Business Models and Systems Essay Example for Free

Business Models and Systems Essay The business that I am choosing to write about is a small convenience store located across the street from my children’s school. It is owned and operated by a very pleasant Indian couple. It is located in a remote area where there are very few businesses in close proximity. This store offers a variety of products and prepared foods. The three main components of the business system that comprises this particular business are as follows: Business as Commerce – They give money in exchange for the products they need to fill their store. In this case, the owners will look for sales at other stores, and then purchase them to sell in their store. They are making a profit from their trade because it is increasing their utility. Business as an Occupation – In order for them to increase their profit they would need to specialize in food service and preparation, customer service, and modern technologies. In other words, they had to learn how to make and present the foods that they offer, they had to learn how to communicate appropriately with their customers, and learn how to gain access to and operate new machines to make a greater profit. Business as an Organization – For the time being, this particular business is owned and operated by just two people. If sometime in the future they would decide to combine their talents and resources with other people, they will be able to pursue new opportunities and reduce transaction costs and increase their profitability.

Appeasement Policies: Britain And France

Appeasement Policies: Britain And France The appeasement policy was a policy adopted by Britain and France and it was a major player in the outbreak of the war. Appeasement was first introduced in the mid 1930s by Stanley Baldwin who was then the British Prime Minister. But it was Neville Chamberlain who changed this appeasement policy when he ascended to power in 1937. The British government defines appeasement as the settlement of issues through negotiation and compromise. The British were very committed to this policy and they followed it confidently with the hope that it will reduce the chance of a world war. Britain and France sought to appease Hitler not merely because it was militarily, economically and politically rational to do so, but because of personal judgments made by Chamberlain. It is clearly evident that right from the start, Chamberlain did not clearly understand Hitlers motive and to his best understanding, appeasement would be the best strategy to avert war. He assumed that Hitlers motive was just to ama ss and maintain power which means possibility for war would be trashed by German people. Sequence of events during pursuance of appeasement policy clearly illustrates that Chamberlain did not understand Hitlers motive at all and his approach to appeasement policy could not work. While appeasement policy was mainly meant to avert war, it did not serve its purpose as Chamberlain failed to understand Hitler and the Nazi motives in general. He did not take quick steps to rearm Britain because he did not see any threat to Britain in particular and to Western Europe in general from the Germans. Therefore Chamberlain felt free to pursue the appeasement policy and disregard a military alliance with France to wage a war against Germany. It is therefore evident that Chamberlain inaccurately thought that appeasement was the only means that would stop the way. He pursued the appeasement from his own convictions and that is why he went to Germany to meet Hitler without the approval of the cabine t. He trusted Hitler and he thought he would keep his word once his demands were met. He sought this appeasement so as to conciliate with Germany to have a stable Europe  [1]  . His personal view was that Germany would be satisfied with what he offered and especially the restoration of its former colonies. There are reasons that made Chamberlain seek appeasement with Hitler. One of them is that he represented the British citizens who did not want a war as they were in the process of healing the wounds from World War One. Also, he did not want to go to war with Germany because the fall of Germany would mean the victory of the Soviet Union and the spread of communism. Chamberlain and the British citizens did not want this to happen. So Chamberlain was trying as much as he could to avoid a war with Germany and at the same time the spread of communism. The appeasement policy that Chamberlain campaigned for was merely to avoid war. He took a number of steps to ensure that the war did not happen but they failed at the end. He even traveled to Germany without Cabinet approval to pursue appeasement with Hitler. But it can also be seen as a strategy that he used in order to gain some time in rearming his forces  [2]  . The perception by Chamberlain of the methods employed by Nazi and the aim of Hitler was inaccurate. This inaccurate perception is what resulted into adoption of appeasement by Britain and France. Instead of preventing world war two, the appeasement policy can be said to be its cause especially after its failure. Chamberlain persisted in use of persuasion towards Germany rather than deterrent in addressing the grievances made by Hitler. In doing this he was convinced that Hitler wanted only to maintain power and if the grievances and demands that Germany raised were met, the German people would quench the possibility of a war  [3]  . Chamberlain thought that he could single handedly and as an individual avert the possibility of Second War through his appeasement. That is why he met Hitler on three separate occasions without Cabinet approval and without the presence of British ministers. Though there was a decrease in support from the British people and the foreign office, Chamberlain continued to believe strongly in this policy and he did not see its failure. He failed to address the arguments that were presented by allies who had been angered by the British foreign policy