Plutarchs Influence on Shakespeare and Other Writers of the Sixteenth Century Essay Example for Free

Plutarchs Influence on Shakespeare and Other Writers of the Sixteenth Century Essay The influence of the writings of Plutarch of Chaeronea on English literature might well be made the subject of one of the most interesting chapters in the long story of the debt of moderns to ancients. One of the most kindly and young spirited, he is also one of the most versatile of Greek writers, and his influence has worked by devious ways to the most varied results. His treatise on the Education of Children had the honour to be early translated into the gravely charming prose of Sir Thomas Elyot, and to be published in a black-letter quarto imprinted, as the colophon tells us, in Fletestrete in the house of Thomas Berthelet. The same work was drawn upon unreservedly by Lyly in the second part of Euphues, and its teachings reappear a little surprisingly in some of the later chapters of Pamela. The essay on the Preservation of Good Health was twice translated into Tudor prose, and that on Curiosity suffered transformation at the hands of the virgin queen herself into some of the most inharmonious of English verse. The sixteenth century was indeed steeped in Plutarch. His writings formed an almost inexhaustible storehouse for historian and philosopher alike, and the age was characterized by no diffidence or moderation in borrowing. Plutarchs aphorisms and his anecdotes meet us at every turn, openly or in disguise, and the translations I have alluded to did but prepare the way for Philemon Hollands great rendering of the complete non-biographical works in the last year of the Tudor era. But it is as author of the Parallel Lives of the famous Greeks and Romans that Plutarch has most strongly and most healthily affected the literature of modern Europe. Few other books of the ancient world have had since the middle ages so interesting a career; in the history of no other, perhaps not even the Iliad, can we see so plainly that rare electric flash of sympathy where the spirit of classical literature blends with the modern spirit, and the renascence becomes a living reality. The Lives of Plutarch were early translated into Latin, and versions of them in that language were among the first productions of the printing press, one such edition being published at  Rome about 1470. It was almost certainly in this Latin form that they first attracted the attention and the pious study of Jacques Amyot (1514-93). Amyots Translations of Plutarch No writer of one age and nation has ever received more devoted and important services from a writer of another than Plutarch owes to Amyot. Already the translator of the Greek pastorals of Heliodorus and Longus, as well as seven books of Diodorus Siculus, Amyot came not unprepared to the subject of his lifes work. Years were spent in purification of the text. Amyots marginal notes as to variants in the original Greek give but a slight conception of the extent of his labours in this direction. Dr. Joseph Jager has made it more evident in a Heidelberg dissertation, Zur Kritik von Amyots Ubersetzung der Moralia Plutarchs (Biihl, 1899). In 1559, being then Abbot of Bellozane, Amyot published his translation of Plutarchs Lives, printed in a large folio volume by the famous Parisian house of Vascosan.The success of the work was immediate; it was pirated largely, but no less than six authorized editions were published by Vascosan before the end of 1579. Amyots concern with the Lives did not cease with the appearance of the first edition. Each re-issue contained improvements, and only that of 1619 can perhaps be regarded as giving his final text, though by that time the translator had been twenty-six years in his grave. Yet it was not the Lives solely that occupied him. In 1572 were printed Les Oeuvres Morales et Meshes de Plutarque. Translatees du Grec en Francois par Messire Jacques Amyot. The popularity of this volume, by whose appearance all Plutarch was rendered accessible in the vernacular to French readers, was hardly inferior to that the Lives had attained, and it directly inspired another work, already mentioned, whose importance for English drama was not very greatly inferior to that of Norths translation of the Lives: The Philosophic, commonly called the Morals, written by the learned Philosopher, Plutarch of Chaeronea. Translated out of Greeke into English, and conferred with the Latin translations, and the French, by Philemon HollandLondon 1603. The indebtedness of such writers as Chapman to the Morals of Plutarch is hardly to be measured. Our concern, however, is rather with the lives as they appeared in Norths translation from the French of Amyot, in 1579. Sir Thomas North Thomas North, or Sir Thomas, as history has preferred to call him, was born about 1535, the second son of Edward Lord North and Alice Squyer his wife. The knightly title in Norths case, like that or Sir Thomas Browne, is really an anachronism as regards his literary career. It was a late granted honour, withheld, like the royal pension, which seems to have immediately preceded death, till the recipients fame had long been established and his work in this world was virtually over. It is simply as Thomas North that he appears on the early