These stories show how society’s sense of justice has been undermined by the pessimistic attitude of postmodernism. These stories force readers to question the people we trust in society. Both are written with a sense of moral ambiguity and leave no resolution for us. They force us to ask ourselves what we are capable of, since we can no longer tell what the characters are capable of. In Ian Rankin’s short story, “The Dean Curse,” Brigadier General Dean comes across as a very wealthy, respected man.
As well as that, there was a very bad harvest in 1621 which caused widespread distress and finally there was wide support for anti-Spanish foreign policy. This meant that money was already short and James had to accept this, but he was a very extravagant king and would struggle to come to terms with not being able to have everything he wanted. Stress would have been a big factor and tension would have been big between the king and Parliament. A main reason that James felt the royal prerogative was under threat in the 1621 Parliament is because of monopolies. Monopolists such as Sir Giles Mompesson and Sir Francis Mithcell were impeached for their corrupt practices in monopolies such as licensing alehouses where many of these alehouses were illegal gambling dens or partly brothels.
Running on Empty In his book, Running on Empty, Peterson recognizes that the hope for modifying the political incentives normally hinges on the changing and the selfish attitudes of voters who have self-interest on political process, hence engendering in vitriolic partnership (Peterson pg. 218). His proposal for the reformation of the budget processes, on the other hand, seems to be myopic, since the pork-barrel politics are disgraceful despite the fact that the reform for the budget processes was proved to be impossible. Peterson has placed a great weight concerning the present generation that is supposed by various obligations to posterity; he says that he is worried whether the social promises of today are binding on the future generation, and if it would be possible to
“The consumer is powerless against the modern advertiser” How does the poetry of Bruce Dawe reinforce this statement? Consumers are extremely vulnerable to the modern advertiser. We are constantly bombarded with images and products that we are led to believe we “need”, if we are to fit in with society. The powerlessness of the consumer can be seen through Bruce Dawe’s poems ‘Americanized’ and ‘Televistas’. Dawe allows us to see how man is forced to succumb into the materialistic world.
Throughout my study of the individual, I have come to realise that the establishment’s desire for control, discourages individuality and has serious consequences for society. This is portrayed in Jonathan Demme’s film ‘Manchurian Candidate’ (2004) and Ken Kesey’s ‘One flew over the cuckoos nest” (1969). Both texts indicate that from any context it is hard to be an individual, because of the power, control and deception of the establishment, and the consequences of personal expression. An individual is anyone who defies against the rules and regulations of the establishment, being the media, governments and organisations. In both Manchurian and Cuckoo’s the individual is immersed in a dominating
Kameshia Washington Amy Wainwright MWF 1PM The World left up to Men The novel, Lord of the Flies by William Golding and the film Apocalypse Now directed and produced by Francis Ford Coppola are stories of how the human mind when in isolation from normal society can become corrupt and begin to lose touch with reason and rationality. These stories show how boys and men become barbaric when driven for power and how the power of persuasion can affect the most sound of people to forget what their own instincts tell them is right. ".. .human communities, whether they consist of a tribe set in a segment of nature, or of a national empire spanning the territory and the loyalties of a variety of peoples, must attempt to reinforce that sense of identity which promises a meaning for the cycle of life within a world view more real than the certainty of death"
Swift’s story portrays his animosity against the way England was changing. In George Orwell’s essay on the examination of “Gulliver’s Travel” he says, “Moreover, it is difficult not to feel that in his shrewder moments Gulliver is simply Swift himself, and there is at least one incident in which Swift seems to be venting his private grievance against contemporary society.” Swift’s critics have argued that he purely hates humankind, and Swift’s reply to these comments is that he only hates humankind’s folly (Chin). “Gulliver’s Travels” is a satire of the society of England during its publish, Swift ridicules the people of the time. This story is like playing a joke on someone, its subtly making fun of its readers, yet it is still popular, and how is that? Because these people were so naive and shallow, they could not see their own flaws.
Throughout generations, our cultural mediocrity has allowed mankind to march fettered down the spiraling path of social degradation. We meander aimlessly, lavished in pelt-covered furnishings and ivory ornaments indiscriminately forged from endangered species. We stride in triumph from the mass plundering of nature yet callously detour from ominous signs of atmospheric contamination. Confined by our shortsightedness, we fail to realize the implications of our imprudent behavior, thus jeopardizing the preservation of humanity. According to Derrick Jensen, “If we are to survive, we must learn a new way to live, or relearn an old way” (Jenson 16).
So here is kind of contradictory that even though he hates the British Empire, but he still work for them, and these action has reflect the definition of ambivalence. * The reason why I choose “D. antipathy” is because base on the same quote I found in the paragraph 2, he directly blame all the environment he had. He hate the people, hate his imperial country Britain, and he job. So I use to think that since he has such dislike about everything, apathy should be the correct answer.