e.g. France. This made France an unwilling follower of Britain foreign policy even though France did not believe in its success. Chamberlain believed that any strong approach towards Hitler other than appeasement would anger him and possibly provoke him into starting a war. Therefore he did not emphasize on military production. The industries in Britain were freed to produce armaments by the recession of 1938 and the cabinet approved a potential war in February 1936  [4]  . Chamberlain was so blinded by appeasement policy that he did not assess any possible alternatives. He was confidence and optimistic that appeasement policy would succeed  [5]  . The alternative that was there was an alliance with the Soviet Union to counter Hitler but Chamberlain would not overlook the differences that Britain had with USSR on communism. He believed that in doing this, he would be giving communism a chance to spread. His erroneous judgments can be seen when he did not pursue a military alliance with France after the Munich conference when he had the chance to check the expansion of Germany. Instead he reasoned that appeasement would stop Hitler from expanding German territories. He therefore did not give any other alternative a chance  [6]  . The Versailles Pact which had been signed after the First World War with an aim of ending all wars was greatly hated by the Germans  [7]  . It was argued that the treaty, if it were to stand, wound ruin the economic status of Germany. This treaty is seen by some historians as the lead cause of the Second World War. Chamberlains misjudgment of Hitlers intention can be seen especially due to his surrender to Hitlers growing demands. This was clearly seen in 1940 when Chamberlain desperately wanted to maintain peace through fulfilling the demands made by Hitler. Chamberlain and Baldwin chose to neglect the armaments of Britain to the edge of national annihilation  [8]  . This therefore means that there were other possible alternatives but which Chamberlain failed to look at. Winston Churchill who came to power after Chamberlain viewed appeasement as a humiliation to France and Britain and he termed it as a long series of miscalculations and misjudgments of men and facts and which led Britain into an endless war with the Nazis  [9]  . Many Britons saw hope after the signing of the Versailles treaty. They wanted to avoid another war and that is why the British government had to give in to the demands presented by Hitler  [10]  . Britain felt that Germany had been treated unfairly due to the restriction imposed upon it. Chamberlain felt that if the restriction were lifted, Germany would become happier. This perception of Germany by the general population gave Hitler confidence and also provided him with an opportunity to acquire more lands without a war. The British economy was fairing very badly hence Britain was not ready for a war. It was not even in a position to fund and rearm its military force due to the bad economic status. So Chamberlain tried as much as possible to avoid a war with Germany. The way Hitler was progressing meant that there was not even time for Britain to organize war strategies and prepare its force. So Chamberlain had to find a way of avoiding war and/or gaining sometime to rearm the military. The only solution present was appeasement  [11]  . To the best of Chamberlain assumptions, German would not pursue another war after all the demands presented had been met. However, it is evident that Chamberlain did not understand the Hitlers motive. Chamberlain assumed that Hitler was only interested in maintaining power. Even when it became evident that Hitler were rearming, Chamberlain turned a blind eye and did not take any step to rearm Britain forces. However, Hitlers main aim was to make Germany as super power and a united Germany. He also wanted to enlarge the Germany territory through what he called recapturing of lost territories  [12]  . Hitler believed that German will become strong again only through the use of military aggression and war. He directly challenged the Versailles treaty in 1934 by rearming his armed forces and preparing them for war. This he did through production of tanks, submarines and aircrafts in huge masses. When it was announced that Hitler was rearming his military forces, which was in conflict with the Versailles pact, Britain and France protested to the League of Nations with the hope that it can be stopped  [ 13]  . The League of Nations did not try to stop these aggressive rearmament plans by Hitler on the grounds that there were no military or economic sanctions that had been imposed. It was due to the appeasement which made Hitler more confident. In short France and Britain simply turned a blind eye on this public breach of Versailles treaty. He was confident that France and Britain as the appeasers would not stop him. He did this knowing very well that he was flouting the Versailles treaty. Britain and France did not stop Hitler from taking over Rhineland because he was taking back what belonged to Germany originally. At this stage, France could have stopped the reoccupation of the Rhine region but she did not want to start a war with Germany due to the lack of support from the British. Hitler did not want negotiations with France. He instead wanted to deal with Britain and Chamberlain especially. This may be because Hitler saw a sign of weakness and poor perception in Chamberlain. This is what forced France to follow Britain in the pursuance of appeasement even though it disputed its success. In supporting Britain, France wanted a strong militarily alliance with Britain that could maintain a war with Germany once the appeasement policy failed. Though the pursuance of appeasement by France was manipulated by Britain, France would not back off because it had found an ally in Britain. Because France would not be in a position to fight Germany on its own, having Britain on its side was of great importance  [14]  . This was because France was undergoing a financial crisis, industrial hold ups