title pages of his three books, and as Master North we find him occasionally mentioned in state papers during the long and eventful years that precede 1591 . Sometimes, by way of self-advertisement, he alludes to himself rather pathetically as sonne of Sir Edward North, Knight, L. North of Kyrtheling or Brother to the Right Honourable Sir Roger North, Knight, Lorde North of Kyrtheling. We know little of his life. It appears to have been a long and honourable one, full of incident and variety, darkened till almost the very end by the shadow of poverty, but certainly not devoid of gleams of temporary good fortune, and on the whole, no doubt, a happy life. There is good reason, but no positive evidence, for believing that he was educated at Peterhouse, Cambridge. In 1557 we find him at Lincolns Inn; on the 2Oth of December in that year he dates from there the dedicatory epistle to Queen Mary, prefixed to his Dtall of Princes. In 1568 he was presented with the freedom of the city of Cambridge. In 1574 he accompanied his elder brother Roger, second Baron North, on a special mission to the court of Henri III of France. Six years later, under date of August 25, 1580, the Earl of Leicester commends Mr. North to Lord Burghley as one who is a very honest gentleman, and hath many good things in him which are drowned only by poverty. During the critical days of the Armada he was Captain of three hundred men in the Isle of Ely, and he seems always to have borne a high reputation for valour. With 1590 the more interesting part of Norths life closes. In 1591 he was knighted. At this period he must apparently have enjoyed a certain pecuniary prosperity, since eligibility for knighthood involved the possession of land worth 40 [pounds] a year. In 1592 we hear of him as justice of the peace in Cambridgeshire; the official commission for placing him is dated February 24. Six years later we may infer that he was again in financial straits, for a grant of 20 [pounds] was made to him by the city of Cambridge. The last known incident of his life was the conferring on him of a pension of 40 [pounds] per annum from the Queen, in 1601. He may or may not have lived to see the publication of the third, expanded edition of his Plutarch in 1603, to which is prefixed a grateful dedication to Queen Elizabeth. North was twice married, and we know that at least two of his children, a son and daughter, reached maturity. His literary fame rests on three translations. The first in point of time was a version of Guevaras Libra Aureo, of which an abbreviated translation by Lord Berners bad been printed in 1535, with the title The Golden Boke of Marcus Aurelius Emperour and eloquent Oratour. North made no such effort at condensation; his rendering appeared first in 1557 and again, with the addition of a fourth book, in 1568, with the following title page: The Dial of Princes, compiled by the reverend father in God, Don Antony of Guevara, Byshop of Guadix, Preacher, and Chronicler to Charles the fifte, late of that name Emperor. Englished out of the Frenche by T. North. . . And now newly revised and corrected by hym, refourmed of faultes escaped in the first edition: with an amplification also of a fourth booke annexed to the same, entituled The fauored Courtier, never heretofore imprinted in our vulgar tongue. Right necessarie and pleasaunt to all noble and vertuous persones. There seems no reason to accept the suggestion that the style of this book was influential in any particular degree in shaping that of Lylys Euphues. Norths second translation appeared in 1570. The title page, which contains all the information concerning the work that the reader is likely to require, runs as follows: The Morall Philosophic of Doni: Drawne out of the auncient writers. A worke first compiled in the Indian tongue, and afterwardes reduced into divers other languages: and now lastly Englished out of Italian by Thomas North. In the Stationers Register for 1579 occurs this entry: VI to Die Aprilis. Thomas vautrollicr, master Wighte Lycenced vnto yem a booke in Englishc called Plutarks Lyves XV and a copie. This is the first mention of Norths translation of Plutarch, which was duly published in the same year, 1579, by the two book-sellers named in the registration notice. A facsimile of the title page appears as frontispiece to this volume.It is of importance to consider here the exact relation in which Norths translation stands to that of Amyot, first printed just twenty years before and definitely claimed by North as his source. .Norths Plutarch enjoyed till the close of the seventeenth century a popularity equal to its merits; but its vogue was now interrupted. It was supplanted by a succession of more modern and infinitely less brilliant renderings and was not again reprinted as a whole till 1895. How entirely it had fallen into disrepute in the eighteenth century is evident from the significant verdict of the Critical Review for February, 1771, This was not a translation from Plutarch, nor can it be read with pleasure in the present Age. One hopes, and can readily believe, that the critic had not made the attempt to read it. There is some doubt as to which edition of North was used by Shakespeare. The theory of Mr. A. P. Paton that a copy of the 1603 version bearing the initials