A wall of funnels concentrates swimming bacteria Essay

A wall of funnels concentrates swimming bacteria - Essay Example It also shows how these microstructures can affect the living, breeding and feeding patterns of the microorganisms. The structures are also responsible for the change in populations and patterns that the microorganisms are used to. The results achieved were through using funnels that were laced with reactive ion and microlithography fluids that were mixed with silicon water. The funnel enclosures were placed in a way that the bacteria would swim and then were sealed with microscope slides. The analysis of the bacteria behavior and swimming modes was determined through reading and use of the microscope (Martinko & Madigan 63). The results were that the swimmers were green in color and fluorescent, which represented the mobility of the microorganisms. The bacteria were initially spread on the funnel and as they communicate with each other to move towards the microfluidic mixture. With time, the bacteria travelled from the broader side of the funnel to the narrow part where they concentrated and coagulated together (Martinko & Madigan 112). The research has contributed to the in-depth knowledge of survival strategies that we can look at when it comes to evolution.It helps the scientific world in analyzing the changes that can be made when it comes to mobility of bacteria and how to separate

Ethnography on Middle Class American Male Essay Example for Free

Ethnography on Middle Class American Male Essay Two centuries ago leading white, middle-class families in the newly united American states spearheaded a family revolution that replaced the premodern gender order with a modern family system. But modern family was an oxymoronic label for this peculiar institution, which dispensed modernity to white, middle-class men only by withholding it from women. The former could enter the public sphere as breadwinners and citizens, because their wives were confirmed to the newly privatized family realm. Ruled by an increasingly absent patriarchal landlord, the modern, middle-class family, a woman’s domain, soon was sentimentalized as traditional. It took most of the subsequent two centuries for substantial numbers of white working-class men to achieve the rudimentary economic pass book to modern family life a male family wage. By the time they had done so, however, a second family revolution was well underway. Once again middle-class, white families appeared to be in the vanguard. This time women were claiming the benefits and burdens of modernity, a status they could achieve only at the expense of the modern family itself. Reviving a long-dormant feminist movement, frustrated middle class homemakers and their more militant daughters subjected modern domesticity to a sustained critique. At times this critique displayed scant sensitivity to the effects our antimodern family ideology might have on women for whom full-time domesticity had rarely been feasible. Thus, feminist family reform came to be regarded widely as a white, middle-class agenda, and white, working-class families it’s most resistant adversaries. African-American women and white, working-class women have been the genuine postmodern family pioneers, even though they also suffer most from its most negative effects. Long denied the mixed benefits that the modern family order offered middle-class women, less privileged women quietly forged alternative child rearing. Struggling creatively, often heroically, to sustain oppressed families and to escape the most oppressive ones, they drew on traditional premodern kinship resources and crafted untraditional ones, lurching backward and forward into the postmodern family. Rising divorce and cohabitation rates, working mothers, two-earner households, single and unwed parenthood, and matrilineal, extended, and fictive kin support networks appeared earlier and more extensively among poor and working-class people. Economic pressures more than political principles governed these departures from domesticity, but working women like Martha Porter and Dotty Lewison soon found additional reasons to appreciate paid employment. Popular images of working-class family life, like the Archie Bunker, rest on the iconography of unionized, blue-collar, male, industrial breadwinners and the history of their lengthy struggle for the family wage (Stacey 30). But the male family wage was a late and ephemeral achievement of only the most fortunate sections of the modern industrial working class. Most working-class men never secured its patriarchal domestic privileges. Postmodern conditions expose the gendered character of this social-class category, and they render it atavistic. As feminist have argued, only by disregarding women’s labor and learning was it ever plausible to designate a family unit as working class. In an era when most married mothers are employed, when women perform most working-class job, when most productive labor is unorganized and fails to pay a family wage, when marriage links are tenuous and transitory, and when more single women than married homemakers are rearing children, conventional notions of a normative working-class family fracture into incoherence. The life circumstances and mobility patterns of the members of Pamela’s kin set and of the Lewisons, for example, are so diverse and fluid that no single social-class category can adequately describe any of the family units among them. If the white, working-class family stereotype is inaccurate, it is also consequential. Stereotype is moral stories people tell to organize the complexity of social experience. Narrating the working class as profamily reactionaries suppresses the diversity and the innovative character of many working-class kin relationships. The Archie Bunker stereotype may have helped to contain feminism by estranging middle-class from working-class women. Barbara Ehrenreich argues that caricatures which portray the working-class as racist and reactionary are recent (Handel 655), self-serving inventions of professional, middleclass people eager to seek legitimating for their own more conservative impulses. In the early 1970s, ignoring rising labor militancy as well as racial, ethnic, and gender diversity among working-class people, the media effectively imaged them as the new conservative bedrock of middle America. Thus, All in the Family, the 1970s television sitcom series that immortalized racist, chauvinist, working-class