and a shortage in skilled labor. Chamberlain thought that France was behind him in his appeasement policy but he failed to see the hidden agenda pursued by France in its support for appeasement. The politics and governance in France were different from those in Britain. While Chamberlain as an individual dominated the foreign policy in Britain, France had a rapid turnover of cabinets and governments. The indictments of appeasement in France focused on the whole political players but not on one individual. Chamberlain thought that by allowing Hitler to take over the region that formally belonged to Germany, he would at least stop there. Hitler invaded Austria in 1938 and he declared Anschluss. In doing this he was breaking the Versailles treaty. The Australian chancellor at the time pleaded with France and Britain to help but these two countries did nothing about it. Chamberlain sent a protest note to Berlin  [15]  . He addressed the cabinet after Hitlers army crossed the border and he blamed both Germany and Austria. Even though, he condemned strongly the methods used by Hitler to annex Austria  [16]  . Chamberlain saw Hitler as a man who can be trusted and in his intervention he persuaded the president of the republic of Czech to hand over Sudetenland to the Germans. In doing this, Chamberlain thought that this was the last demand that Hitler would ask for. The annexation of Australia in 1938 and the invasion of Czechoslovakia as a whole is what opened the eyes of the appeasers and they saw that no matter how much they tried to appease Hitler, war was inevitable. After giving in to all the demands made by Hitler and his continual invasion of Europe, the appeasers realized that the appeasement policy was a failed policy. Chamberlain did not see Czechoslovakia as an issue that could result to war. He had simply assumed that it was just a conflict between two neighboring countries and that their conflict could not result to a world war. In 1938, Chamberlain is said to have observed: How horrible. Fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas masks here because of a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing!  [17]  . This quote suggests that the reason why Chamberlain pursued appeasement was to keep Britain safe while allowing Germany to control other nations. As long as Hitler did not interfere with Britains interest, Chamberlain was committed in pursuing appeasement. He believed that Hitler would be only interested in Eastern Europe and would not care to head Western Europe. That is why Britain and France did not take any military action when Germany started its rearming, the remilitarization of Rhine land and the Anschluss with Austria. The reason why the British policy of appeasement was vague in the 1930s was because the British politicians were unable to accurately the greatest threat to Britain and therefore come up with appropriate means and strategies to deal with them. Therefore Britain did not make any attempt to unite with America, USSR or France  [18]  . Though the British people were at first excited by Chamberlains avoidance of another war, the public opinion changed in 1938-8 after Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia. The public mood in France and Britain changed and Chamberlain chose to ignore this and instead continue with appeasement secretly. He had ordered that the word appeasement be used as little as possible in his speeches  [19]  . The famous peace in our time speech that was delivered by Chamberlain on September 30, 1938 showed that Hitler was a man who could not be trusted. It also showed that appeasement policy had failed as a means to prevent war. The main reason why Britain and France embraced the appeasement policy was because they did not want the whole of Europe to be dragged into a world war by Hitler. It was a policy being persued due to the lessons learnt from world war one. Appeasement policy can be seen as a bad policy that was aimed at achieving world peace while sacrificing some countries like the way Britain and France did to try and appease Hitler at the mercies of Czechoslovakia. Though the appeasement policy led to the strengthening of Germany, and the breakout of war, there are other reasons why France and Britain adopted this policy. These two countries were faced with economic problems in the 1930s. The British economy was severely weakened by the Wall Street crash of 1929 which made the government put the rearming of its armed forces on hold. Chamberlain wanted as much as possible to avoid war. That is why he adopted the appeasement policy. On the other hard, France was not in a position to maintain a war. It needed the support of Britain. It is because of this that it followed Britain in seeking the appeasement. This was because he wanted peace and stability that would allow economic growth for the whole of Europe. The Britons had a positive attitude towards the appeasement in the hope that it would reduce the chances of a war outbreak. Thus it can be concluded that appeasement was a British government policy that was fully supported by the citizens. Britain did not want a war between it and Germany. This was because it was threatened by communist USSR and not because it feared Germany. In case Germany fell, there was a possibility of spread of communism and Britain did not want this to happen. That is why it was in the favor of appeasement policy. Another fear that embraced Britain was forming a coalition with USSR which was its bitter rival. That is why Chamberlain desperately sought for appeasement at the mercies of other countries just to make sure that they did not join hands with USSR in a war against Germany  [20]  . The signing of the Munich agreement is viewed by many as a betrayal especially by Britain. What Chamberlain was doing is to buy some time to rearm British forces. Hitler on the other hand thought it as a weakness and a sign of fear of the appeasers  [21]  . This was a great mistake as all that the appeasers wanted was to preserve the world peace. This