W. S. was the poets property has long ago been exploded. From an allusion by Weever in his Mirror of Martyrs, we know that Julius Caesar was in existence in 1601. The two possible editions, those of 1579 and 1595 respectively, often vary a little in wording, but there seems to be no instance where such difference offers any hint as to which text Shakespeare used. No one with a knowledge of the rules and vagaries of Elizabethan orthography will probably lay any stress on the argument which prefers the  folio of 1595 for the sole reason that on the first page of the Life of Coriolanus it happens to agree in spelling of the word conduits with the 1623 Shakespeare, whereas the folio of 1579 gives the older form of conducts. If Shakespeares acquaintance with North was delayed till about 1600, it may be imagined that copies of the second edition would then be the more easily obtainable. If, on the other hand, we derive the allusions in A Midsummer Nights Dream (II. i. 75-80) to Hippolyta, Perigouna, Aegle, Ariadne, and Antiopa from the Life of Theseus, as has been done, though with no very great show of probability, we must then assume the dramatist to have known Norths book at a period probably antecedent to the appearance of the second edition. The question is of little import. There seems on other grounds every reason to prefer the text of the editio princeps, which in practically all cases of difference offers an older and apparently more authentic read ing than the version of 1595. As has been said, we have no evidence that North was personally responsible for any of the changes in the second edition.

Analysis of American Protest Literature

Analysis of American Protest Literature The protest literature of early to mid-19th century America shares a common theme of moral values. Both Henry David Thoreau and William Apess speak of a moral code that humanity is bound to uphold. Although they addressed it in different ways and proposed different solutions, they ask a similar question: is America truly the great land of principle that it claims to be. The essay The Resistance to Civil Government was based on a series of lectures Thoreau gave in 1848 and was published in 1849. In it he discussed the shared responsibilities and duties of citizens and their governments. While his thoughts stand alone as a philosophical position, it is important to understand the historical context. Texas gained its independence from Mexico in 1836. The United States did not immediately incorporate the territory into the Union because of the ongoing political battle over the expansion of slavery, however, on December 29, 1845, Texas entered the United States as a slave state. Thoreau was an outspoken abolitionist, as made clear in other of his writings, and was adamantly opposed paying taxes which supported a government that upheld unjust and immoral policies. He based his decision not to comply on the belief that there is a law higher than civil law that demands the obedience of the individual. Thoreau opened Civil Disobedience with the maxim That government is best which governs least, (p 843) and he speaks in favor of government that does not intrude upon peoples lives. Government, he believed, was a means of attaining an end that existed only because the people chose it to execute their will. Government, however, was susceptible to misuse, corruption, and injustice. When injustice became extreme, such as by allowing slavery, individuals had both the right and duty to rebel against the State through a variety of means such as refusing to pay taxes. Thoreau did not advocate the dissolution of government. Rather, he called for a better government (p 844), one which was limited to decide those issues that it was fitted to consider. Thoreau underscored the power of the individual to effect reform. Reform, he believed, came only through the individual, and moral issues were the individuals concern. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law' he said, so much as for the right. The individuals obligation was to do at any time what [he thinks] right (p 844). He enjoined his audience to wake up and to refuse to be machines that served the State with their bodies or minds. Good people, he contended, must serve the State with their consciences and resist it when its policies and actions conflict with their consciences. Through this duty to resist, Thoreau introduced the concept of civil disobedience, tying to the birth of the nation through revolution. Merely expressing opposition to slavery was meaningless. Only action what people did about their objection mattered. Wrongs could be redressed only by the individual, not through the government since the mechanisms of change provided by the State were too slow or were ineffective. He acknowledged that in practical application a single person might not be able to affect widespread change, however, a person must at least not be guilty of supporting injustice through compliance. Individuals must not support a government whose policies are unjust. Talk is cheap; action is immediate. People must act with principle and must break the law if necessary. Such action, however, comes with a price. People must be willing to bear the consequences of their actions. When the man of conscience acted in