Play Macbeth by WIlliam Shakespeare Essay Example for Free

Play Macbeth by WIlliam Shakespeare EssayThe play Macbeth was written by WIlliam Shakespeare in the 1600s. The whole play revolves around the theme of force-out. The theme of power is shown through inhalation, betrayal and vindicate using the symbolisms of sleep and blood.William Shakespeare used the issue of pipe dream to portray power in Macbeth. Macbeth was driven by his ambition of gaining power. Macbeths hunger for power made him blond to the atrocities and iniquitous deeds he was performing. In solve 1 Scene 7 Macbeth is stating that ambition was his only motivation to kill Duncan. I have no spurTo prick the sides of my intent,but only Vaulting ambition which oerleaps itself And falls on thother. Shakespeare used a supply metaphor to show the conflict of emotions in Macbeths mind.Macbeth thinks of his purpose to kill Duncan as a cavalry horsebut he has no motive to urge it into action so it stands still. Macbeths ambition is pictured as a rider springing into his sad dle who overleaps himself and falls on the other side of his steed.Macbeth means that his ambition to be king would inevitably lead him too far. The quote is effective in defining Macbeths drive to ambition. opposition is used by Macbeth to take the power from Duncan.William Shakespeare used the issue of betrayal to portray power in Macbeth. The issue of betrayal is shown throughout the play from the skip over when the Thane of Cawdor betrayed Duncan. Macbeth betrayed Duncan,his guest,king and relative by killing him to take the crown of Scotland. Macbeth betrayed his friend and colleague Banquo who stayed by his side when they were fighting against the Norwegians. Macbeth also betrayed Lady Macbeth his wife by dismissing her from testicle duties. In Act 1 Scene 7 Macbeth is telling lady macbeth to hide their knowings of duncans murder under an innocent spirit. Away,and mock the time with the fairest show, False face must hide what the false heart doth know. Shakespeare used an iambic Pentameter to lend dignity and presence to Macbeth after his devious plans to kill Duncan. The quote is effective in showing that Macbeth would betray his king and guest and act innocent with the devious plan in his mind and stoop low just to gain what he wanted. Betrayal is the weapon that Macbeth used to gain power.The issue of revenge was used by William Shakespeare to show power in Macbeth. Revenge was shown from the start of the play when the witches got revenge on the sailors wife who didnt give the witches any chestnuts. Banquo got his revenge on Macbeth when he came back as a ghost and frightened Macbeth as well as embarrassing him in front of other thanes. Macduff got his revenge by killing Macbeth who slaughtered his family. In act 4 scene 3 malcolm comforts macduff who heard that his family was slaughtered by Macbeth by telling him to confine revenge his medicine to cure his ruefulness. lets make us medcines of our great revengeTo cure this deadly griefMalcolm is telling Macduff to make the revenge on Macbeth, a medicine that would cure his grief. Malcolm is implying that revenge is sweet. The quote is effective in showing that macduffs revenge on Macbeth was to cure his own grief caused by Macbeth. Revenge was the issue which made one person to rise up or fall down. Blood was a symbolism which helped to symbolize the issues that shows power in Macbeth. The word blood occurs frequently throughout the play.In act 1 scene 2, the wounded captain told a report which described the spread over war. Blood was also related to guilt after after macbeth had murdered Duncan. Once Macbeth and lady Macbeth embark upon their murderous journey, blood comes to symbolize their guilt, and they begin to olfactory perception like their crimes have stained them in a way that cannot be washed clean. Blood symbolizes the guilt that sits like a permanent stain on the consciences of both Macbeth and lady Macbeth, one that hounds them to their graves. The enormity of Macbeths crime has awakened in him a powerful sense of guilt that will hound him throughout the play.

The Penitent Thief Essay Example for Free

The Penitent Thief EssayOne of the crucified criminals began to hurl maltreatment at Him, saying, Arent you the rescuer? Save yourself and us.-But the other one, rebuking him, replied, Dont you even fear matinee idol, since youre under the same condemnation? And we indeed justly, for we are getting what we deserve. But this man has make no subject out of place. Then he said, saviour, remember me when you come in your kingdom. saviour said to him, I solemnly declare to you, today you will be with me in Paradise. Brown (1976) noted that the story is peculiar of Luke. At first both robbers scoffed. They blasphemed the Holy One (Matthew 2744 Mark 1532).Then Lukes fib shows to us that One of the crucified criminals began to hurl abuse at Him, saying, Arent you the Christ?see morenight market essay pt3 Save yourself and us v. 39. It was one of the crucified criminals, that was harden to the last. Near to the cross of Christ, he railed on him, as others did. -But the other one, rebuking him, replied, Dont you even fear God, since youre under the same condemnation? This shows the conversion of the thief upon the cross, here Christ was crucified between two thieves, and in them were represented the different effects which the cross of Christ would have upon the children of men, to whom it would be brought near in the preaching of the gospel. They were in all criminals, all guilty before God. Now the cross of Christ is to some a savoir of life unto life, to others of death unto death. To them that perish it is foolishness, but to them that are saved it is the wisdom of God and the power of God (Henry,1991).Here we can see the extraordinary grace of God operating in the heart of the other criminal. For a curtly age his conversion was evident with the following turn of events when He rebuked his partner, and admitted his own guilt. Furthermore, he even admitted that he and his partner fully deserved the terrible death on the cross And we indeed justly, for we are getting what we deserve. Let us take notice that he does not say, You indeed justly, but We. Note, that true penitents acknowledge the rightness of God in all the punishments of their sin. Then we can see him confessing delivery boy, But this man has done nothing out of place Hendricksen, Williams (1979) explained that the other criminal who confessed Jesus had added his own testimony with respect to Christs innocence to all the other similar testimonies that had already been declared (by Pilate and Herod). God has done right, but we have done wickedly. The short account showed us that the penitent thief or criminal not only rebuked his partner, admitted his guilt, and confessed Jesus as Innocent One. He did one more thing Then he said, Jesus, remember me when you come in your kingdom (v. 42).Barnes (1997) mentioned that this is a phrase praying for favor, or asking him to grant him an interest in his kingdom. It implied that he believed that Jesus was what he claimed to be-the Messiah that, though he was dying with them, yet he would set up his kingdom and that he had full power to bless him, though about to expire. It is possible that this man might have heard him preach before his cruci amendion, and have learned there the nature of his kingdom or it whitethorn have been that while on the cross Jesus had taken occasion to acquaint them with the nature of his kingdom.When the penitent thief talk of Christs coming, it is impossible now to fix the precise idea which this penitent criminal had in mind. Whether it was that he expected that he would rise from the dead, as some of the Jews supposed the Messiah would or whether he referred to the Day of Judgment or whether to an immediate translation to his kingdom in the heavens, we cannot tell. All that we know is, that he fully believed him to be the Messiah, and that he desired to get hold an interest in that kingdom which he knew he would establish. The promise which follows shows that this prayer was answered and that Jesus is here assuring those who come to Him in repentance. Though it also tells us of His triumph over death in the cross Jesus said to him, I solemnly declare to you, today you will be with me in Paradise(v.43).This was a case of repentance in the last hour, the trying hour of death and it has been remarked that one was brought to repentance there, to show that no one should despair on a dying bed and but one, that none should be presumptuous and delay repentance to that awful moment. By this word we are given to understand that Jesus Christ died to open the kingdom of heaven to all penitent obedient believers.BIBLIOGRAPHYBarnes and Nobles.1997.Luke 23. Barnes Notes, Electronic Database. copyright (c) 1997 byBiblesoftBrown, David. 1976. The Four Gospels. USA The Banner of lawfulness TrustHendriksen, William. 1984. New Testament Commentary The Gospel of Luke. Great BritainMackays of Chatham Ltd.Henry, Matthew.1991.Luke 23.Matthew Henrys Commentary on the Who le Bible New Modern Edition, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1991 by Hendrickson Publishers,Inc.

