and use them as a moral code as well as a law. The harming of civilians is prohibited, and only other combatants can be return fired at.As said in terms of masculinity, the army uses uniforms and weapons as a means of telling combatants and non-combatants apart. The harming of an innocent civilian can prompt an official prosecution of the soldier who open fired, unless there is reasonable evidence to claim that they believed the individual was in fact a combatant. Football hooligans also follow a strict moral code similar to that of the army. Football hooligans distinguish each other through the clothes they wear and the chants they use.It is an unspoken rule that if someone is not part of the hooligan culture then they cannot be harmed or made to participate in the battles that take place. This is shown in a quote from Darren's interview â€Å"The casual look, its a way of telling people apart, you know who is who – We don't just kick the f**k out of a random person, only people who want to have a row back. †(Darren, personal interview, Jan 2012) This sets football hooliganism apart from just random street fights. With the presence of moral codes, we can see that football hooliganism is more developed and strategically balanced then first thought.It is not simply about fighting like primitive men in the streets, but about the preparation and planning that surround it, the certainty that where you are going will not be surrounded by civilians who do not want to be part of this culture. The consequenc es of a civilian being harmed is most likely the shame that will be burdened upon you by your peers, and in some cases, ‘taught a lesson' in that you will be expected to receive punishment through violence by your peers who are ranked more superior then you.Continuing on the theme of similarities, the humanitarian laws and moral codes that both social groups follow is similar in the way that each are expected to abide by rules that prevent them from harming civilians who are not involved in their particular conflict. The consequences of their actions, should they breach this, is the prosecution of themselves through court marshals and/or violent punishment from their superiors. As presented above, we can see that war and football hooliganism have various similarities.This shows us that we can explain football hooliganism in terms of war using three attributes; Territory, masculinity and the humanitarian law/ moral codes that both must abide by. Although the ultimate goal can b e seen as directly different, it is the way in which both of these social groups plan and participate in their battles. The taking of territory and confirming their presence is similar in that both mark the territory claimed with the use of a flag or sticker.The uniform and weapon is symbolic for both, in the way it presents and confirms their masculinity, whilst causing a negative impact on their oppositions masculinity. When fighting, both will abide by the same rules that civilians are not to be harmed in any way, or face the consequences of going against these rules, which involves being persecuted by others superior than themselves. Although soldiers fighting in wars are labeled as passionate heroes, whilst football hooligans are vilified as thugs, we can notice the similarities of the two social groups when placed in the context of war.The addictive adrenaline buzz associated with each group during battle is what spurs them on, gives them the power to keep fighting, and is wha t keeps them going back for more. ‘Darren' describes this buzz as â€Å"Better than sex. † (Darren, personal interview, Jan 2012) Throughout this essay, masculinity has made a continuous appearance, in some cases it is more disguised, but still apparent. This shows us that masculinity, and proving they have an adequately sized manhood, is the real connection behind war and football hooliganism.Overall, the best way to explain football hooliganism is in the same context as war through territory, humanitarian law/ moral codes and of course, masculinity. BIBLIOGRAPHY Byers, M (2005). War Law: Understanding international law and armed conflict. London: Atlantic books. p. 9. King, A. (Dec 1997). The Postmodernity of Football Hooliganism. The British Journal of Sociology. 48 (4), p. 576-593. Orwell, G (1945). The Sporting Spirit. London: Tribune. Reeser, T. W (2010). Masculinities in theory: An introduction. London: Blackwell Publishing. Chapter 1.

Quotes From Princess Diana

When Diana Spencer married Prince Charles, the world opened its arms to the new royal bride. Princess Diana was an overnight hero, a youth icon and a benefactor of the poor. She was a figure of passion, empathy, and kindness to the commoners. People thronged to wave at her, while she smiled at every face. As Princess of Wales, Diana was involved with many charitable organizations. She defied custom by involving herself with AIDS charitable programs. She was often photographed hugging an AIDS-afflicted child. Diana was grounded in her beliefs. In time, her marriage faltered and eventually ended in divorce. Her premature death in an accident on the streets of Paris shocked the world. Princess Diana lives on in the hearts of her well-wishers. In this collection of Princess Dianas remarks lie the passion, aspiration, hopes, and dreams of a young princess. Princess Diana on Random Acts of Kindness Helping people in need is a good and essential part of my life, a kind of destiny. Carry out a random act of kindness, with no expectation of reward, safe in the knowledge that one day someone might do the same for you. Comments on Her Marriage There were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded. Any sane person would have left long ago. But I cannot. I have my sons. I think like any marriage, especially when youve had divorced parents like myself; you want to try even harder to make it work. The Importance of Family Family  is the most important thing in the world.   I will fight for my children on any level so they can reach their potential as human beings and in their public duties. I live for my sons. I would be lost without them. I want my boys to have an understanding of peoples emotions, their insecurities, peoples distress, and their hopes and dreams. About the Monarchy Being a princess isnt all its cracked up to be.   Its vital that the monarchy keeps in touch with the people. Its what I try and do. Id like to be a queen in peoples hearts, but I dont see myself being  queen  of this country. Call me Diana, not Princess Diana.   On the Meaning of Life Life is just a journey. The biggest disease this day and age is that of people feeling unloved. So many people supported me through my public life, and I will never forget them. The Importance of Love If you find someone you love in your life, then hang on to that love. I went to the school and put it to William, particularly, that if you find someone you love in life, you must hang onto it, and look after it, and if you were lucky enough to find someone who loved you, then you must protect it. My first thoughts are that I should not let people down, that I should support them and love them. I knew what my job was; it was to go out and meet the people and love them. Every one of us needs to show how much we care for each other and, in the process, care for ourselves. Happiness I dont want expensive gifts; I dont want to be bought. I have everything I want. I just want someone to be there for me, to make me feel safe and secure. When you are happy you can forgive a great deal. Princess Dianas Personal Philosophy I dont go by the rule book. I lead from the heart, not the head. I like to be a free spirit. Some dont like that, but thats the way I am. Anywhere I see suffering, that is where I want to be, doing what I can. I wear my heart on my sleeve. Is it a weakness that I lead from my heart and not my head? Hugs can do great amounts of good—especially for children.   Thoughts on Helping Others Nothing brings me more happiness than trying to help the most vulnerable people in society. It is a goal and an essential part of my life—a kind of destiny. Whoever is in distress can call on me. I will come running wherever they are. I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved. I know that I can give love for a minute, for half an hour, for a day, for a month, but I can give. I am very happy to do that, I want to do that. I want to walk into a room, be it a hospital for the dying or a hospital for the sick children, and feel that I am needed. I want to do, not just to be. Random Musings I dont even know how to use a parking meter, let alone a phone box. If men had to have babies, they would only ever have one each. People think at the end of the day that a man is the only answer to fulfillment. Actually, a job is better for me. Im as thick as a plank. Im aware that people I have loved and have died and are in the spirit world looking after me. The greatest problem in the world today is intolerance. Everyone is so intolerant of each other. The kindness and affection from the public have carried me through some of the most difficult periods, and always your love and affection have eased the journey.