variance with the state, he might be punished by force. This f orce could be against his property, his family, or his person. Because of this potential loss, Thoreau believed it was impossible for a person of conscience to live honestly and at the same time comfortably (p 851). However, these penalties cost people of conscience less than the price they would pay in obeying the State. Therefore, it falls to the State to respect the higher and independent power of the individual since it is only through this that it derives its authority (p 857). The writings of William Apess are also protest literature and, like those of Thoreau, are better understood through their historical context. In 1830, the government passed the Indian Removal Act which authorized the removal of Indians from the lands east of the Mississippi to Indian Territory and other areas considered suitable. In essence, this act spelled the end of Indian rights to live in those states under their own traditional laws. They were given a choice: assimilate and concede to US law or leave their homelands. The Act was based on the white-written history of interactions between Native Americans and European settlers; a history rife with horrific stories and only the occasional act of kindness. Apess was bi-, or perhaps multi-, racial. Because he was primarily raised by whites, he grew up with stories of the Indians cruelty. As he grew he learned of the competing truth of the whites cruelty toward the Indians. He converted to Christianity early in his life and ultimately was ordained as a Methodist minister. His faith was integral to his ability to affirm himself as a Pequot and as a person of color, and in Christianity he found both hope and a philosophical framework from which to challenge racial bigotry. The central theme of An Indians Looking Glass for the White Man was the failure of white people to recognize the irony and hypocrisy of denying Native Americans, who they considered to be heathens, the self-evident rights guaranteed to all men by the Declaration of Independence, and their un-Christian treatment of them. As the title indicates, his words were directed to a white audience. According to Apess, materially well-off whites were not superior to the Indians from either a religious or moral perspective because they were unprincipled in their dealings with people of a different skin color. He liberally used the word principle, or some variant thereof, for the purpose of establishing the unprincipled actions of white men in regard to red men. What if, he asked, all the worlds different skins were put together, and each skin had its national crimes written upon it-which skin do you think would have the greatest? (p 501). Apess outrage at the mistreatment of Indians extended to the mistreatment of blacks. His charge against the white citizens of the United States was not only that they had robbed a nation almost of their whole continent, and murder[ed] their women and children, but that they had also subjugated another nation to till their ground and welter out their days under the lash (p 501). He used the word black to metaphorically describe the Christian morals and principles that were corrupted by the aversion to colored skins.   If black or red skins or any other skin of color were disgraceful in Gods eye, he said, it appears that he has disgraced himself a great deal-for he has made fifteen colored people to one white and placed them here upon this earth (p 501). He went even further and implied that Jesus, himself, had been a person of color. Apess implored the American people to think for themselves and act upon the morals that they held dear. As a minister he was able to incorporate quotes from the Bible in support of his position.   He used every detail he could to present the moral contradictions in American policy and used the philosophical underpinnings of America to support his argument against them. He concluded with a blistering indictment of bigotry directed at his audience: By what you read, you may learn how deep your principles are. I should say they were skin deep (p 504), yet he maintained hope due to the actions of those who spoke out against mistreatment. Thoreaus The Resistance to Civil Government and Apess An Indians Looking Glass for the White Man can be seen as protests against a government that had failed to live up to its stated ideals and failed to protect the rights of its people. Both call upon the moral conscience to bring an end to injustice; both appeal to the founding principles of the nation; both call people to action. Question 7: Literature speaks truths about the past to which history cannot give voice. The writings of Pontiac, William Apess, and James Fenimore Cooper all express the concerns of native Americans, but through different perspectives. Cooper attempts to portray the Native Americans as honorable, albeit stereotypical, savages, Pontiac laments the destruction of traditional Indian culture, and Apess condemns the hypocrisy and bigotry of white society. Within all these writings are both overlapping and unique concerns that give voice to the challenges faced by a culture forced to change. James Fenimore Coopers The Last of the Mohicans, subtitled A Narrative of 1757, was published in 1826, however it harkens back to an earlier period of American expansion.   