hero-buffoon Archie Bunker, can best be read, Ehrenreich suggests, as the longest-running Polish joke, a projection of middle-class bad faith. Yet, if this bad faith served professional middle-class interest, it did so at the expense of feminism. The inverse logic of class prejudice construed the constituency of that enormously popular social movement as exclusively middleclass. By convincing middle-class feminists of our isolation, perhaps the last laugh of that Polish joke was on us. Even Ehrenreich, who sensitively debunks the Bunker myth, labels starting the findings of a 1986 Gallup poll that 56 percent of American women considered themselves to be feminists, and the degree of feminist identification, was, if anything, slightly higher as one descended the socioeconomic scale. Feminist must be attuned to the polyphony of family stories authored by working-class as well as middle-class people if they are ever to transform data like these into effective political alliances. While the ethnographic narratives in this research demonstrate the demise of the working-class family, in no way do they document the emergence of the classless society postindustrial theorists once anticipated. On the contrary, recent studies indicate that the middle classes are shrinking and the economic circumstances of Americans polarizing. African-American has borne the most devastating impact of economic restructuring and the subsequent decline of industrial and unionized occupations. But formerly privileged access to the American Dream in the 1960s and 1970s, now find their gains threatened and not easy to pass on to their children. While high-wage, blue-collar jobs decline, the window of postindustrial opportunity that admitted undereducated men and women, like Lou and Kristina Lewison and Don Frankin, to middle-class status is slamming shut. Young white families earned 20 percent less in 1986 than did comparable families in 1980, and their homeownership prospects plummeted. Real earnings for young men between the ages of twenty and twenty four dropped by 26 percent between 1980 and 1986, while the military route to upward mobility that many of their fathers traveled constricted. In the 1950s men like Lou Lewison, equipped with VA loans, could buy homes with token down payments and budget just 14 percent of their monthly wages for housing costs. By 1984, however, carrying a median-priced home would cost 44 percent of an average male’s monthly earnings. Few could manage this, and in 1986 the U. S government reported the first sustained drop in home ownership since the modern collection of data began in 1940. Thus, the proportion of American families in the middle-income range fell from 46 percent in 1970 to 39 percent in 1985. Two earners in a household now are necessary just to keep from losing ground. Data like these led social analysts to anxiously track the disappearing middle class, a phrase that Barbara Ehrenreich now believes in some ways missed the least from the middle range of comfort. Conclusion The major arena to which expert turned in their examination of postwar masculinity was the American family, placing a spotlight upon men’s roles as husbands, fathers, and family heads. It was commonly noted by social scientist and delineators of American character that men had lost much of their former authority within the family. Indeed, the typical American male, as described by the anthropologist Geoffrey Gorer, was seen as having so completely given up any claim to authority that the family would constantly risk disintegration and disaster if not for the efforts of his wife (Reumann 66). On the other hand, commentators diagnosed an assault on middle-class manliness and warned of its effects on the nation and its culture. Obsessively rehearsing a narrative of nationwide decline, social disarray, and familial and gender collapse, they pictured a country in which masculinity had become a besieged and precious resource. Works Cited Handel, Gerald. and Gail, Whtchurch, The Psychosocial Interior of the Family, Aldine, Transaction, 1994 Reumann, Miriam. American Sexual Character: Sex, Gender, and National Identity, Berkeley, California: London University of California Press, 2005 Stacey, Judith, In the Name of the Family: Rethinking Family Values in the Postmodern Age; U. S, Beacon Press, 1996

The Corporate Analysis Pret A Manger Marketing Essay

The Corporate Analysis Pret A Manger Marketing Essay Introduction 1.1 Background The name of Prà ªt à   Manger sandwich shop roughly translates to ready to eat. This name embodies the restaurants aim of providing healthy alternatives to fast food. Co-founders and college friends Sinclair Beecham and Julian Metcalfe wanted to provide the United Kingdom with healthy on-the-go sandwiches, without compromising the nutritious content of the food. Upon forming this resolve, Beecham and Metcalfe borrowed their capital of  £17,000 from a bank, and opened their first Pret deli on Victoria Street in 1986. At the start of their venture, the two friends lacked employees, and they personally prepared each item. Twenty-four years after the launching of Pret, the company has perfected its formula for success, and has opened several branches outside of the United Kingdom. The aims and objectives of founders Beecham and Metcalfe was to have proper sandwiches without any additives, chemicals, and preservatives. Each store only stocks natural ingredients, and the sandwiches are made on each stores kitchens in the morning. Each sandwich is packed in cardboard containers, ensuring consumers of the foods quality and freshness. The days leftovers would be distributed to charities catering to the noble cause of providing food for the homeless. From its initial launch of 1986, there are more than 200 Pret shops throughout the world. In 2000, the company opened its first branch in New York, and commenced on having another food shop called Itsu, which are sushi restaurants in the UK, during 1997. By 2001, McDonalds was attracted to the speed Pret is establishing itself as a dominant player in the fast food industry, and bought 33% of the companys stake for fifty million pounds. By 2002, Pret opened outlets in Asia, with the blessings of political standing from McDonalds. The last milestone in Prets current timeline is that by March 2004, the company ceased their ventures in Japan, after incurring losses over eighteen months of testing the market. After the companys losses in