Nt Was There Consensus In Post War British Politics Politics Essay

Nt Was There Consensus In Post War British regime Politics EssayIn the context of politics, the term consensus can be defined as a broad agreement exists between parties on chief(prenominal) areas of policy1. Despite early being employ as early as the 1950s, the word consensus came to prominence in 1975 when Paul Addison used it to describe the perceive similarities in the goals and policies of the alternating campaign and Conservative goernments in the post-war period. The end of World War II was arguably a catalyst for the implementation of ideas2which had been building for decades former to the outbreak of war. However, the supposed consensus which existed began to disintegrate in the late 1970s. Commentators, including Brian Harrison, hold up pinned its demise to 1975 and the appointment of Margaret Thatcher as Conservative troupe leader due to her struggle (against) those who move consensus3. Cruci onlyy, the notion of consensus has not been met with universal acceptan ce historians, including Pimlott, have suggested it was a myth, proposing that consensus is a mirage an illusion that rapidly fades the endingr one gets to it4. In spite of this however, it will be argued that thither was indeed agreement between the major parties on fundamental issues. However, the parties often differed in terms of attitude and approach, thus suggesting that consensus is too strong a word to describe this period. Concurring with Hennessy that post-war devisetlement5is perhaps a to a greater extent appropriate description, this essay will take a thematic approach, assessing the degree of consensus in regard to three key areas economic policy social policy and finally outside and defence policy.Perhaps the most significant area in which to measure the extent of political consensus is through the assessment of economic policy in the post-war period. Public ownership is an area in which, ideologicly at least, agitate and the Conservatives should have had divergent views. However, during the late 1940s, coal, gas, electricity, constrict and steel were all nationalised and, by the early 1950s, 20 per cent of industry and commerce was state-controlled6. Crucially, it was a Labour government responsible for the nationalisation statues in the 1940s while the Conservatives rebrinyed unconnected to such measures, pledging to reverse the statutes and return industry to the private sector. Whilst such plans were never realised, it would be too simplistic to make the assumption that this meant a consensus had been reached. Rather, a convince case can be made to suggest that a compromise, as opposed to agreement, was reached, with the Conservatives accepting public ownership unwillingly7because they sought to avoid causing further disruption. However unwilling the Conservatives may have been, it is clear that, at least until the early 1970s, public ownership remained a point of consensus between the 2 main parties the only significant change in thi s field occurred in 1964 with the renationalisation of iron and steel by Wilsons Labour government.Moreover, strategy towards employment is arguably another key aspect of post-war economic policy which initially points towards a consensus between the two main parties. Following the mass unemployment which characterised the inter-war period, the Second World War virtually eradicated this problem. Understandably, twain Labour and the Conservatives sought to maintain this at the end of the war, as outline in the White Paper on Employment in 1944 which stated that the maintenance of a high and stable level of employment8would be a key foregoingity for post-war governments. The belief in Keynesianism and commitment to full employment was maintained for three decades, with unemployment averaging less(prenominal) than 3 per cent between 1945 and 19709. Whilst at first this appears to be a clear indicator of consensus, a strong case can be made to suggest that both parties were motivated by pragmatism, accept that full employment was good politics10as it kept morale high and people in work, thus increasing their likelihood of re-election. Furthermore, it is clear that the Conservatives were arguably reluctant partners in the commitment to full employment. Whilst Labour declared its support for introducing measures in the private sector to jockstrap achieve full employment, the Conservatives showed a greater degree of reticence. Throughout the 1950s, the Conservatives pledged only to maintain11present policy, with Kavanagh suggesting this was merely an attempt to live down their reputation as the party of unemployment in the thirty-something12. Subtly, this suggests that the only real source of consensus was in the rhetoric of both parties who both claimed to be advocates of Keynesian economics despite, however, speaking it with different accents and differing emphasis13.What is more, a trey significant aspect of economic policy which, on the out-of-doors, sugg ests a strong degree of consensus in the post-war period concerns trade unions. Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, trade unions bear their important role in politics for another thirty years after the Labour defeat in 1951 because, as Peter Dorey asserts, both parties accept the desirability of working with, rather than against14trade unions. Demonstrating the extent of the consensus, in the late 1940s, the Conservative party asserted its acceptance of, and commitment to15trade unionism. A convincing case can be made to suggest that both parties had converging views on trade unions because they appreciated the symbiotic relationship between government and the unions. The scheme of the 1953 railway strike is a prime example of this the strike was prevented following close negotiations between the government and National Union of Railwaymen, demonstrating what could be achieved by close co-operation between the two16. However, it is important to assess the nature of the perceived conse nsus. Significantly, trade unions have been described by the likes of the historian Matthias Matthijs as Labours paymasters17due to the large similitude of party funding they provided. In contrast, the Conservatives were independent from the trade unions and were, thus, more critical of trade unionism, seeking to reform the way in which unions functioned. Therefore, it is clear that, despite share-out the same fundamental belief in the brilliance of trade unions, both parties had differing attitudes and approaches as a result of their conflicting interests.A further key area, which is inwrought to discuss in order to assess the extent to which there was a consensus in post-war British politics, is social policy, with item reference to the National Health Service, eudaemonia, and education. A strong argument can be made to support the assertion that there was indeed a great deal of consensus between the two main parties regarding the welfare state. By the fall of the Labour gover nment in 1951, the foundations were arguably complete but, crucially, if the newly-elected Conservative government had reversed Labours plans, the NHS and welfare state would not have come into existence. The very fact that the Conservatives chose to continue with Labours plans implies a mutual appreciation and acceptance of the key principles18which underpinned welfare pro plenty. In fact, every government, regardless of party, committed to maintaining and improve19the welfare state, except for the Heath government between 1970 and 1972. Moreover, following the publication of the Beveridge Report in 1942, it is plausible to suggest that the NHS and welfare state represented more than simply a consensus on policy instead, the report arguably profoundly influenced both parties and subtly suggests a consensus in their beliefs and principles. This assertion is supported by the likes of Rodney Lowe, who argues that there was now an understanding that government could assume a positive2 0role in improving the lives of its citizens.However, despite evidence of a strong, universal commitment to the welfare state between 1945 and 1974, there is evidence of greater divergence between the two parties over time, particularly with regards to the provision of social services and education. Crucially, in the 1960s, elements in spite of appearance the Conservative party began to doubt21the concept of universal welfare provision, believing instead that selectivity would both reduce welfare spending whilst also targetting those who needed help most. These divisions continued to grow throughout the 1960s and early 1970s as right-wing Conservatives began claim(ing) that high levels of welfare spending were () undermining the economy22. Similarly, with regard to education, on the surface at least, this appeared to be a source of consensus the Education Act of 1944 was conceived by the Conservatives but enacted by Labour, suggesting a common vision for secondary education