By the time it was written the prevailing view was that humans were divided into distinct races and that some races were inferior to others. Indians (savages) were fated to vanish before the superior (civilized) white men, and there was no changing fate.   Cooper sought to promote a true understanding of ethnological problems in a rapidly changing America.   His prose was infused with a belief that shared humanity could be communicated across cultural and linguistic differences and could dispel the idea of the unknowable otherness that promoted fear and justified exploitation. Hawk-eye and Chingachgook were depicted as individuals who displayed, through their friendship, the ideal of human relationships between Native and European Americans. Cooper embraced the concept of the noble savage, but at the same time he also promulgated racial stereotypes. In his description of Chingachgook he noted that, His body, which was nearly naked, presented a terrific emblem of deathà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ (p 486). Coopers attitudes toward race were complicated even for his time. He was, after all, a white man and his characters reflected an obsession with systems of classification by which race was distinguished from race, nation from nation, and tribe from tribe. Hawk-eye and Chingachgook are both concerned with racial purity. à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦the worst enemy I have on earthà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ darent deny that I am genuine white, declared Hawk-eye (p 487). They respected each other and could work together, but both rejected the idea of interracial marriage. Hawk-eye frequently displayed his superior knowledge, as when he presented Chingachgook as ignorant because he did not understand about tides. Drawn in this way, their partnership did not threaten the racial status quo. From an historical perspective, this story was set during the French and Indian War (1754-60), a proxy war which pitted the British Empire, its American colonies, and their Indian allies against the French Empire, its Canadian colonies, and their Indian allies. It was the North American theater of a much broader international conflict known as the Seven Years War. The Treaty of Paris that ended the French and Indian War led to a flood of English settlers moving across the Alleghenies into Indian territory. The French had gained the loyalty of their Native American allies by providing them with ammunition and supplies. The Indians viewed the French as tenants on their land who had provided gunpowder, rum, and other goods as a type of rent. The British, on the other hand, believed themselves to be governed by international law and felt no obligation to the regions original inhabitants. Native Americans were not members of the family of nations and had no more rights than the animals th ey hunted. They were no longer welcome at the forts and intermarriage was discouraged. From the Indian viewpoint, the lack of support and disrespect were a breach of protocol and an insult to the Indian nations and their leaders. American Indian resistance began to grow. Pontiac was an Ottawa Indian chief who had been very successful in protecting his land and his people. During the   French and Indian War, Pontiac was an ally of the French. The changes brought by the British victory did not sit well with Chief   Pontiac. On April 27, 1763, a council gathering was held near Detroit. Pontiac gave a speech in which he recounted the indignities that the Indians had suffered at the hands of the British. He believed that his people needed return to the customs and weapons of their ancestors, throw away the implements they had acquired from the white man, abstain from whiskey, and take up the hatchet against the British. He realized that in adopting the white mens customs and in using their food, blankets, and weapons, his people had become dependent upon them. He remembered the stories, heard in childhood, of the might of the Ottawas in the days when they lived according to the old customs and longed for a return to the traditional ways. Pontiac was strongly influenced by the story of Neolin. Neolin was a respected visionary and spiritual leader of   the Delaware people.   Pontiac also understood the power that story telling had in his culture. Stories were guides that taught them how to act and live their lives. He used the story of Neolins encounter with The Great Spirit in order to convince the leaders of the neighboring tribes to join him in a rebellion.   He reminded them of what the Great Spirit said to Neolin: The land on which you live I have made for you, and not for others. Why do you suffer the white man to live among you? (p 223) The Great Spirit then instructed Neolin to Fling all these things away; live as your wise forefathers lived before you. And as for these English, these dogs dressed in red who have come to rob you of your hunting grounds, and drive away the game,- you must lift the hatchet against them. Wipe them from the face of the earth, and then you will win my favor bac k again, and once more be happy and prosperous (p 224) William Apess approach was different and can be best characterized as embracing the goal of nation-building. His work documented many past injustices endured by Native Americans and lamented the state of their current life in and around Connecticut and Massachusetts. During this period, the relationship between Native Americans and the dominant white culture was viewed as a struggle between assimilation and cultural tradition.   