is what made him bold and gain confidence and a sen se of security. . Hitler had managed to convince the appeasers that he had no any intentions of aggression through his peace propaganda. This had in a way fooled Britain and France who were not in favor of a war but wanted world peaceful coexistence. The appeasers continued to adopt the appeasement policy and this assured Hitler that they would do anything just to avoid a war. This made him think that he could continue to expand his demands and the appeasers would still continue to give in to them. It was this appeasement policy that gave Hitler a foundation and a base to increase the demands after every successful conquest that he achieved. Conclusion There are many opinions and views about the appeasement policy with some critics saying it was a betrayal and sacrifice of some nations for the benefit of others. Others say that it was Chamberlains strategy of buying time to rearm Britain. But from Chamberlains point of view, all that he wanted was to avoid another world war. It is not the appeasement policy that triggered the world war two but instead it was the greed of Hitler to enlarge the German territory and make Germany a superpower. The failure of the appeasement policy was because it was only Chamberlain who fulfilled his part of the bargain. He was convinced, on trying to appease Hitler that he (Hitler) was an honest trustworthy and honorable man which was a mistake and a misjudgment on his part. Chamberlain felt that he had been betrayed by Hitler and that his appeasement policies were failing him. That is when he decided to take on a hard line approach towards the Nazi. Britain and France began rearming themselves. Italy on the other hard invaded Albania in April of 1939. It was Hitlers invasion of Poland that made these two countries declare war and Second World War officially began on 3rde September 1939. Though he really wanted to avoid the war, there came a time that he knew that war was in evitable. It was only after the failure of the negotiations between him and Hitler that he declared war against Germany Teleworking what it is? Teleworking what it is? Teleworking what it is? TELEWORK is a form of organising and/or performing work, using information technology, in the context of an employment contract/relationship, where work, which could also be performed at the employers premises, is carried out away from those premises on a regular basis. This agreement covers teleworkers. A teleworker is any person carrying out telework as defined above. (Emilio Gabaglio, Georges Jacobs, Andrea Bonetti, Rainer Plassmann, 16.07.2002 EU agreement among ETUC, UNICE/UEAPME and CEEP, p. 2). So it can be stated that teleworking is arrangement between employer and employee in which an employee regularly performs officially assigned duties at home or other work sites which are convenient for the employee. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM in US), describes telework as an alternative work arrangement for employees to conduct all or some of their work away from the primary workplace. The work location can be a residence, a telecenter, an office closer to the employees residence, or another acceptable location. The telework schedule may be fixed or episodic.(U.S. Office of Personnel Management, http://www.opm.gov/index.asp, date taken 29.01.2010).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Teleworking is also named telecommuting, flexiwork, sometimes flexiplace, e- commuting, e-work, telework, working at home (WAH), or working from home (WFH). Different types of teleworking. In general there are three types of telework: full time, part time, and situational. Full time telework means that the employee performs and completes all or almost all duties outside of a traditional office. In this meaning full time teleworking can be named as home-based work. Part time telework means that the employee performs and completes duties outside of a traditional office on a regularly scheduled basis, but not five days per week. For instance, the employee may telework one or more days a week, every two weeks, or several days in a month. Situational telework means that the employee do not telework on a regular basis. This type of telework may happened in case of medical problem, weather or hazardous conditions, that do not allowed employee to get to traditional office in a safe condition and way, sometimes situational telework may be caused by preparing special project which needs high concentration and doesnt need present of the employee in traditional office. Ursula Huws, an Associate Fellow of IES, is an established international authority on teleworking, states different approach to types of teleworking. The five main types of teleworking according to Ursula Huws are: Multi-site teleworking This form of teleworking means that employee rotates between working on the employers premises and working elsewhere. Typically, the secondary worksite is the home, but it may be a telecottage, telecentre or other outpost. Tele-homeworking Tele-homeworking means work which is based only in the home and carried out for a single employer, even if the worker does not have formal employee status. This type of teleworking generally involves fairly low-skilled work carried out by people who are tied to the home by the need to care for children or other dependants. Freelance teleworking Freelance teleworkers, in contrast to tele-homeworkers, work for a different clients, rather than a single employer. Mobile teleworking Mobile teleworking has evolved from more traditional types of work, which can be qualified in groups such as travelling sales representatives, inspectors or maintenance engineers. The new technologies, especially the development of portable equipment such the notebook computer, the mobile telephone, the portable fax machine, have created type of mobility which allowed increase of amount of professional, technical and managerial work that can be carried out on the road. Relocated back-office functions The first four categories of teleworking involve activities which employee can carry out in isolation away from the employers premises. Relocated back-office is other form of teleworking which takes place on remote office sites. Many big companies have been noticed a rapid growth in specialist centres carrying out activities such as data entry, customer service, airline bookings, telephone banking and mail-order. These centres operate on a subcontracted basis or under the direct control of an employer located at a distance. These type of teleworking face different problems including: lack of promotion prospects, health and safety problems and equal opportunities issues, for instance fairly low-paid work carried out by women (Teleworking: Guidelines for Good Practice, Huws U. Report 329, Institute for Employment Studies, 1997.). Teleworking advantages and disadvantages to employers and employees.