in Brit ain. However, as noted by Nick Ellison, there was conflict between the two parties regarding comprehensive and private education. The division on this issue highlights the fundamental ideological differences which existed between Labour and the Conservatives Labours egalitarian perspective contrasted markedly with Conservative education policy23. Significantly, this illustrates the limitations of consensus, suggesting that party ideology was not compromised in the name of consensus.Finally, a terce broad area which requires discussion in order to determine the extent to which there was a consensus in post-war British politics is foreign and defence policy, with particular reference to Europe, decolonisation and the British Commonwealth. The debate surrounding European desegregation can be seen, on the surface at least, as evidence of consensus in the post-war period. Throughout the 1950s, both parties remained opposed24to various ventures, including the formation of the Coal and S teel community in 1950 and, later in 1954, the establishment of a European defending team Community. However, by the 1960s, both parties simultaneously came to accept that joining the European Economic Community was the best way to protect British interests25. Crucially, the issue of European integration highlights an important feature of the consensus whilst governments of both parties shared the same views on European integration, this was not necessarily representative of the opinions of party members, thus stressing the elitist nature of consensus politics and its disunite from party opinion26.Furthermore, the policy of decolonisation, achieved through the granting of independence to colonies and the subsequent transition to a Commonwealth, marked a clear departure from the policies pursued by Britain prior to the Second World War. Despite the drastic change in direction, both parties appear, in rhetoric at least, to have shared a common vision for the British Empire in the po st-war era. This is highlighted in their 1950 election manifestos in which both Labour and the Conservatives outlined their commitment to the Commonwealth and decolonisation. The similarity in the language used is striking Labour outlined its desire to strengthen27the association between nations while the Conservatives pledged to and promote and support28the Commonwealth. On the one hand, this can be perceived as highlighting the true extent to which both parties shared a united vision for post-war foreign policy. However, manifesto rhetoric does not eternally truly represent the views of the party. Anthony Seldon concurs with this, claiming that Labour was enthusiastic29while the Conservatives were more reluctant30about the prospect of decolonisation. However, there are several aspects where there is generally less debate regarding the extent of consensus between the main parties. For instance, both Labour and the Conservatives recognised the value of maintaining a nuclear deterre nt and were also of the same view regarding the importance of both Britains membership to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the maintenance of close links with the USA31. Thus, it is clear that, whilst there were key elements of consensus in post-war foreign and domestic policy, there are also several examples of disagreement.Overall, in assessing economic, social and foreign policy between 1945 and 1974, this essay has highlighted numerous points upon which Labour and the Conservative party have shared a common vision for post-war Britain. However, there are also many examples of disagreement and divergence between the main parties. Fundamentally, it is clear that both parties shared broadly similar goals and policies but differed in terms of their attitude and approach to achieving their shared vision. The key issue is one of semantics, however. Historians have differing definitions of consensus, making it all the more difficult to assess the extent to which there was a c onsensus in this period. If Addisons definition of consensus as a historically unusual degree of agreement over a wide range of economic and social policies32is accepted, then it is impossible to deny the strength of consensus in the post-war period. Crucially, as Seldon notes, the use of the word consensus can be unhelpful as it is ambiguous, with some historians referring to a consensus over policy33while others advocate the existence of a deeper, more profound commitment to a set of common beliefs and values34. However, despite the ambiguity of the word, the extent to which the two main parties agreed on fundamental issues during this thirty year period was arguably unparalleled. In spite of the disagreements which occurred, there were no major shifts in policy and the existence of a broad consensus, amongst the governing elite at least, is undeniable.

Changing Role of HRM: The NHS

changing Role of HRM The NHSThe Changing Role of Human Resource Management deep down the National wellness Service step at Home in an Increasingly Complex Environment.AbstractIn the background of a liberalspread programme of reform of the English National Health Service (NHS) this paper considers the changing get together of Human Resources Management (HRM) at heart the renovation, and reports a study of the changing situation of HRM in a large article of faith hospital. Empirical inquiry suggests that whilst the perception of the region and forcefulnessiveness of the HRM function roosts varied, if managed correctly it is po hug drugtially heart-to-heart of having a direct and beneficial impact upon service delivery.IntroductionThe reforms and modifys indoors the National Health Service (NHS) and its management of staff and services has all the way been well documented, however look for into the evaluation of these initiatives remains a neglected bea. Walshe su ggests that the reason behind this is that interrogationers do not have time to pains victoriously document and measure the progress and impacts of reform due to uninterrupted change generate by the initial bright ideas having been poorly thought out (2002106). Empirical research goat though attempt to offer an down the stairsstanding into the manifold relationships that know between individuals and how they interpret policies in spite of appearance a wider genial and cultural organisational context (Clarke 2006202) and provide insight into the NHS managerial culture to examine how it supports and facilitates the implementation of the recent boom of NHS reforms (Merali 2003550). Through incorporating a review of the literature that surrounds the changing role of HRM at bottom the NHS and empirically based qualitative research, a comprehensive insight into the reliable context and function of Human Resource Management within an NHS Trust is given. Whilst such research a llow for hopefully be of academic interest, maybe more significantly in order for the NHS and anformer(a)(prenominal) public services to be aware of the impact of reforms upon employees and olibanum on later(prenominal) service delivery, an awareness of HRM practices and their implementation should be a necessity for practitioners (Edgar and Geare 2005).The Current Context of the NHSthe NHS is unique. To name provided a few of its characteristics, it is in the public sector, exceptionally large in terms of its resources, activities and song employed domestic not international in its operations its tasks are infinitely varied, Byzantine and difficult its goals are unclear it is subject to an exceptionally wide range of policy-making and economic influences and it is an organisation uniquely and specially close to the hearts (metaphorically), minds and bodies (physically) of British people. It is run by special kinds of people too dedicated, in so far often ambitious, excee dingly qualified and skilled, often bloody-minded and usually tough-minded, yet also caring and even tender.