their Asian ventures, Pret re-organized itself into a better, more stable company in terms of closing shops that were making more debts than profits, and reducing their workforce. This happened from 2002 to 2003. After closing the shops that were not making money and reducing the workforce to a number of people which would be just as effective, Pret is right on track, and was targeting to have twenty new stores in the UK in 2005. Currently there are more than 2,200 Pret employees worldwide. During the year 2004, Pret A Manger was dubbed as the fourth largest company in the United Kingdoms  £3.5 billion sandwich bar market. In terms of the branded coffee bar sector, Pret took the sixth place from the  £1 billion market share. Lastly, Pret has thousands of customers, and has the consumers vote for cleanliness and food quality. Overall the brand started from one small store in the streets of London, and has grown as one of the leading sandwich stores in the UK. Chapter 2 Information Gathering All forms of available media were used by the author to gather ample information for this paper. A thorough contextual analysis was done with all gathered snippets of published materials such as magazines, journals, encyclopedias, newspapers, pamphlets, and books. The author also used the literature found in Pret A Mangers wrapping, wherein they provided recipes for their food in the packaging of their sandwiches. Aside from published materials, the author investigated all available resources in the public domain such as the Internet. The Internet yielded very crucial information, especially for those renowned websites which provided reviews, overviews, and customer narratives regarding Pret A Manger and other sandwich stores in London. The author also used Pret A Mangers official website to provide an accurate representation of the company within this report, since it is important that the company is not misled in this analysis. Other websites were used as long as they provided pertinent information for this paper. Yet the information gathering would be incomplete if the author only used contextual analysis to relieve the history of Pret A Manger. Due to this, the author personally frequented Pret stores in London, in order to observe the attitude and relationship of the serving staff, management, and crew towards customers. This attitude and rapport was compared to the actions and relationships with Subways, since Pret A Manger and Subway are the two leading competitors in the sandwich market. By frequenting the two stores, the author was able to establish the differences in service, as well as what probable threats and disadvantages Pret A Manger is prone to. Along with casual conversations with fellow diners, the author is able to see what should be done in order to ensure that consumers would continue to utilize Pret over other stores. Chapter 3 Analysis Discussion 3.1 PESTLE Analysis A. Political When McDonalds bought 33% of Pret A Mangers stakes, it brought about a huge windfall of investments for Pret A Manger. Since McDonalds is one of the biggest fast food chains worldwide, other people acknowledged McDos interest in Pret as equals to generating more profit. After all, if a powerhouse such as McDonalds would be interested in a little sandwich shop in the United Kingdom, then they might have missed something about that sandwich shop. The simple of act of McDonalds buying a non-controlling stake in the company generated more political power for Pret than never before. A few years after the sale, Pret was able to open at least twenty shops in the United States and Hong Kong. Prets political power could be said to have began in McDonalds interest, and was fueled by the success Pret attained due to its many accomplishment. Throughout the years, the image of Pret A Manger as a leading sandwich retail store is unblemished to this very day. B. Economic The brand Pret A Manger continues to flourish and to supply stable work opportunities in these economically disturbing times. In 1992, six short years after the first store in Victoria was opened, three more shops were opened and the brand continues to grow. The sandwich store Pret a Manger was followed by Itsu, a sushi bar which is renowned in London and the United Kingdom. Ten years after the Itsu was launched, there are more than a dozen Itsu stores established both in New York, United States, and London. Though the brand hit a standstill when they were forced to recall and to call their stores in Japan as losses, even the founders acknowledged that the speed with which they have expanded were too fast for development. Instead of producing service and products which were supposed to be unrivaled anywhere else, the company was intent on building more and more shops in different locations. Because of this, the plan backfired, and they have to gather their remaining assets and convert them to other sources of income. It is also worth mentioning that there are those who believe that once a business has entered the mainstream of the business industry, which is in Manhattan, New York, then that company would be labeled as one in the big league. By having branches in Manhattan, Pret was able to demonstrate to the world its power as a big player in the sandwich industry. C. Socio-Cultural Pret asserts itself as having its own attitude and outlook, as well as image for all consumers. Most of Prets customers are familiar with the Pret attitude, which is an environment friendly service coupled with enthusiastic, over-eager staff. Its identity as a healthy-food provider exceeds all expectations as it obviously embodies this ideal in everyday standards. The food are created fresh daily, all excess would be given to the homeless, and even the packaging is made up of recycled cardboard paper. There are no preservatives at all: only fresh, pure food to be enjoyed by those who enjoy healthy lifestyles. This nature-loving attitude is also emphasized in Pret A Mangers website. Its Sustainability tab mentions how the company aims to provide clean, healthy food for all customers so that all might get the benefits of a healthy lifestyle. Even their delivery cabs conserve energy in the form of using green energy sources during delivery. In-house recycling is highly encouraged, and once a customer walks into the store, he or she will immediately understand what the Prets commitment to nature is all about. D. Technological Like other major companies, Pret has embraced technology