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Telework brings a variety of advantages and disadvantages to employees and employers in many different aspects from work environment to health issues. I am going to point and describe, in my opinion, the most important benefits and negatives of telework to both employers and employees. Advantages to employers. Increase of employees productivity, because telework help to avoid common interruption to work in traditional office, what provides to better concentration. Employees are not late to work because of travel difficulties or unpredictable events, for example breakdown of a car, delays in public transport. Advantages of a health matter in meaning employees take off less time due to illness: employees who are long-time unwell and not able to work in traditional office, might be able to work from home, employees during recovering period from serious illness might be able to work from home, because employees who work alone are more isolated, they are less likely to contact or spread diseases such as flu, colds, viruses, etc. working in private, convenient place for employees is less stressful and could be less exposure to pollution, it can cause that teleworkers can be generally in better health, employees who work at home, obviously, are less likely to be injured while commuting. Employee work at home is fully using productive time for only work, compare to traditional office where at the end of work usually employees start to prepare to leave and clear their desk few minutes before the end of the work day. Help in recruiting process because: flexible working is more attractive, especially to graduated young people, employers have much more possibilities to seek employees, especially among disabled, people who take care of young children or the elderly, it is also encouraging to seek potentially employees away from city centres or even from different regions and countries. Reducing costs in everyday using of traditional office: saving in reducing employees benefits, for instance company car, fuel, public transport season tickets, parking spaces or payable car park permissions etc., saving in reducing or eliminating catering subsidies or the facilities themselves. Advantages to employees. Telework help to avoid common interruption to work in traditional office, what provides to faster implement projects and reduce wasting of time. Travel difficulties are avoided. From employee site it means: avoid loss of pay because of lateness or non-arrival, avoid stress on the way to work place. Less time taken off due to illness: if employee is too ill to come to traditional office, might still be well enough to work at home, employees during recovering period from serious illness might be able to work from home and finish priority projects on time, work alone employee is less likely to contact or spread diseases such as flu, colds, viruses, etc., improved general health because of less stress and exposure to pollution. Better personal safety, because reducing risk of accident on the way to work and back. More time to spend with family because time to travel to work is reduced to zero. In this meaning more time in case of family illness, household maintenance etc. Possibility to reduce cost of living through: living out of city centre in cheaper areas, reduce fuel cost, car maintenance because travel to work and back is excluded. Disadvantages to employers. Managers has only a little or even lack of control over employees who work on teleworking base. Because lack of control, managers cant check the productivity, they assess employees work only through deadlines of projects submissions. Security issues of data stored and general database; if employees work on their own PCs or laptops, do they have proper programs installed to secure companys data stored. Issues included persuade employees to work harder and more productive if manager cant see process of their work; how many brakes they take etc. Lost of physical contact with clients and employees; disadvantages connect with lack of reed of body language of employees their physical reaction on different situations and tasks, their way of socialising: making friendships with one another can show manager of employees ability to work in group, leadership etc. Disadvantages to employees. Employees work on telework basis, in their chosen places, cant compare their productivity to employees who work on regular basis in companys office. It can produce some kind of frustration and unfair feelings. Employees who work on telework basis can be afraid of additional costs of working at their chosen places for example: decorate an area for their Home Office, have extra phone lines installed, buy additional computer equipment and software to protect data and system, furnished their Home Office. Employees working at home will have to do own typing, filing and other office function. Telework employees will lose subsidised food beverages, company car, public transport etc. (1995-1999 Telework Analytics International, Inc. All Rights Reserved, http://www.teleworker.com/pro_con.html, taken 27.02.2010).