(Gl over and Leopold 1996256)The NHS is the largest employer in Europe, employing over a million clinical, al-Qaida and support personnel (The Information Centre 2006). Whilst remaining close to the peoples heart in terms of its prepareing note values of a universal and comprehensive health care with its service delivery freely and equally available to all in society (Rivett 1997 Talbot-Smith and Pollock 2006), it is also close to the peoples pockets, with billions of pounds having been invested into the NHS in the last ten years (Appelby 2007). In addition to providing a health service to the population, it is also claimed that health and healthcare play a key role in generating social cohesion, productive workforce, employment and hence economic growth (Harrison 2005) and for this reason, as Bach notes, the politics agency to reform health care systems effectively is an issue that confronts insurance makers worldwide. (20011) As such, the challenges facing the NHS in terms of management, change and efficiency are important to an audience far wider than the UK and those who use and work within the organisation.In consuming near 50 billion per annum it is no wonder that successive British governments have attempted throughout the history of the NHS to dictate from the centre the minutia of the NHSs activities. A key worry however is that due to the hardity of the organisation itself and the politics that surround it, the methods used are considered by more to consist merely of a plethora of mingled targets and initiatives that confound those who are charged to implement them (Bradshaw 200390). In recognising the manifest public concern over the management, and expenditure, of the NHS both the previous Conservative and Labour governments and current impertinently Labour invest considerable time, and tax- feeders money, into attempting to impro ve the service. Yet it is considered increasingly apparent that in acting to health deficiencies by throwing money at them to see the quick, comfortable declaration of the political meshing that these inevitably cause (Duncan-Smith 2002), continual change for changes sake has become the focus at the expense of the ultimate telos that created the health service (Kelly and Glover 199631).Changes in Management of the NHSSince its conception, it is clear that the NHS has undergone many changes, both structurally and ideologically, but it is since the reforms of the early 1980s that the focus of NHS management has attempted to move away from obvious overtop and control techniques and towards local management with local responsibility and accountability not lone(prenominal) to the government but to the public that experience the service. It was subsequent to these reforms and as a result of the Griffiths Report and policies such as Promoting Better Health, that Working for Patients(1 989) was introduced which further accented the NHSs aims of better health care, pick, complaints procedures, long-suffering information, and overarching quality.Currently a number of policy and management initiatives are transforming the structure and organisation of the NHS (Truss 2003). New Labour are heralding the benefits of choice within the public services as a whole and many of the recent initiatives focus upon the customer and the need for services to attract these customers and the money that they bring, to the extent that within the NHS individual patient preference is determining where dividing line bequeath be placed (Bradshaw 200387). The logic behind this is claimed to be one of providing a new incentive for providers to improve customer responsiveness, for if money follows patients and patients have a choice of service the power is with the people rather than in the hands of a previous monopo be givenic service provider (ibid). Such market incentives are unpromp ted NHS hospital trusts to perform more like businesses, with a unified focus based upon meeting the demands of all the various stakeholders, and thus requiring distinct business strategies which allow account for all aspects of the organisation and services provided and ultimately enhance their cash flow (Pollock 2004218).With the establishment of foundation garment Trusts, NHS Trusts which are perceived as high performers can gain introduction Status, thus becoming corporate bodies, free from the controls of the strategical health authorities and accountable only to those whom they represent their own managers, staff, patients and local residents (Pollock 2004). The persuasion behind this is seemingly one of moving away from what has been perceived as a monolithic, in expeditious bureaucracy to a system of individual services which are autonomous healthcare provider organisations that could be flexible, responsive and innovative (Walshe 2002109). As the Department of Health statesThe Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003 establishes NHS Foundation Trusts as independent public benefit corporations modelled on co-operative and mutual traditions. Public benefit corporations are a new type of organisation, specially authentic to forge the unique aims and responsibilities of NHS Foundation Trusts. NHS Foundation Trusts exist to provide and develop services for NHS patients according to NHS principles and standards and are subject to NHS systems of inspection. Transferring ownership and accountability from Whitehall to the local community means that NHS Foundation Trusts are able to tailor their services to best meet the needs of the local population and tackle health inequalities more effectively.(DoH 2007)Walshe considers the introduction of Foundation Trusts as providing organisational stability due to them reducing the ability of future Secretaries of State for Health to reorganise the NHS every two or three years and thus al lowing meaningful service improvements to take place (2002109). til now, it is also recognised that this in turn could potentially cause problems as there will be no guarantee of good management and governance resulting in the replacement of one set of dysfunctional behaviours with anformer(a) (ibid).Many interpret Foundation Trusts as forcing NHS trusts into having to respond flexibly to market forces exchangeablely to hole-and-corner(a) sector organisations, due to the public and political interest in the service it must also contend with the constant barrage of audits, inspections, monitoring, league tables and an increasingly demanding and knowledgeable public (Talbot-Smith and Pollock 2006). The NHS today can therefore be seen as remaining seemingly attached to the ideologies of the business world, and current government emphasis towards modernisation suggests that the premise remains dominantly thatno organisational context is immune from the uncertainties of unrelenting ch ange and that, as a result, all organisations public, private and voluntary need to develop similar norms and techniques of conduct if they do not do so, they will not survive. Thus all organisations need to look to current best practiceGovernment services are brought forward using the best and most modern techniques, to match the best of the private sector.(Du Gay 2003676)These government initiatives reflect notions that by improving management and employee satisfaction, the NHS could become both an efficient and effective business, able to satisfy these consumerist needs of the customer. For example, the policy Improving Working Lives aimed to advocate NHS employers to develop a range of policies and practices which support personal and professional development and enable employees to achieve a healthy work-life balance (DH 2000). These management strategies have been labelled within this sector as New Public Management (NPM) and are considered to mark a clear differentiation from the previous strategies of an administered service to a managed service(Bach, 2000928). Flynn argues that NPM clearly turn backs all of the changes that have occurred within the NHS following the reorganisations and new rhetorics of the 1980 reforms and the essential components that NPM consists of are clearly visiblemore active and accountable management explicit standards, targets and measures for action a stress on results, quality and outcomes the break-up of large units into smaller decentralised agencies more competition and a contract culture more flexibility in the terms and conditions of employment increased managerial control over the workforce and efficiency in resource al stead.(199128)With the introduction of this managerialist emphasis in the NHS it has been suggested that there has been an enthronisation of faith in managers. This faith has been based on the supposition that the language, techniques and values of managerialism were, and are, the only way actua lly to deliver change thus an unparalleled position of power and authority has been placed upon public managers (Exworthy and Halford 19995-6). Such managerialism, and its values and beliefs is based upon the assumption that better management will prove an efficient solvent for a wide range of economic and social ills (Pollitt 19931), and in the case of the NHS these ills are well documented in terms of a lack of capital and thus a shortage of resources yet with a need to provide an increasingly efficient and quality driven service.However, the notion of managerialism must be used with caution. corporate trust in managers can be perceived as politicians having faith in their own management in that they have failed to ever relinquish control, kinda taking even more tight control through the implementation of numerous health policies and operational procedures. Such a need to keep close reigns on the management of the NHS suggests a deep mistrust in the capabilities of the public se rvants within it rather than a desire to allow it its freedom.Overall it is clear that the NHS is very complex for a range of reasons not least because of its complexity and variety of its duties, the range of skills it needs to draw on, the difficulty of reconciling