and utilized it for their own advancement. Such is the blessing of e-HRM, which enables workers to produce more output in lesser time. With Pret, they have used technology to keep track of their in-house resources, stocks, list of groceries to buy, and other things. The company uses it to check their employee resources, delegations, tasks, and leaves. They log into a system from any Pret store branch, and can check their leave credits, file leaves and offsets, and other personal details. E. Legal Though Prets unyielding commitment to preserving nature goes untarnished, the company is not free of intrigue. There was an incident wherein a former KGB agent was poisoned while dining in an Itsu Restaurant. The branch at Picadilly, London, had to be closed, yet autopsy report and other investigations have proven that the source of poison was not in the store, and the agent contacted the poison before entering the restaurant. Aside from this incident, there are also other reports wherein people filed cases against the sandwich empire, as is inevitable in a popular brand. Yet Pret has faced each one of them, and has managed to keep its slate clear of any negative connotations about the brand. F. Ethical There is no ethical discrimination and other ethical dilemmas involved in Pret A Manger. It is an honest store which aims to provide quality service, and accepts applicants of all people of all races. This as much is mentioned in the portfolio of Pret A Manger, as they welcome applicants from all people, regardless of their ethnic backgrounds, color of their skins, genders, and other factors. 3.2 Business Analysis SWOT Analysis Figure 1 Pret A Manger SWOT Analysis The figure below would determine Pret A Mangers SWOT analysis: A. Strengths  · Established name there are many Pret A Manger stores throughout the United Kingdom. Along with Itsu, these stores are visible, and easily accessible to all potential customers. Also, Pret has twenty-four years of experience as a famed sandwich maker. Their name is synonymous to healthy sandwiches, and they have also established themselves as a major contributor in the sandwich market.  · Many loyal followers there are thousands of loyal customers who rely on Pret to feed them during breaks and snacks. Since they can get food in a speedy manner, most business people would prefer to eat at Prets.  · Aim to be a healthy food chain is unique and is attractive to many people in this golden era of lifestyle awareness, most people are investing in their health. Due to this, Prets healthy and environment-friendly approach to service is greatly embraced by the people. B. Weaknesses  · Too many stores sharing the same items since each store would individually prepare its sandwiches and products for the day, there are instances wherein what a customer might want may not be available in the store. Since there are too many stores sharing the same items, each store lost its unique characteristics to entice new customers.  · Some would say that the prices are too high for a sandwich customers have said that they would prefer if the sandwiches are made cheaper. Then again, with the quality of service, as well as the health benefits given by the store, it is no wonder that the prices are high. C. Opportunities  · Expansion plans in other countries by placing Pret in mainstream competition, the world would be able to understand that Pret is a brand that is clamoring to be known. The quality of their sandwiches and products would precede them.  · Since there are many followers, it would be easier to know what consumers want, and how to retain these wants to keep the customers loyal to Pret. D. Threats  · By entering the mainstream competition in New York and other countries, Pret A Manger has established its force. However, it is open for comparison to other prestigious brands, such as Subway Sandwiches, which are rampant in the United States. Though Pret has twenty stores in Manhattan alone, Subway has dominated the sandwich scheme in the United States, and is available in all states for the customers. Chapter 4 Conclusion and Recommendation As was clearly portrayed in this paper, Pret A Manger is an established, reputable company with many followers throughout the world. Its brand of loving nature and providing healthy food to all consumers makes is stand out in this world wherein fast food is in demand. Pret is able to provide speedy service, without the saturated fat, and cholesterol served by other organizations. Prets strengths could be said to lie in this image and identity. Since people are already sold to the idea of perfect sandwiches which are healthy and delectable, more and more consumers are lining up at Pret stores. Furthermore, since the brand is using recycled paper, and is supporting charities and the poor by providing them with food, and recycling, those who are nature buffs and who feel a deep sense of environmentalism would flock to the stores. The author strongly believes that the threats faced by Pret A Manger could be handled well, since it was already proven before that the company could continue with its production despite losses, as was the case when they lost huge investments in Japan. However, since people at the store were complaining of the prices, there must be a better alternative to selling the sandwiches without lowering the quality. The author recommends that the store conduct sales and other promos in order to entice new customers to try their products. Since it is also a misconception that all Pret products are expensive, they should be able to bring about new customers by showing them that each product is accurately priced. Once new customers would see how much effort, patience, and top quality materials were used in order to give them their orders, they would realize that the prices, once one compares them to other sandwich stores, are not ridiculously expensive. Lastly, throughout the company analysis, it was established how much people appreciate Pret A Manger, as was evident by the number of stores which were made in order to cater to the needs of all citizens. Having Pret littered around the country and the world makes it accessible for all consumers and customers. Once Pret is able to entice new customers, and convince them that their prices are not extravagant, then the author strongly believes that Pret would be able to trump the competition which is in Subway sandwiches. Pret would be able to claim the number one spot as the most dominant contributor in the sandwich market.