Joan Of Arc Essay -- Biography Biographies Joan of Arc Essays

A French saint and a heroine in the Hundred Years' war was Joan of Arc. This farm girl helped save the French from English command and was often called the Maid Orleans and the Maid of France. Her inspiration led the French to many victories. Joan Of Arc (In French Jeanne d'Arc) was born around 1412, in the village of Domremy, France. She was a peasant girl who, like many girls of that time, could not read or write. Her father, Jacques, was a wealthy tenant farmer and her mother, Isabelle Romee, taught her how to sow, spin, and cook which she was proud of. She also spent much of her time praying to and serving God. She lived like most children did at that time, until when she was about thirteen. According to Wagenknecht: "The Vision first came when she was first thirteen...." 1 The vision was Saint Michael who said she should be a good girl and go to church. When more and more Visions had come it started coming clearer to her and when she saw Saint Catherine and Saint Margaret her duty was clear, she was the chosen one to crown Charles the VII. 2 Since France had been fighting with England in what was called the Hundred Years' War, much of Northern France was captured by the English, including Reims where the coronation for kings had been held for over centuries before him. Since Reims was captured, Charles the VII, who had not yet been crowned; was still called the Dauphin. When Joan had these visions of Saint Catherine and Saint Margaret, she told her family and friends. When she told her father, he would not let her go. After when these Visions told her that England and Burgundy, England's ally, were going to capture Orleans, one of France's last strong forces, she knew she had to react. She needed to go to the governor of Vaucouleurs, an agent of the Dauphin, and convince him to give her an army to escort her to the Dauphin. She first needed an escort to come with her to see the governor so she asked her cousin, Durand Laxart. He, at first, was skeptical about it, but then he soon came to Joan's side. When she told the governor, Robert de Baudricourt, he said she was a fool and she should go home. But after some time of waiting, Baudri-court let her go, under his protection, to the Dauphin with male clothing, a sword, 3 a safe conduct pass, and a small escort. They departed February 23. They safel... ...tried as a witch under an ecclesiastical court. She was handed over to Pierre Cauchon, bishop of Beauvais, on January 3rd, 1431. The sittings had begun on February 21 and continued over a period of months. She was held in chains, harassed by countless questions, and threatened with torture over this period of months; Saint Catherine and Saint Margaret still gave her advice through all this. On May 24, 1431, Joan was taken to the cemetery where she she was to been burned at the stake unless she recanted, which she did. This is not really to clear to historians why she did that, but many believe that she did not understand what the recant meant. Wagenknecht stated that "Her own view, after she was herself again, or perhaps one should say her report and interpretation of the view of her Voices in that matter, was that she had imperiled her soul to save her life: 'It was the fear of the fire which made me say what I did." 7 After her recanting she was sentenced from death to life of imprisonment. Of her being treated so softly, the English were furious. Joan had thought she was going 10 to be sent free but instead Cauchon sentenced her to perpetual imprisonment.

Elvis: Americas King :: essays research papers

America’s King Elvis Presley may be the single most important figure in American 20th century popular music. Not necessarily the best and certainly not the most consistent. But no one could argue with the fact that he was the musician most responsible for popularizing rock & roll on an international level. Viewed in cold sales figures, his impact was phenomenal. Dozens upon dozens of international smashes from the mid-'50s to the mid-'70s, as well as the steady sales of his catalog and reissues since his death in 1977, may make him the single highest-selling performer in history. More important from a music lover's perspective, however, are his remarkable artistic achievements. Presley was not the very first white man to sing rhythm & blues; Bill Haley predated him in that regard, and there may have been others as well. Elvis was certainly the first, however, to assertively fuse country and blues music into the style known as rockabilly. While rockabilly arrangements were the foundations of his first (and possibly best) recordings, Presley could not have become a mainstream superstar without a much more varied palette that also incorporated pop, gospel, and even some bits of bluegrass and operatic schmaltz here and there. His 1950s recordings established the basic language of rock & roll; his explosive and sexual stage presence set standards for the music's visual image; his vocals were incredibly powerful and versatile. Unfortunately, to much of the public, Elvis is more icon than artist. Innumerable bad Hollywood movies, increasingly caricatured records and mannerisms, and a personal life that became steadily more sheltered from real-world concerns (and steadily more bizarre) gave his story a somewhat mythic status. By the time of his death, he'd become more a symbol of gross Americana than of cultural innovation. The continued speculation about his incredible career has sustained interest in his life, and supported a large tourist/entertainment industry, that may last indefinitely, even if the fascination is fueled more by his celebrity than his music. Born to a poor Mississippi family in the heart of Depression, Elvis had moved to Memphis by his teens, where he absorbed the vibrant melting pot of Southern popular music in the form of blues, country, bluegrass, and gospel. After graduating from high school, he became a truck driver, rarely if ever singing in public. Some 1953 and 1954 demos, recorded at the emerging Sun label in Memphis primarily for Elvis' own pleasure, helped stir interest on the part of Sun owner Sam Phillips.