competing priorities, the cost of healthcare, and the way the NHS has been stitched into the political fabric of England. From an organisational perspective too it is a hybrid mix of hierarchy, bureaucracy, market and network. To efficiently manage such an organisation is therefore a highly complex and unrelenting challenge.HRM in the NHSThe role of HRM pre-reforms was mainly focused on administration and support with a lack of defined responsibility. Named Personnel rather than HR, the function was used to deal with public staffing issues of terms and conditions of employment, payment and holiday options, individual and local staffing issues and the well known hiring and firing that it remains renowned for. From Perso nnel Managers came HR professionals, HR departments, and increasingly HR directors with voting rights on the Executive Boards of NHS Trusts. This has been considered a result of the changes that stemmed from the Griffiths reforms and continue today, and due to a particular focus on corporate business ideals, from which a clear, but nonetheless controversial role was carved out for a function that dealt with the management of the increasingly important resource of people.the effect of the reforms was to stimulate management to review custom and practice and historical staffing patterns, with a view to achieving better value for money. In this context the HR function was caught up in the continuing tension between those health care professionals who focused primarily on patient care, and those managers responsible for cost-effective use of resources but trammel by a lack of clinical knowledge(Buchan 2000320).The current role of HRM in the NHS, its status within the service, and its s uccess as an effective function has become curiously important at this time where human resources are considered the key to not only improved staff performance but also competitive wages (Bach 2001 Clarke 2006). Despite the managerialist rhetoric that clearly surrounds the drive for increasing the role of HR, on a more simple note it is little wonder that such an emphasis has been placed upon the HR function considering the cost of staffing in the NHS of the 19 billion cash increase in the NHS from 2004/5 to 2007/8 the increases in staff pay swallowed up around 34% (Appelby 2007). To add to this, the growing importance of the function is particularly clear in situations where individual NHS trusts are cosmos granted great financial and operational independence within the increasingly competitive, consumer driven market that the government is creating through such initiatives as Foundation Trust Status. Barnett et als research demonstrated that the HR function within a Trust evo lved through these changes in political and organisational focus and generated a new focus on tote productivity and on value for money from which a new and strategic approach to the management of the workforce was required and as a result they refractory to embrace the principles of human resource management(199631).So with the acknowledgement that service funding follows customers, customer satisfaction is linked to quality of service, and quality of service is linked to the skills, motivation and commitment of service staff, within such a labour intensive human service industry the role of HRM is imperative (Bach 20011 Pollock 2004).The Changing Role of HRM in the NHSYet HRMs move from an administrative role to a function that potentially impacts upon corporate strategy has been my no means plain sailing. ham succinctly locates a key basis for conflict within the NHS in his suggestion that there is continuing tension between the role of doctors in decision making treatmentand the attempt by managers and politicians to influence priorities at a national and local level (199696). There is much literature on the dominance of professionals and the conflict with managers within public sector organisations and in particular the NHS (Kember 1994 Skjorshammer 2001 Atun 2006 Hoggett 2006) and it is clear that their dominance remains not only because of their unique skills and knowledge but also because of their obvious importance within the service (Kelly and Glover 1996). However, within the changing NHS, the dominance of the professionals is subject to more and more management constraints, both on their resources and their autonomy and whilst some borrowing of management expertise is recognised by the professional groups their patience reaches a limit when this becomes encroachment on their professional competence, resulting inevitably in conflict (Ackroyd 1996).Managers within the NHS are marked by a poor image, often both within the organisation and by membe rs of the public. Meralis study found that the majority of the managers were convinced that the general public believed that doctors and nurses were the only professionals in the NHS who are motivated by a desire to serve/provide care to society (2003558) and similarly within this research the public perception of management within the NHS was consistently negative Theres too many managers as it is, The NHS should swap most of the managers for doctors and nurses, then there wouldnt be time lag lists, If you can find out what the management do then thats an achievement in itself. Overall it seems that management, especially in a context of attempting to rationalise the NHS and incorporate business ideals of value for money and efficiency which often results in cost-cutting through redundancies and closing services, are deemed by non-managers to hold an entirely different ideology that is a far cry from caring for people. Yet the function of management is well placed within the NHS, and its conflict with the medical professionals whilst often cited can appear over-emphasised.However with HRM now shifting in its role from administration and support to management and strategy at the same time as organisational change that is producing a complex and uncertain surround for many within the NHS, the HRM function faces a hostile crowd. This symmetry between the focus upon business and private sector ideals and the rise in HR as a function in its own right, can begin to explain perhaps the antagonism that many within the NHS express towards the HR departments. Those within the NHS who hold close to their hearts the original ideals of the NHS and their role within it rather than fighting against government initiatives and the corporate business world influence instead could hold to account the one group which was created out of these initiatives the HR function. Bryson et al in acknowledging both the power cope between doctors and management and the increasing role of HRM note that, with a complex organisational strategy that seemingly has no clear direction and with few colleagues from the traditional management functions to align with, HRM are far from being seen as any part of the NHS tribal club (199653).Through becoming part of the Corporate Business Team and gaining responsibility and a potential role of power within the new NHS environment the HRM function has run into conflict. Starting off on the wrong-foot, as Bach explains, HR within the NHS must struggle with the constant accusation that it is illegitimate as its role does not obviously contribute to patient care(Bach 200112). It would also be expected that any role within the NHS service that had the role of scrutinising staff and reviewing quality of care when they were not medically knowledgeable would come to blows with the medical professionals, especially when the latter has enjoyed far-reaching autonomy and control in the service since its beginning (Buchan 2000). However, to also find few compatriots within the rest of management due to its timely rise with organisational change which has rationalised and constrained many other departments, many HR departments have been left in a no-mans land.There are few who would debate the continued dominance of the medical profession within the NHS, nor the importance of it remaining in such a position. However, their importance within the NHS as a business is becoming more complex. Management are increasingly holding the power to dictate for example the working patterns of doctors and they have the ability to withhold or reward resources depending upon clinicians abilities to achieve targets. And, with the introduction of Foundation Status, Trusts are running a competitive business within which all are dispensable, as Pollock describesin the past, doctors were free to speak out in fact they were under a moral obligation to do so if they felt it was in the interests of their patients. In a business culture, howe ver, loyalty is said to be due preceding(prenominal) all to the shareholders. Where the survival of the hospitals depends on massaging the figures and performance ratings, doctors who expose the inadequacies in the system or rail against underfunding or lack of resources are seen to be criticising their own hospitals(2004203)With