Onderwerp de doodstraf

Onderwerp de doodstraf Ik kies voor het onderwerp de doodstraf omdat het vrij actueel is en het mij interesseert omdat het een veelbesproken onderwerp is. Ik heb dit onderwerp gekozen omdat bijna alle mensen hier een mening over hebben en omdat er in de Bijbel over gesproken wordt. Ikzelf ben van mening dat de doodstraf iets is wat niet mag en dus afgeschaft moet worden. Ik vindt het ook een heel erg interessant onderwerp omdat het niet duidelijk in de Bijbel staat. Het is voor mij dus ook een klein beetje een zoektocht naar antwoorden Toch delen de mensen die de Bijbel hebben gelezen niet dezelfde mening, dat komt omdat er in de Bijbel niet heel duidelijk staat of het wel of niet mag. Zo staat er: Jullie hebben gehoord dat tot de ouden gezegd is: U zult niet doden. Wie doodt, zal uitgeleverd worden aan het gerecht. Maar Ik zeg jullie: ieder die zijn broeder een kwaad hart toedraagt, zal uitgeleverd worden aan het gerecht. (Matteà ¼s 5, 21-22) Hier staat dus dat je niet mag doden en dus niet mag oordelen of iemand moet blijven leven of ter dood veroordeeld moet worden. Nog bekender is de uitspraak: Oog om oog, tand om tand.( Exodus 21 ). Dat zou dus betekenen dat als je iemand dood, zelf ook gedood moet worden. Dus in moderne tijd vertaald; iemand die heeft gedood, moet door de rechter ter dood worden veroordeeld. Maar in de Bijbel staat ook: Wie iemand zo treft, dat hij sterft, zal zeker ter dood gebracht worden. Wie zijn vader of moeder slaat, zal zeker ter dood gebracht worden. Wie een mens rooft, hetzij hij hem reeds verkocht heeft, hetzij deze nog in zijn bezit wordt aangetroffen, zal zeker ter dood veroordeeld worden. Wie zijn vader of moeder vervloekt, zal zeker ter dood gebracht worden. Het staat dus niet duidelijk in de Bijbel of het wel of niet mag. Daarom is ook niet iedereen het erover eens. Er zijn verschillende ideeà «n en theorieà «n over de doodstraf. Dit is ook een van de redenen dat ik me hierin wil verdiepen, het is een veelbesproken onderwerp maar nog te onduidelijk voor mij om te beoordelen of het wel of niet mag volgens de Bijbel. Het is een onderwerp die naar mijn mening ook te maken heeft met abortus omdat je met abortus een levend kind wegneemt. Je kiest er dus voor om dat kind te doden. Dit is iets wat volgens de Bijbel verboden is. Voor mij is dit abortus nog erger dan de doodstraf. Maar omdat het ik het over het onderwerp de doodstraf doe ga ik daar niet te veel op in. Ook is het vaak de vraag of dat de veroordeelde wel echt schuldig is. Want hoe vaak is het wel niet voorgekomen dat iemand onterecht vast zat? Ook is dit een paar keer met mensen gebeurd die achteraf onschuldig bleken te zijn. Zoals hierboven staat zijn er veel verschillende standpunten. Ook onder mensen met dezelfde religies zijn de meningen verdeeld. Zo is mijn oom dominee en tegen de doodstraf terwijl mijn andere oom ook christelijk is maar wel voor de doodstraf is. Er is dus nog veel om te doen en juist daarom zijn er veel verschillende argumenten en standpunten.. Ik heb de standpunten en argumenten in 4 groepen verdeeld. Voor de doodstraf Voor de doodstraf volgens Bijbels perspectief Tegen de doodstraf Tegen de doodstraf volgens Bijbels perspectief Voor de doodstraf. Het is veel goedkoper om de doodstraf toe te passen dan iemand een aantal jaar in de gevangenis te houden. De familieleden van het slachtoffer of het slachtoffer zelf hebben veel leed moeten doorstaan door de dader, terwijl ze dit niet hebben verkozen. De doodstraf maakt dit iets dragelijker. Het kan ook meteen voorkomen dat mensen het recht in eigen handen gaan nemen en het slachtoffer gaan wreken. De doodstraf kan werken als een afschrikkend middel. Een crimineel zal nu zich eerder bedenken om een zwaar misdrijf te plegen vanwege de zware straf die erop staat. Een moordenaar zou niet meer de maatschappij in mogen want hij zou misschien weer kunnen herhalen wat hij al eerder heeft gedaan. De doodstraf is de zwaarste straf die je kunt geven en de enige vergelding voor. Voor de doodstraf vanuit Bijbels perspectief. Wie iemand zo treft, dat hij sterft, zal zeker ter dood gebracht worden Wie zijn vader of moeder slaat, zal zeker ter dood gebracht worden. Wie een mens rooft, hetzij hij hem reeds verkocht heeft, hetzij deze nog zijn bezit wordt aangetroffen, zal zeker ter dood veroordeeld worden. Wie zijn vader of moeder vervloekt, zal zeker ter dood gebracht worden. Als een man overspel pleegt met de vrouw van een ander, moeten beiden ter dood worden gebracht. Tegen de doodstraf. Het is tegen de rechten van de mens (artikel 3 en 5) De doodstraf is onherroepelijk Het wordt gebruikt als vergelding niet als straf De doodstraf schrikt niet af, terwijl dat wel de bedoeling is. Het is vooral een straf voor de nabestaanden De doodstraf heeft discriminerende effecten De dader heeft geen kans om zijn leven te beteren Het is kwaad met kwaad vergelden, je doet zelf wat je tegen een ander zegt dat Hij/zij dat niet mag doen. Tegen de doodstraf vanuit Bijbels perspectief. De doodstrafdruist in tegen andere bijbelse opdrachten, zoals Gij zult niet doden. Maar we mogen volgensPaulusook geen kwaad met kwaad vergelden(Romeinen 12:17) Jullie hebben gehoord dat tot de ouden gezegd is: U zult niet doden. Wie doodt, zal uitgeleverd worden aan het gerecht. Maar Ik zeg jullie: ieder die zijn broeder een kwaad hart toedraagt, zal uitgeleverd worden aan het gerecht. (Matteà ¼s 5, 21-22) Jullie hebben gehoord dat er gezegd is: Oog om oog en tand om tand. Maar Ik zeg jullie een zaak niet uit te vechten met iemand die je kwaad heeft gedaan. Maar als iemand jou een klap op je rechterwang geeft, houd hem dan ook de andere voor. (Matteà ¼s 5, 38-39) Jullie hebben gehoord dat er gezegd is: U zult uw naaste liefhebben en uw vijand haten. Maar Ik zeg jullie: heb je vijanden lief en bid voor wie je vervolgen, dan zullen jullie kinderen worden van je Vader in de hemel, want die laat zijn zon opgaan over slechten en goeden, en Hij laat het regenen over rechtvaardigen en onrechtvaardigen. Wees volmaakt, zoals ook uw hemelse Vader volmaakt is. (Matteà ¼s 5,43-45, 48) Uiteraard zijn er nog meer standpunten en argumenten maar ik kan ze niet allemaal gebruiken dus heb ik een selectie gemaakt. Mijn standpunt over de doodstraf of het wel of niet mag is heel makkelijk. Het mag NIET!! Ik vind dat de mens niet mag oordelen of iemand dood moet of moet blijven leven, er staat ook in de bijbel dat de mens