The Moonstone Essay -- essays research papers fc

Alexandra Lloyd What role did 19th Century popular serial novels such as Wilkie Collins’ The Moonstone play in British understandings of India? When Wilkie Collins first wrote The Moonstone in 1868, it was not published in the form available today, but was published in instalments in a popular Victorian magazine, All the Year Round. Upon its first publication it was eagerly read by the general British public, for its readership not only included the ruling and upper classes, but the cost and availability meant that a copy would have a wide circulation amongst all members of a household. The tale’s images and ideas of India thus reached many social groups in British culture. To Wilkie Collins, the gem, part of whose history we follow in The Moonstone, the novel of the same name, is the signifier of all things that humanity strives for, material and spiritual. He begins the novel by demonstrating that the history of the Moonstone gem is a history of thefts. In having his initial narrator state "that crime brings its own fatality with it" (p.6 Ch. IV of the prologue), Collins underscores the fact that nemesis attends every worldly expropriator of the Moonstone, which to its temporary European possessors is a bauble and a commodity but which to its faithful guardians, the Brahmins, is a sacred artefact beyond price. The Moonstone is never really English or England's, for the novel begins with an account of its various thefts. It opens in India with Rachel Verinder’s Uncle Herncastle's purloining the gem in battle (the opening lines are specifically "written in India"(p.1)) and closes with Murthwaite, the famed fictional explorer's, account (dated 1850) of the restoration of the gleaming "yellow Diamond"(p.466) to the forehead of the Hindu deity of the Moon "after the lapse of eight centuries"(p.466, "The Statement of Mr. Murthwaite"). The date of Murthwaite's account of the restoration of the diamond may be ironic, for in 1850 a Sikh maharajah, exiled from Indian after the Anglo-Sikh War of 1848-9, presented a gem, which is thought to be the ... ...l conciliation and transcendent faith if India were to arise from bloody, mutually destructive, strife and take her rightful place in the society of nations. Today, Collins's The Moonstone may be viewed not as a response to a national insurgency and/or European determination to keep the native in his place, but rather as a love story between two people who only come to see each other for what they are after misjudgements, misunderstandings, accidental and intended deceptions, and considerable self-sacrifice. Bibliography Page references to passages from The Moonstone come from the Oxford University Press, 1999 edition of the novel. Collins, Wilkie. The Moonstone. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999. Sutherland, John. â€Å"Introduction and A Note on the Composition† Wilkie Collins’ The Moonstone. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999. Stewart, J. I. M. â€Å"A Note on Sources.† Wilkie Collins' The Moonstone. Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1966, rpt. 1973. Pp. 527-8. Fraser, Antonia, ed. The Lives of the Kings and Queens of England. New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1975. Peters, Catherine. The King of the Inventors: A Life of Wilkie Collins. London, Minerva, 1991.

Clearing the Smoke with Education

Do you want to die? Do you want your children to experience early deaths? These questions run through my mind every time I witness people puffing away on their cigarettes. It genuinely hurts me to see parents smoking around their children. As if this isn†t enough to promote smoking among the young, there are a number of other elements that encourage them to smoke. As one writer explains, â€Å"They†ve learned from movies and advertising that smoking makes them more mature and sophisticated† (Chen 29). They would look anything but sophisticated lying in the morgue with family and friends hovering over, grieving. This case is closed! The cause of death is lung cancer at age 35. Also as another writer states, â€Å"Recently tobacco companies have found new ways to promote their products to youth. They support their sporting events and concerts, and even give them discounts on hip clothing† (Schwartz). We, the people, need to come up with a sensible solution on how to cut down on cigarette smoking amongst the young and old. There are many sensible solutions that could be tried. We could always pass a law stating complete prohibition of tobacco products, but as we look back at the 18th Amendment, prohibition of alcohol, that may not be such a wise choice. Some may say that prohibition should be passed on tobacco products because they are un-nutritional. That statement is a farce! This couldn†t be passed as a general rule because â€Å"†¦ there†s absolutely no nutritional reason for adding salt to food, or consuming beer, whiskey, butter, potato chips, and candy†¦ † (Williams 35). My view is if prohibition were to pass, that†s fine, but we should brace ourselves for a new generation for Al Capones. This is why it is time to take the initiative to educate our selves and the younger generation on the harmfulness of tobacco products. First of all, I think everyone has the common knowledge that â€Å"tobacco products are harmful†(Bowles 32). So why do people use them? The first puff of a cigarette is usually the result of curiosity or, perhaps, peer pressure when talking about a group of teenagers. I am challenging you to go out and ask as many regular smokers as you can if they read the Surgeon General warning on the back of a pack of cigarettes. I wish you luck in trying to find someone who will respond positively. So really people have no true knowledge about tobacco other than what is told to them. If people listen when they are told that tobacco products are harmful, maybe if we dig deeper and pull out specific consequences and real life stories, smokers would truly understand the danger they are in. As writer, Sally Chen states, the biggest danger would be â€Å"†¦ how hard it is to stop once you†ve started† (Chen 