performance targets increasingly dominant in the NHS, to the extent that funding, resources and Foundation Status can be given or taken away accordingly, accountability not only for service provision but also initiatives such as Improving Working Lives have meant that HRM can also take a large piece of the managerial high-ground (Givan 2005). In addition, with the record investments in staffing and government focus upon improving service delivery through effective people management, HRM has been given legitimacy within the NHS through the Governments HR in the NHS Plan (DoH 2002) which represented the NHSs first generic HR strategy(Truss 200349) and more r ecently NHS Foundation Trusts A Guide to Developing HR arrangements which highlighted the importance of the HRM function within Foundation Trusts (DoH 2006). With these initiatives in place the effective functioning of HRM is a measurable target it matters not whether the medical professionals or other managers accept or value the role of HRM. This not only provides the HRM function with a place within the NHS, it gives it the opportunity to adopt a more strategic role within the new public management it is no longer consigned to a reactive and administrative role, interpreting and applying national rules, and can be proactive (Corby 1996 cited in Truss 200349).A number of commentators have assumed that changes in the role and status of HRM in the public sector merely follow orientations developed in the private sector (Buchan 2000 Thomason 1990). Just as the NHS as an organisation can be seen to have taken on private, corporate business strategies, so too it is considered that pri vate sector HR management techniques were established (Buchan 2000320). Distinct similarities can indeed be seen between the developments of HRM in the private sector and what is before long expected of the HRM function within the NHS as Begley and Boyd summariseThe declining relevance of the command-and-control approach to business has extended into the roles played by HRM. Many companies regard their employees talents as providing a significant competitive advantage. they expect their HR professionals to formulate creative, flexible programs and policies to woo, develop, and retain that talent.(200012)This apparent mirroring of private sector HR techniques within the public sector environment has met with various hostile reactions, with accusations of public managers being forced to adopt private sector HRM styles with the possible dangerous result that such language will cause the public domains to neglect their values (Boyne, Jenkins et al. 1999411).Yet others, and especially s ome senior HR professionals within the NHS, take a different view. For them, the introduction of more efficient people management is an important and necessary development, one that is sorely needed in an environment where people are not only the service providers, but also the product and customer of healthcare services. The following empirical research and analysis demonstrates that far from being left out in the cold, the HRM function is capable of rising through an NHS Trust, effectively implementing government initiatives as well as producing its own, and finally reaching the position of designing and directing corporate strategy. Whilst the perceptions of HRM by other Trust members may vary, this is not necessarily a hindrance, but perhaps an organisational necessity that must be negotiated.MethodologyThe paper reports a research task that has followed the changing role of the HRM function within a large teaching NHS Trust (herein called The Trust) in the UK. It reports on in -depth interviews and observations of a number of meetings involving staff from across the hospital hierarchy. The Trust is facing many changes, both in its financial governance and organisational practices. Recently it was granted Foundation Trust status and, as a result, a competitive drive for value for money and the need to develop efficient recruitment and retention practices have become key issues.Despite only requiring assenting to staff, rather than patients, researching an NHS Trust proved more difficult than originally anticipated. Currently researchers wanting to interview NHS staff are required to gain NHS Ethics committal approval to the same degree that clinical researchers must do when requesting clinical trials on patients. This can be seen as associated with the increased awareness of the importance and value of hospital staff and their working lives at all levels of the organisation, requiring the researcher to ensure that the research is valid and that staff wil l not be adversely affected. It could be suggested that by not distinguishing between staff and patients and the need for ethical approval in research the NHS has adopted the understanding that to ensure quality of service and patient care staff must also benefit from an improved working life.1The empirical research took place over a period of nine months within the one NHS Trust and included in-depth interviews with twenty-two members of The Trusts staff and observations of key meetings with staff from across The Trusts hierarchy in attendance. A Trust Executive P.A. provided a list of thirty-five potential participants for the interviews, ranging from Assistant Service Managers, Junior Doctors, Ward Managers, Nurse Specialists and Senior Staff (including members of the Trust Executive) who were contacted via email communication. Assurances were given that these participants had not been cherry picked for their perceptions of HR or management initiatives (which was reflected in int erview content at times).The interviews were conducted either within an office provided by The Trust or at a location convenient to the interviewee, often a staff room or their office. Each interview was recorded, with the participants consent, and transcribed in full, with all distinguishing information such as names, take aim details of roles and personal information destroyed to ensure anonymity, in accordance with the Ethics Approval criteria. The Director of Workforce and Corporate Affairs was interviewed twice, before subsequent interviews took place and again once interviewing was completed.The three meetings observed (Patient and Staff Experience Meeting Executive Governance Committee for Clinical Effectiveness and Strategy consultive Group) were chosen through knowledge of the different staffing groups that would be in attendance in order to attempt to gather information as to how different groups interacted. By chance observation of the RCN Clinical Leadership Programme Presentation to the Patient and Staff Experience Group was also possible. Notes were taken during the meeting regarding staff interaction, comments virtually policies and Trust issues, though individual names and some meeting content was not recorded due to either anonymity or irrelevance.Due to the highly qualitative nature of this research and in valuing the need to attempt to provide an accurate and indepth understanding into the perceptions of those interviewed and how these relate to the role of HRM and its effectiveness, the following presentation and discussion of the research will use direct quotations, some at length, to highlight issues. It is felt that it is important to allow these views to be expressed clearly and as distinct from over interpretation thus enabling as honest a reflection of the current context as possible. In order to ensure the anonymity of participants they will usually be identified only by their generic role within The Trust.Discussion of Empirical ResearchThe research demonstrates that perceptions of HRM within The Trust remain varied, a stance that is not unknown to those within the roleI think lots of different people have lots of different perceptions. I think a lot of managers are starting to see the value of HR and what HR can actually offer themOther managers would probably but think we are only here to make their lives difficult and not let them get on with the job but those are the people who perhaps have never really had any involvement or used HR to its capacity (Human Resources Staff 1)This suggests that HRM within the NHS remains in a similar situation to when Currie and Procter researched the role of personnel within the NHS and highlight the differing perceptions that the personnel department, and its subsequent human resource strategies, had within a trustBoth executive directors and core level managers see an advisory role as appropriateThey differ in their views as to whether the emphasis of the personnel d epartment should lie with operational or strategic issues in an advisory rolemiddle managers view the personnel department unfavourably because it is distant from the operational aspects of health care(1998383-384)Indeed, many of the participants found it difficult to summarise the role of HRM and during the research the role was often described as personnel or medical staffing. This lack of clearly defined role for some within The Trust may, as suggested by the HR staff, stem from minimal contact with the HRM department, other than in specific situations such issues with recruitment and pay-role2. frown grade staff will still see the HR as a sort of mini police force within the organisation and if you do anything naughty you get disciplined and I guess a lot of the lower grade staff dont have a real idea of what the HR department does( Human Resources Staff2)Perhaps another reason could be the constantly changing title of the head of the HR department. Initially The Trust employed a Director of HRM but as the Director developed and expanded the remit and function of the HR departments role his title developed to one of Director of Workfor