niet mag oordelen dus laten we dat dan ook niet doen. Ook hebben we niet de capaciteit, ik neem als voorbeeld Amerika waar nog met regelmaat de doodstraf wordt opgelegd. Het hele land en in sommige gevallen bemoeit de hele wereld zich ermee, iedereen heeft een mening en de media zit er bovenop. Dan lijkt het mij niet dat een rechter onder deze druk een goed besluit kan nemen. Ik heb ook altijd geleerd van mijn ouders dat als ik boos was niet boos mocht blijven en hem of haar ook niet iets toe mocht wensen. Als ik dat wel deed dan zou ik over iemand oordelen en er was maar 1 iemand die dat mocht doen; God ! Dus, als je er niet over mag oordelen, waarom zou je het dan wel in werkelijkheid mogen brengen? Het klopt dat de Bijbel vol staat over moorden, en mijn bovengenoemde argumenten staan ook allemaal in de Bijbel. Toch denk ik dat het volgens de Bijbel niet mag. Alle argumenten die hierboven zijn opgenoemd staan in het OUDE Testament. Jezus is in het NIEUWE Testament gekomen en heeft dus een aantal dingen gezegd waaruit ik kan opleiden dat moorden(doodstraf) niet mag. Hij haalde het Oude Testament aan om de Oude wet te voltooien omdat Hij de Nieuwe wet was en is. Veel mensen gebruiken dan het argument: Ja maar in de Bijbel staat oog om oog, tand om tand. Deze mensen hebben het stuk dan niet gelezen. Want er staat namelijk ook : Oog om oog en tand om tand. Maar Ik zeg jullie een zaak niet uit te vechten met iemand die je kwaad heeft gedaan. Maar als iemand jou een klap op je rechterwang geeft, houd hem dan ook de andere voor. (Matteà ¼s 5, 38-39) Tegenwoordig zijn er verschillende manieren om de doodstraf uit te voeren. De meeste manieren zijn de galg, de kogel, de elektrische stoel, de gaskamer en de dodelijke injectie. De meningen zijn verdeeld over wat nu het meest humaan is. Veel mensen vinden de dodelijke injectie het meest humaan maar ze realiseren zich niet dat ook een hele lijdensweg is. Misschien heb je geen pijn maar stel je voor dat je daar ligt (terecht of onterecht) je zit vastgebonden en er is niks meer wat je kan doen. De lichten in de kamer gaan aan en het doek gaat open, ze ziet nog de blikken van je eigen familie, de jury en de familie van de gedupeerde. Dan krijg je opeens een paar spuiten in je arm, de doeken gaan dicht en je bent alleen in een dichte kamer. je wilt nog dingen zeggen en je wilt bewegen maar niemand die jou hoort en ziet. Alles wordt langzaam minder, je zicht, je ademhaling, je hartslag. En je weet dat je binnen enkele minuten dood gaat. Ook dit is geen fijne dood. Dus het maakt mij niet uit hoe de doodstraf wordt uitgevoerd ik ben gewoon tegen de doodstraf omdat het een onmenselijke en onomkeerbare straf is. Ook zonder de bijbel te hebben gelezen. Zou ik tegen deze straf zijn. Ik vind het ook hypocriet, je mag niet moorden maar omdat de verdachte/dader heeft gemoord, vermoord je hem of haar ook maar. Ook voor de nabestaanden levert dit niks op. Als de dader de doodstraf krijgt opgelegd dan is de dader wel dood maar daar krijgen ze niet hun verloren persoon mee terug. Deze persoon krijgen ze natuurlijk nooit meer terug maar als de dader levenslang krijgt dan kan hij wel na gaan denken in zijn cel over zijn zonden en misdaden. Naar mijn mening is dit dus ook een veel betere straf en kan de dader ook spijt betuigen voor zover hij/zij dat nog niet heeft gedaan. Hij leert er dus iets van en kan in die cel misschien wel tot bekering komen. De doodstraf is dus een nutteloze straf waarbij geen winnaars vallen, eigenlijk al leen maar verliezer. De doodstraf is een heel terechte straf voor zware misdrijven. Als je de doodstraf invoer weten de mensen wat de gevolgen kunnen zijn dus is het gelijk een stok achter de deur. Het schrikt dus af en dan bedenken de criminelen zich wel een tweede keer voor ze een poging doen tot een zwaar misdrijf. Het is ook heel terecht want als jij een leven van iemand neem dan heb je zelf natuurlijk ook het recht niet meer om te leven. In de mensenrechten staat wel dat iedereen recht heeft op een leven. Maar als iemand andere mensen heeft vermoord, heeft hij zelf dan nog wel het recht op leven? Ik vind van niet!! Ieder mens heeft recht op een bestaan maar op het moment dat jij dat leven afpak van iemand heb je dat recht gewoon verspeelt. Bovendien is iemand die een moord heeft gepleegd een moordenaar en dus ook een bedreiging voor de samenleving. Is het dan wel verstandig om zo iemand op te sluiten en hem verder te laten leven tussen vier muren? Nee, iemand kan altijd ontsnappen of wegens goed gedrag vrij komen (als de dader geen levenslang heeft gehad). Daarom is het beter om deze dader de doodstraf op te leggen. Ook voorkom je hiermee wraakacties. Vaak is een familielid of vriend van de gedupeerde uit op wraak, als iemand dood is kan hij/zij geen wraak meer nemen. Ook kan de doodstraf in sommige gevallen humaner zijn dan een (levenslange) gevangenisstraf. In Nederland is dit misschien niet het geval maar denk aan landen in Azià « of in het Oostblok, daar is de gevangenis echt geen pretje. Daar zijn de voorzieningen zeer slecht, je zit met veel mensen in à ©Ãƒ ©n cel en heb dus geen privacy. Je krijgt daar lichamelijke straffen, je wordt verkracht. Ook dat is geen pretje. Daarom willen sommige daders liever de do odstraf dan levenslang. Ook in financieel oogpunt is de doodstraf beter. Het is een goedkopere manier om de daders te straffen. In Nederland kost het ongeveer 300 euro per dag voor à ©Ãƒ ©n gevangene ! Kun je nagaan hoeveel het kost als iemand 25 jaar lang in een gevangenis zit! Dat is 2,8 miljoen euro ! Nou is de vraag of diegene het wel waard is nadat hij/zij zon erge misdaad heeft gepleegd. Ook in de bijbel staan er veel voorbeelden waarin staat wanneer de doodstraf toegestaan is, zoals: Als een man overspel pleegt met de vrouw van een ander, moeten beiden ter dood worden gebracht. Hier staat dus dat als een man overspel pleegt hij ter dood gebracht moet worden. In andere woorden: vreemdgaan = doodstraf. Dus ook in de Bijbel is het toegestaan dat de doodstraf wordt uitgevoerd, waarom zouden we die nu dan niet toepassen. Als je iemand veroordeelt tot een paar jaar gevangenisstraf terwijl hij een hele familie vermoordt schrikt dat natuurlijk niet af, daarom is het juist goed om zware misdrijven hard aan te pakken. Vaak kan dat alleen met de doodstraf. En waarom zouden we de doodstraf niet invoeren als dat toch geen negatieve gevolgen heeft voor het gewone volk. Het is immers de bedoeling dat alleen de misdadigers worden