Apess revealed how false this dichotomy was. His was an authentic voice arising from the personal experience of his bi-racial identity. Instead of the either/or of cultural tradition or assimilation, Apess sought to promote affiliation. With the authority granted to an ordained Methodist minister, Apess relied upon religious engagement as a means to bring to light the hypocrisy of thePilgrims who would fight to destroy any perceived threat to their land or livelihood, but would not grant this same right to Native Americans. In doing so he also demonstrated the Native Americans capacity to affiliate themselves with Christian values. God, he said, will show no favor to outward appearances but will judge righteousness (p 499). Apess was the antithesis of the Christian nationalist. Growing up he described how was terrified of his own people because his white caretakers told him stereotypical stories about Indian cruelty but never told him how cruelly they treated Indians. This past that they embraced was sacred to them; to him it was a degrading myth. They used their position   to build churches, dispatch missionaries, and educate the people they deemed savages; to him their authority was morally bankrupt. Apess challenged people to live up to the stated values of their government and their church. If they talked the talk then they also had to walk the walk. To profess a belief in liberty and justice for all or the equality of all Gods children was not enough. People needed to act in accordance with their beliefs. If they failed to do so then they were hypocrites. Native Americans faced a variety of concern in the early to mid-19th century. They faced the loss of their traditional homeland, the dissolution of their cultural heritage, and the very real consequences of institutionalized bigotry. What can be seen in the speech by Pontiac and the writings of James Fenimore Cooper and William Apess is the complexity of the cultural forces at work at that time. The portrayal of the savage or contemptible Indian was as much a creation of the white man as was the civilized, and Christianized Indian, who was created in the white mans image. Native Americans were unique and complex individuals with the same needs and longings as any other people.

The Effective Use of Symbolism in Fitzgeralds The Great Gatsby Essay

The Great Gatsby is one of the finest pieces of literature written in the 20th century. It explores the nature of westerners during hardships and other social problems. The Great Gatsby is not just a mere historical novel from 1920’s. Fitzgerald gives a great in depth analysis of the lives of ordinary people through the characters and the symbols in this book. Through these characters and symbols Fitzgerald portrays on the lack of moral and spiritual values of the people and different aspects of the society. One of the three of main symbols used in Great Gatsby is the valley of ashes. â€Å"Immediately the ash-gray men swarm up with leaden spades and stir up an impenetrable cloud, which screens their obscure operations from your sight† (Fitzgerald 23). This gray land suggests the ignorance and careless ness of the wealthy during the 20th century. All these rich ever dreamed about was their growth rather the growth as a nation. This use of symbolism illustrates the vast amounts of unexplored real world by the rich, and how they always live in their own circle of people believing that money is the only thing in this world. The other side of this symbolism is the reality of the lives of people, for example Mr. Wilson, helpless, he passed his long life in his garage with his unhappy wife, and how the rude arrogant behavior of the rich in the end turned him into a murderer. This indicates that how the rich people like Tom acted as a barrier. These people oppressed the poor the whole time, and did not even give them the opportunity to grow in their status rather used their hopelessness for their own desires. On the contrary to the above symbol, the next symbolism depicts the goal and future based of a human being, which is the green ... ... the injustice; in this story the wealthy. Mr. Wilson looking at the billboard claims, â€Å"god sees everything† (Fitzgerald 160). Only poor and honest people like George Wilson could see god. This explains the blindness of the wealthy and how god favored only ethical people. Fitzgerald suggests that everyone is accountable to god and even though it may seem that nobody is watching you that moment, there is always a spiritual power recording all your sins. The author brings about this suggestion as a warning to the people, and explains how the people were not aware of this caution during the 1920’s. The rich were deeply immersed in the ocean of wealth and were not able to swim their way out. In conclusion, Fitzgerald clearly sums up the problems that people face through his effective use of symbolism. He also reveals many interesting facts about the lives of people.