The Philosophy of Gift Giving

The Philosophy of Gift GivingThe introduce is primarily about the dealingships being transacted, about the mountain involved in these transactions quite an than the notice well-favored and receiving of things ( carrier wave 1995 19). Write an essay evaluating the role of alienable and untransferable goods in underscoring the importance of exchange transactions.In order for us to take an in sagacity look at the idea of contribute bounteous and the relationships involved in such a ceremonial transaction we moldiness first look at the people that are involved in the transaction. Not only must we look that the people but we must also focus on the tie beam between people and the actual aim itself. crew cut himself states in his essay Gifts and Commodities that Clearly there is much more in our relationship to ends than sheer service program (Carrier, 1995. 1), and thus proving to us that there we have a much more intimate relationship with material objects than we first i magined. This fond regard is deep enough that we horizontal need material objects to define who we are sometimes, for example if a punk rocker claims to be a punk rocker he must correct according to the social image of a punk rocker and from there we can assume that somebodys identity and personality as a punk rocker. Carrier says himself that The corollary is that objects signify status identity and so constitute a claim to status-group membership on the f only in of those who have them (Carrier, 1995. 2). Another major concept that is involved with both the relationship between humans and material objects and with the ceremonial act of gift giving is reciprocity. It shows us and defines to us the strength of the bond between people and material objects.It goes without a doubt that humans have a natural affiliation with objects as we all have a material need and it is by dint of these objects that we can control these needs. Carrier states in his essay Gifts and Commodities th at Humans do have material needs, and objects can satisfy them (Carrier, 1995. 1). As I stated ahead we need material objects for a variety of reasons, cardinal of which is for them do define and show our order of magnitude both our identity and our personality. It is for this reason that we have such a deep linkup with material objects, because as long as society continues to exist so will the need for material objects. However this essay, nor is Carriers essay, about the connection between people, identity and material objects but instead, as Carrier puts it, we are going to investigate the ways that objects are implicated in personal relationships, rather than seeing them in mass structures of meaning and identity (Carrier, 1995. 10). In order to get a full understanding of such a topic we must first take a look at what is known as reciprocity, reciprocity is a term used to describe the exchange of goods and labour. It was separated into a few separate terms know as, infer reciprocity, balanced or Symmetrical reciprocity and negative reciprocity. The term which most applies to the ceremony of gift giving is generalized reciprocity as it is described as the event of giving or sharing. It is defined as when a legitimate individual shares his expertise with other individual in his society who is in need of his goods or labour without expecting anything in return. However this does not define the event as reciprocal as the giver expects nothing in return, but this interaction is indeed reciprocal as the individual who gives his goods is overcome by such satisfaction in giving his services, and the fact that it creates a social bond between the giver and the receiver and that is what he attains in return for his goods or services. In modern day society this seems to occur mainly between parents and children or within married couples as there seems to be a certain amount of trust and social interaction involved between the people within the event. It is through these transactions with other people that also help define our identity, not just that material object itself. Carrier himself says that Indeed, in some ways transaction creates the very identities of those involved in it. (Carrier. 1995. 35) These, reciprocal events help define our relationships with other people, as I give tongue to before through these events we can gain social bonds with people but we also need certain amount of social interaction with that same person before we can involve ourselves in such a transaction.What is also interesting about these transactions, and indeed very much present in the generalized reciprocity that I defined earlier, is that we are indeed a selfish race. We only give gifts so that we may receive something in return. In the condition of generalized reciprocity we only give our goods and labour so that it can be returned in the feeling of gratitude and the formation of a social bond. Marcel Mauss states in his essay The Gift that gi fts are never free and as a selfish race we will always expect something in return as we only give so that we may receive. Mauss probably most famous question raised by his essay The Gift was What power resides in the object given that causes its recipient to pay it back?, (Mauss, 1990. 3) an the answer seems to be simple enough. The Power lies not with the object itself but rather with the unspoken contract that it creates with the people involved in the transaction. The giver does not only give away some material abject but also gives away a part of themselves with that object this creates a strong bond between the giver and the item he gave away. Mauss himself says that the objects are never completely separated from the men who exchange them (Mauss, 1990. 31). Because of this bond between the gift and the giver the receiver has a certain obligation to return the favour to the giver in the form of a gift of the same, if not better value. Although the receiver is not under any law to return in such a manner and it is solely up to him if he returns the favour, the trouble to reciprocate often results in the loss of social status and trust amongst his peers. Mauss describes an even greater consequence to the failure of the act of reciprocation, in Polynesia that failure to acquit by the obligations of reciprocity results in the loss of mana which is a persons spiritual energy and source of power and wealth. Mauss breaks down the ceremonial event of gift giving into ternion separate stages and obligations giving, receiving and reciprocating. Giving is the step that is needed to maintain a social relationship, receiving is the act of acknowledging and accepting that social relationship and failure to accept results in the rejection of that relationship, and live is reciprocating as it shows ones honour and social status within the society. We can see this throughout the ethnography of the Kula ring and the Kula shells, whereby giving the shells away is just as classic as receiving them for they are not meant to kept forever but instead passed on.Is saying this however we must also look at the concept of inalienability in reference to gift exchange as it plays a major part in both Mauss essay and the ceremonial act of gift-giving. An unassignable object is something that cannot be exchanged from one individual to another. quite they have to be sold and the rights of ownership are then passed to the new owner, the object has therefore become an alienated item to the original owner as they no longer have the rights to that object however the concept of free gifts is a slightly different one. Instead of the owner selling the object and becoming completely alienated from the item given, the gift instead renders the item under loan. Therefore the original owner corpse the rightful owner and this rightful ownership has the power to compel the recipient to return the favour. Carrier points out the same concept in his essay where he says th at if he buys a bottle of wine in s hop it is now his and can do what he wants with it, including pouring it down the drain, however if his perplex buys him a bottle of wine it is her choice for him and becomes a token of her affection towards him and in turn this makes it a part of her