aangepakt. Het volk dat zich normaal gedraagt zal hier niks van merken. Daarom moet de doodstraf weer worden ingevoerd. Het gaat alleen op voor mensen die zich niet aan de wet houden, als jij je aan de wet houdt is er niks aan de hand. En vaak zijn de mensen die moorden, mensen waarbij een steekje los zit. Kranten VS in actie tegen de doodstraf OPENING, Van onze correspondent Bert Lanting op11 augustus 00, 00:00, bijgewerkt20 januari 09, 12:31 Ook al is er binnen de Verenigde Staten kritiek op de doodstraf, de belangstelling voor de ultieme straf is gering. Amerikaanse kranten hopen de discussie een nieuwe wending te geven door een DNA-test te laten uitvoeren in een oude zaak. Een aantal Amerikaanse kranten wil de discussie over de doodstraf in de VS een nieuwe wending geven door een DNA-test te laten doen om na te gaan of een gevangene die vier jaar geleden werd geà «xecuteerd, werkelijk schuldig was. De kranten kregen daarvoor deze week toestemming van een rechter in Georgia. Het gaat om de zaak van Ellis Felker, die in 1996 in Georgia ter dood werd gebracht wegens het verkrachten en vermoorden van een meisje. Felker heeft altijd volgehouden dat hij onschuldig was. Via een DNA-onderzoek van zijn haar en stukjes huid die onder de nagels van het meisje werden gevonden, hopen de kranten waaronder The Boston Globe en The Atlanta Journal-Constitution er achter te komen of Felker gelijk had. De afgelopen jaren zijn al tientallen gevangenen vrijgekomen, nadat uit DNA-onderzoek was gebleken dat zij onschuldig waren. Bij terdoodveroordeelden gebeurde dat zelfs op het moment dat zij op hun executie zaten te wachten. Als ooit kan worden aangetoond dat iemand ten onrechte is geà «xecuteerd, krijgt het debat over de doodstraf een heel andere wending, voorspelt Ben Bradlee jr. van de Boston Globe. Dat zou vooral pijnlijk zijn voor de gouverneur van Texas, George Bush, die er steeds op hamert dat onder zijn bewind nooit een onschuldige is geà «xecuteerd. Een paar jaar geleden probeerde de rooms-katholieke kerk in Virginia een DNA-test te laten doen om zekerheid te krijgen over de schuld of onschuld van een andere gevangene die wegens moord en verkrachting ter dood was gebracht. Maar een rechtbank weigerde dat omdat het bewijsmateriaal besmet was. Volgens openbaar aanklager Kelly Burke uit het district waar het vonnis tegen Felker werd voltrokken, zegt het DNA-onderzoek niets. Ook als de stukjes huid onder de nagels van het slachtoffer van iemand anders blijken, zijn er volgens hem voldoende andere bewijzen die aantonen dat Felker de dader was. Gouverneur George Bush, de Republikeinse presidentskandidaat, is vanuit het buitenland onder vuur komen te liggen wegens de executie van een zwakzinnige gevangene. Mensenrechtenorganisaties en de EU hadden er tegen geprotesteerd, maar Bush legde de kritiek naast zich neer. Texas executeerde gisteren twee gevangenen, maar de protesten richtten zich vooral tegen de executie van Oliver Cruz. De 33-jarige Cruz kreeg de doodstraf wegens het verkrachten en vermoorden van een vrouw die op een luchtmachtbasis in San Antonio werkte. Maar volgens zijn advocaat verdiende hij die straf niet, omdat hij zwakzinnig is. Het besluit de executie door te laten gaan werd genomen door vice-gouverneur Rick Perry, maar gouverneur Bush, die op campagne is, liet weten dat hij het met diens besluit eens was. De jury heeft uitgebreid bewijsmateriaal gehoord over de geestelijke vermogens van Cruz, maar is tot de conclusie gekomen dat zijn gruwelijke en berekende misdaad een doodvonnis rechtvaardigde, zei Bush. Een half uur voordat Cruz een dodelijk spuitje kreeg , was een andere gevangene in de executiekamer terechtgesteld. Hij was veroordeeld wegens de moord op een bejaard echtpaar. Met de voltrekking van de twee vonnissen kwam het aantal gevangenen dat onder gouverneur Bush ter dood is gebracht op 140, een record. De executie van Cruz heeft in de Amerikaanse pers tot een discussie geleid over het executeren van misdadigers met uiterst beperkte geestelijke vermogens. Dertien van de 38 staten die de doodstraf kennen, hebben wetten die de executie van zwakzinnigen verbieden. De meeste van die staten leggen de drempel bij een IQ van 65. Cruz kwam bij intelligentietests uit op een IQ van 63. De openbaar aanklager bestreed dat niet, maar betoogde dat het hem alleen maar gevaarlijker maakte. Hoewel er vanuit het buitenland veel kritiek was op de executie van Cruz, trok zijn zaak in de Verenigde Staten echter veel minder aandacht dan de executie van Gary Graham, eerder deze zomer. De kritiek was dat Graham ter dood was veroordeeld op basis van de verklaring van slechts à ©Ãƒ ©n ooggetuige. Graham zelf hield tot het eind vol dat hij de moord niet had gepleegd. Ondanks alle kritiek liet George Bush de executie doorgaan. Sindsdien lijkt de belangstelling voor het onderwerp te zijn weggeà «bd.

A Sense of Gothic Expressed in Mary Shelleys Frankenstein Essay

A Sense of Gothic Expressed in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein The term ‘Gothic’ has many forms. Its origins go back to the medieval period and can be seen in architecture such as Westminster Abbey in London and the Notre Dame cathedral in Paris. It can also be applied to art in the works of Hieronymus Bosch who’s grotesque and haunting imagery depicted ugly distorted humans who are morally degenerate and depraved, and to William Blake who visualised Dante’s Divine Comedy. In literature, the Gothic novel is credited as starting with Horace Walpole’s Castle of Otranto, (1764) which characterised most of what would become the essential ingredients in the Gothic genre. I will for the purpose of this assignment discuss what constitutes ‘Gothic’ in Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein novel. Mary Shelly’s novel Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus was first published in London in 1818 and again with an edited edition in 1831. It was a novel of its time in respect to its romantic style of flamboyant and extravagant characters, which are placed in mysterious, remote and exotic settings. Shelly’s ‘hideous progeny’ of a novel was largely inspired by her own tragic personal circumstances which saw the untimely death of her mother, half-sister who committed suicide and the death of two of her daughters, one of which died two weeks after a premature birth. Shelly’s nightmarish vision during a tremendous thunderstorm while on vacation at the villa Diodati at Lake Geneva had a profound effect on ...