The Causes of Divorce :: Expository Cause Effect Essays

The Causes of Divorce There are as many theories on this issue as there are people offering them. The usual explanations are communication, compromise, and commitment, and it’s hard to disagree with them. Indeed, if both spouses were consistently able to communicate with each other, able and willing to compromise with each other, and 100% committed to their marriage, it’s hard to see how it could fail. The vexing question, of course is HOW do they foster communication, compromise, and commitment? Here the explanations diverge. For those with a fundamental faith foundation, the answer is clear. Marriages work if both spouses obey the principles of the faith. For a more prosaic explanation, check marriagebuilders.com, where therapist Willard Harley lays out a simple set of principles he says any couple can use to help their romance survive and thrive. The principle that creates the most stir with groups I address is from Cosmopolitan magazine a few years back, namely that the most reliable indicator of the success of a marriage is the extent to which both the husband and wife had close, long-term, platonic relationships with members of the opposite sex before they met. When you think about it, this makes sense. It’s startling to reflect on how little time husbands and wives spend in genuinely romantic interaction. They will spend most of their married life relating to each other as friends. If either or both of them lacks the essential skills or inclination to do that, the marriage is unlikely to thrive. One thing I feel strongly about is how little impact adultery has on divorce, and I know that I'm going against the tide here. I hear constantly from all-knowing observers - many of them fundamentalist Christians - who proclaim that if you look behind most divorces, you'll find an adulterous affair somewhere. That may be partially true, because many divorces do involve adultery, but I believe adultery to be a symptom, not a cause, of most divorces. Adultery is a reaction to abuse, and it is a tool of abuse. Adultery is the legal "gotcha," but I don't think it causes many divorces. I think the crud that drives husbands and wives apart causes divorces.

Towards Clarity and Boredom :: Writing Writers Education English Essays

Towards Clarity and Boredom Begrudgingly Admitting the Usefulness of Style Books When God stood over the Earth, rumor has it; he decreed that he felt the need to punish English Students everywhere. His response was swift and to the point: he gave the world Style Guides. Taking the big guy’s cue, William Strunk Jr, E.B.White and Joseph Williams all set about to light that path and frustrate writers and students everywhere. Mission accomplished. However boring they might be, they do, in fact, help light the path to writing and proper English style. In the end, while both books might be on the dry side, they both are great resources and often plug the other’s holes. Dealing with â€Å"The Elements of Style† first, it’s very clear to me that both Strunk and White really hated going over the same rules again and again year after year with each new crop of Freshmen every semester. That seems to be the overall tone of the book. You can almost see the kind of guy who wrote this: a foppish older book – possibly British – who stands over you and berates you over the â€Å"do and don’ts† of proper semi-colon usage. Sounds like a blast. While definitely not a rock and roll show by any stretch, â€Å"The Elements of Style† has several perks outside the content. First thing is that the book is only 85 pages. 85 Pages is something that, maybe, a student could read on a public bus on the way to an English class. It’s small, sleek, compact and easy to reference from. Also, it’s been written in a style that interjects some humor into the rather vanilla topic. Finally, Strunk and White keep it light. There isn’t anything more then the rule, a few examples and a brief passage about the rule. Nothing more, nothing less. Personally, there were a few rules from the list of several hundred that will benefit me in my present and future writing endeavors. â€Å"Do not break sentences in two† (Strunk and White 7) is a rule that is good to keep handy.