identity, he therefore could not but throw it out like his own bottle of wine. This identity that we find in the object is also what Mauss calls the hau. The hau is what is known as the spirit of the gift, it lives inside the gift and has a deep connection with its original owner, and therefore the object is constantly trying to return to its rightful owner, increasing the obligation of the receiver to return the motility of gift-giving. Because the gift is an inalienable object and the rights of ownership still belong to the gift giver, the favour must be returned by the receiver as the act of gift giving creates a contract between the people involved and that in turn creates a sort of gift givin g social debt that must be repaid by the receiver. So then according to Mauss, if the free gift is not returned buy the receiver the act of gift giving therefore becomes a contradiction as if the gift is not returned it cannot create social ties because the demands of the obligations are not met. Mauss therefore believes that social solidarity is achieved through the concept of gift giving and the social relations that it creates.Carrier also raises the issues of alienation within his own essay as he tackles the concepts of the self and alienation. He shows us how some commodities and objects cannot be alienated from our selves as they are too closely linked with our identities. For example Carrier supposes to us that we cannot put our right to vote up for sale, as that is our constitutional right as a citizen to execute, and Carrier also says Equally, one cannot sell ones decision on how to vote. (Carrier, 1995. 29) What he means here is that we cannot be told how or who to vote f or in an resource by somebody else in exchange for money. However Carrier does state that One can . . . give that decision as a gift (Carrier, 1995. 29). Carrier goes on to tell us that one cannot sell oneself as that would mean that we are putting ourselves up for slavery, which realistically one cannot do as one cannot alienate themselves from oneself, but one can sell ones labour ability. And again the same can be said for selling oneself sexually, as that is considered prostitution and guilty by the law, but one can give themselves sexually as a gift. What Carrier is trying to say is that one cannot be alienated from all aspects and the identity of their life, but through the act of gift giving, we can lend our insights, experiences and goods to our peers and those who need them in our society. But Carrier goes on to talk about these inalienable qualities and how they relate us to one another and not to our objects. Carrier says My mother and I are linked by what our society s ees as inalienable attributes. (Carrier, 1995. 31). What he is saying is that the blood bond between himself and his mother defines them and imposes on all(prenominal) of the obligation to interact and transact in certain ways and under certain circumstances. This then in turn can relate to the interactions between a gift giving relationship. Thus, gift transactors are social persons defined in epochal ways by their inalienable positions in a structure of personal social relations that encompasses them. (Carrier, 1995. 31). And thus showing us how gift transactions help define who we are.In Carriers essay Gifts and Commodities he states that in many societies dominated by gift exchange that structure of kinship provides the basis of peoples identities and their relations with each other, and thus their obligations to transact with each other. What Carrier is trying to say her is that rather than our objects entirely defining who we are, the act of gift giving from person to person may be more important to our identities than the actual object we are giving. The relationship between the giver and the receiver is of utmost importance to their social relationship, the item in this context seems of little importance, for it is through these acts of gift giving and the obligations that ensue the actions that help us build our social relations. This is helped along by the inclusion of alienated objects and inalienable objects within a gift transaction, for both come with certain obligations where we sell and item so it becomes alienable or the object is entirely inalienable to us, both are connected to the relationship between the giver and the receiver, and building a social relationship between the two. It was Mauss who claims that it is these gift giving ceremonies that build the social solidarity of a culture.

Technology - Progress of Interstellar Travel :: Exploratory Essays Research Papers

The Progress of Interstellar Travel The (un)likelihood of extraterrestrial visitation is probably one of the most debated aspects of the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis, the answer being an essential component to the harshness of the ETH. After only, the assumed unlikeliness of interstellar fail has become the cornerstone of those who resist the ETH as an explanation for UFOs. So, does extraterrestrial visitation necessarily require all sorts of unlikely science, or is it possible to accomplish interstellar travel using conventional wisdom? If we at once admit the foolishness of these perennially suggested impediments to sensation flight, we will be on our way to understanding that interstellar space does not need a bridge too far. Interstellar travel may still be in its infancy, just adulthood is fast approaching, and our descendants will someday see childhoods end1. Opinions on the practicality of interstellar travel diverge, but the ne gative and positive opinions are seen to stem primarily from the differences in background of those people doing the studies. SETI researchers think that the degree of dispersion of stars throughout the galaxy, combined with the limitations of interstellar travel as we understand general relativity, effectively preclude the feasibility of extraterrestrial visitation, thus believing that any extraterrestrial intelligence would only be contagion their love and good wishes to us. The other group, largely composed of physicists and engineers involved in propulsion research, tends to believe that interstellar travel is difficult, but not a barrier, or not difficult at all once technology progresses 1. Not surprisingly, the latter choice appears to be the most defensible. Quite a number of gifted designs have appeared in print, describing various methods of getting mankind to the stars. These include such projects as the star probe Daedalus, a r obot interstellar vehicle designed by members of the British Interplanetary Society which uses nuclear fusion power, or interstellar ramjets which scoop up their fuel between the

Heart Of Darkness :: essays research papers

In this paper I will show the effect the "Heart of Darkness" had on Kurtz in the stages prior to, the Kurtz in transition, and at the end of his journeying.&9The Kurtz prior to his journey was a man with a noble heart. We learn about Kurtz prior to his journey by auditory modality to the conversations Marlow has when he returns from Africa. Marlow talked with Kurtz cousin, an old colleague, and his Intended. Kurtz "was a universal genius" (244). The old colleague told of "how the man could talk. He electrified large meetings. He had faithHe could get himself to opine anything" (244). Marlow fully agreed with this state workforcet. Marlow said, "This is the reason why I affirm that Kurtz was a remarkable man. He had something to say. He said it" (241).&9He was one of those men who you had to admire. You HAD to love him, if you knew him. The Intended said, "she had been worthy of him" (248). She speaks of him as almost a god. The Intended pro mises Marlow she was worthy of him, she had all his noble confidence. Their engagement wasnt approved because Kurtz wasnt pixilated enough. Kurtz had the ability to draw "men towards him by what was best in them" (249). This is the gift of the great. Kurtz was a great man. He was a born leader.&9The Kurtz prior to the journey seems to be a man with a heart of gold. "His goodness shone in every act" (250). But in actuality his soul was conformed by society and the " specimen voice of a kind neighbor" (206). He was a man with principles just because principles were all around him. Kurtz was dependent on that kind neighbor to lionise him noble.&9The Kurtz in transition was a man with a heart that understands what is going on in the jungle. Kurtz is described as a first-class agent, a very remarkable person, who will go very far. Kurtz drew a painting of a woman, draped and blindfolded, carrying a lighted torch. The painting had a downplay that was somber-almo st black. Her movements were stately, and the effect of the torch-light on the face was sinister (169). Kurtz had painted this while he was at the Central Station. This painting is Kurtz view of the colonization of Africa. The blindfold refers to the lack of deal that the advancing civilization going into Africa has.