29). Chen also shares the thought that â€Å"[Tobacco is] an addictive drug that not only harms the user but everyone else through secondary smoke† (30). Also, because tobacco products are extremely un-nutritional, if we help to lower the amount of smokers, we will help to lower health care costs. This aspect of saving money is one that everyone would embrace! Perhaps if we educate people they will never start, hence avoiding the danger of addiction. Unfortunately, I will admit that there are hills to climb before we can start this education process. First, will people listen? Educating children wouldn†t be as difficult has educating adults. With children we could incorporate smoking education into their everyday schooling where they are forced to listen or they fail. I am proposing that there should be in depth information presented to the children about the consequences of smoking. For example, when I took a chemistry course, my instructor would preach on how careful you had to be when working with chemicals. He would use real life stories to explain what happens when we misuse the chemicals. A lot of the time I was terrified to use some of these chemicals for fear of getting burned or going blind. If we do the same when educating people about smoking, we may get somewhere in the fight to decrease the percentage of people who do smoke. We have to understand that we cannot make anyone listen, but if a child fails the course, it will be repeated until the child passes. When the child passes, it signifies that they know the information and, hopefully, that it sunk in. Some may argue that this â€Å"un-important† subject could take away from other school subjects. Let me ask you this, does learning about the human body in health class take away from other subjects. Or how about the learning of alcohol when taking a Safety Ed course? When you look at this objection as a whole, there are really no downsides to this option. However, it can be extremely beneficial. Sure, children need to pay attention to their English and Math courses, but will they be able to use them in the future if they are lying in a hospital bed with emphysema? I don†t think so. Incorporating smoking education into the everyday health classes is not a hazard, but rather a swift start to a smoke free America. However, with adults it may not be this easy. You cannot make adults come to school, as you can with children. Adults have to want to be educated in order to be educated. Newspaper advertisements are a good way to present the hazards of smoking. Catchy headlines and striking attention getters are a requirement if we want adults to read more than the first line. There could be advertisements posting dates and times on classes where you can go and learn about the effects of smoking. These classes are for people who want to quit, which is why newspaper articles are needed to make people think twice about smoking. Television commercials or, perhaps, infomercials are other alternatives to getting the public†s attention. Once people begin to understand what smoking is really about, if they are smart, they will want to quit. Another question that may arise is where are we going to get the money to fund these classes? Money isn†t a problem when smoking classes are being taught in the schools. Nothing changes in that sense. As for funding outside of school classes, such as those available to adults, there are some simple solutions to raising money. Getting support from larger anti-smoking organizations is always a plus and sometimes they will even provide donations to organizations that they find to be beneficial to people. Another way to raise money is through fundraisers. Setting up walk-a-thons and other health related events is always a good way to raise money, and it†s also a good way to make your organization well known. Putting taxes on cigarettes is not an option that should be forgotten. There are copious ways that these classes can be funded, so there is no ned for it to be made into a major issue. Education is a positive solution in preventing smoking among all age groups. If people are properly educated, the end result should be rewarding. As smoking decreases from generation to generation, the health of the American people will increase and life expectancies may rise also. Being human myself, I know that people will listen, as long as they are not forced to, for â€Å"†¦ mankind always struggles to be free† (Bowles 33). We need to approach this problem with gentleness, but with confidence that we can prevent the smoking problem from becoming bigger. The goal here is to help people enjoy long, healthy lives. Use your right to choose wisely, because you have the right to live!

Reflection on Culture Shock

Last class, the professor let us see a picture. The picture tells us unlike America, Canada likes salad; different people can go into its culture and do not need to throw its own culture, like a melting pot. I think this metaphor is very vivid. In my eyes, Canadian is more friendly and more kind than American. When I get on the bus, I see various people from different countries. And they talk about something together, very happy and harmonious. If we bump somebody at school accidently, you will find that before you say sorry to him, he will say sorry to you. At first I feel strange about that. I bump to him, why he don’t angry and say sorry to me? When I back home I ask my home stay mother, she said Canadian is very polite. If you get lost and ask a guy how to get the destination, he will tell you in detail as if he is afraid of you getting lost. Few days ago, after I had supper in East, I want to buy some Korea food, I know there has a supermarket near the restaurant, but I do not know how to get there. So I look around to think the way. Then a man came to me and asked: â€Å" Can I help you? You look confused just now. Where do you want to go? † I told him the name of the supermarket and he said follow me, I lead you to there. I appreciated him and got there. So from my experience, I like this diverse cultural atmosphere, I always think that I am a lucky dog I come to this big culture family!