Doctor Who vs. Back to the Future Essay

People always love a good science fiction film or show, because even though it can have the same basic idea, they can be completely different. Doctor Who and Back to the Future are two of the world’s most beloved franchises, however, even though they are both based on time travel, they completely different but have some key similarities. Both of these franchises have a basis of time travel. Doctor Who is about an all-knowing alien named The Doctor, who travels through time and space in his time machine called the TARDIS. He is normally accompanied by a friend or a companion that he picks up along his travels. With Back to the Future, it revolves around a seventeen-year old kid named Marty McFly who, after crazy circumstances, winds up taking the time machine his best friend, Doc Brown or Doc, had invented. Marty is accompanied by Doc from different points in Doc’s time line. The extent of time travel is different for these franchises. Time is one of the most complicated ideas in all of history. When it comes to the time travel perspective Doctor Who is much more complicated than the simple Back to the Future model of time travel. In Back to the Future, Marty accidentally goes back in time and stops his parents from ever meeting. Throughout the movie he tries to get his parents to fall in love. When he begins to fail at getting them to fall in love, he starts to fade away. This idea seems to be pretty straightforward. However, you need to take into account the fact if Marty was never born how did he travel back and stop them from meeting. In Doctor Who it goes much more in-depth and time travel gets more difficult to understand. If the Doctor was faced with the same situation as Marty, a paradox would occur and he would have been from a different time stream where his parents got married, and he wouldn’t have faded away. One of the most immense trademarks that define these franchises is the characters. The trademark characters define this genre of film. The Doctor is an alien from the planet Gallifray, who has been traveling for about 900 years. Marty, is a teenager who gets thrown into a time travel with no foreknowledge about the subject. Marty is a naive teenager who doesn’t know the first thing about time travel, whereas the Doctor knows all about time travel, history, science and, most importantly, what not to mess with. Even though they don’t share the same knowledge, their personalities have some similarities. They both show bravery when needed and are willing to rip through time just to help someone dear to them. However, what shines the most about these two characters are their flaws. Whenever someone calls Marty a chicken, he loses all control of himself and does whatever he can to prove he isn’t. The Doctor, on the other hand, has a dark side. If someone breaks the Doctor enough, who is already damaged, he will show no mercy, and that is the scariest thing about him. Even though no one likes them, the antagonist of each franchise is just as important as the protagonist. In Back to the Future the antagonist is Biff Tannen. Biff Tannen bullied Marty’s dad as a kid and continues to bully him into adulthood. With Doctor Who the main antagonist, among many, are the Daleks. They are a robotic alien race that wants nothing more than to destroy anything that isn’t Dalek and will do anything to survive. Both of these enemies only care about can benefit themselves. Neither of them cares if they hurt anyone, or the disaster they can cause in their quest for power or wealth. The Daleks, however, aren’t the same as Biff. The Daleks are very loyal to their own race, whereas Biff isn’t loyal to anyone. In Back to the Future Biff is thought of as a pain that Marty has to deal with whereas when the Doctor has to deal with the Daleks, he is frightened. The Daleks are pure hate and have no sympathy. Biff is a human being so therefore he does have humanity somewhere in him. The science fiction genre is one of the most celebrated genres in all of history. It is so vast and so loved by many. Even though there are so much science fiction, even though some have the same basic idea, they can be so different with a few key things in common that makes it spectacular. Doctor Who and Back to the Future are two enchanting franchises in their own ways, even with both of them revolving around time travel.

Reactive, Proactive Patrols Essay

In policing there are two types of patrol, reactive and proactive patrol. Reactive patrol is based on crimes after they are committed. Proactive patrol is based on preventing crime rather than responding to crimes after they were committed. If police departments adopted one type of patrol there would be consequences. If police departments adopted reactive patrols, then there would be no way to prevent crimes. Police would only show up after a crime was committed and there would be an increase in crime. There would be an increase of criminal activity, traffic accidents, and a decrease in community approval of police. If police adopted the proactive patrol, then there would be more patrol in problem areas where crime is higher than other areas. This type of patrol is good to prevent crime, but if adopted it would cause the community to have little approval of the police, because it could cause crimes to be all over instead of a specific area. It would also cause officers to target crimes instead of respond to calls about crimes. In my opinion, a police department would be better suited for criminal activity if they keep both types of patrol rather than adopt one type; it would make the department more conductive and community oriented. CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY I certify that the attached paper is my original work. I am familiar with, and acknowledge my responsibilities which are part of, the University of Phoenix Student Code of Academic Integrity. I affirm that any section of the paper which has been submitted previously is attributed and cited as such, and that this paper has not been submitted by anyone else. I have identified the sources of all information whether quoted verbatim or paraphrased, all images, and all quotations with citations and reference listings. Along with citations and reference listings, I have used quotation marks to identify quotations of fewer than 40 words and have used block indentation for quotations of 40 or more words. Nothing in this assignment violates copyright, trademark, or other intellectual property laws. I further agree that my name typed on the line below is intended to have, and shall have, the same validity as my handwritten signature.