Huxleys Brave New World Essay -- Huxley Brave New World Essays

Huxley's Brave New World Today, in 21st century United States, people are concerned with the fast pace of new and growing technology, and how these advances should be used. In the last decade alone we have seen major advancements in technology; in science, cloning has become a reality, newer, more powerful drugs have been invented and, in communications, the Internet has dominated society. There is a cultural lag due to the fast rate of increasing technology, and while the governments of the world are trying to keep up their role as censors and lawmakers, we as individuals are trying to comprehend the effects it has on our lives. Will these advances enhance our lives to an unprecedented level of comfort, or lead to the loss of actual happiness? In the early 1930's, when Aldous Huxley wrote Brave New World, this was a question he felt was worth asking. In Huxley's Brave New World there are two forms of happiness: physical and actual. The fulfillment of physical happiness is the basis of the New World society. Residents never have to worry about food, shelter, job security, or sickness. One will never look fat, wrinkly or become weak with brittle bones and, thus, even the fear of growing old is taken away. Mustapha Mond, one of the world controllers in the novel, sums up physical happiness with the statement: ?The world is stable now?They?re well off; They?re safe; They are never ill; they?re not afraid of death; they?re blissfully ignorant of passion and old age(Huxley 220). The characters, Bernard Marx, Lenina Crowne, and Helmholtz Watson are each looking for more than what is offered by physical happiness, they are looking for actual happiness. Actual happiness ?relates more to the mind and heart? (HH Dalai Lama 21). For example, Helmholtz has the desire to be creative and Lenina has the desire to love. Bernard Marx, knowing that he is different and considered inferior to other Alpha-plus males, has the desire to not only fit in, but to be respected by others. Other individuals in the Brave New World are content while these three characters are searching for something not given to them by the government, something beyond physical happiness. They are searching for actual happiness. Individuality, which is one of the strongest values in the United States today, is taken away at the moment of conception in the B... ...e a prophetic tone seventy years after it was written. Our society?s priorities, like the one in the Brave New World, seem to be quite shallow in its obsession with physical appearance and conspicuous consumption of material objects. People undergo surgery to improve their appearance and maintain their youthful image of themselves. People, generally, judge others as well as themselves by their possessions, status, and appearance, rather than the quality of their character. Cloning is no longer science fiction, and with increasing technology, the absolute need for mothers and fathers could disappear. At what point does social stability outweigh human nature? There needs to be a balance between physical and actual happiness, and where the proper balance should be is questionable. Huxley doesn?t have the answer, but he leaves the reader with an idea of why balance is so hard to find: ?Actual happiness always looks pretty squalid in comparison with the overcompensations for misery? (Huxley 221). WORKS CITED: Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World. New York: HarperCollins, 1998. Lama, HH Dalai. The Art of Happiness. London: Hoddler and Straughton, 1999.

Existentialism in “Babylon Revisited” by F. Scott Fitzgerald

F. Scott Fitzgerald's fiction presents not only the magic of the Jazz Age but also its immorality, materialism, and degradation of the human spirit. While Fitzgerald was probably not trying to specifically present existentialism in his works, Finkelstein describes Fitzgerald's work as having an existential theme: â€Å"F. Scott Fitzgerald was of this milieu, and at the same time critically detached from it. He expressed its hard-boiled, disillusioned attitude through the deliberate use of alienated imagery† (171).He manages to present the existential theme of alienation along with other existential issues; the characters in his fiction characterize the existential ideas of the absurdity of life, the absolute freedom of choice, and living with the consequence of one's choices. In â€Å"Babylon Revisited,† the freedom of choice leads the characters to exploit wealth and freedom and, eventually, to regret past actions and try to make up for the abuse of this freedom. In â €Å"Babylon Revisited† the reader can see the absurdity of life through the rise, fall and rebuilding of Charlie Wales.He chooses to drink and spend all his money. He loses everything in the stock market crash but attempts to rebuild his life. Charlie is distraught over the tragic loss of his wife but realizes that he must suffer the consequences of his prior actions.Regaining custody of his daughter Honoria serves as a symbol that Charlie has regained control of his life. This paper presents the ideas of existentialism as they apply to â€Å"Babylon Revisited†. The greatest tenet of existentialism in â€Å"Babylon Revisited† is that life is absurd because there is no true meaning.Individuals must create meaning; therefore they are constantly searching for themselves. Charlie Wales was searching for his true meaning and made some choices that led to bad consequences. The ultimate absurdity in this story is that Charlie makes the right decision to turn his life a round, but because he must live with his consequences, he fails to regain custody of his daughter. Although Charlie believes he has moved beyond his previous profligate behavior, his sister-in law does not, and she makes the decision to keep his daughter from him.The most absurd part is that Charlie is better suited now to take care of his daughter but Marion manages to remain in control of the situation. He works hard to build his life back up but one incident (that reflects his past life) turns everything upside down.Charlie Wales made some choices that led to bad consequences. The ultimate absurdity in this story is that even though Charlie has made the right decision to turn his life around, he must live with the consequences of his previous decisions and fails to regain custody of his daughter.The absurdity here deals with the fact that Charlie's experiences run contrary to expectations. If he has indeed changed his life, he should be rewarded for his redemption; unfortunately, he is not. He works hard to build his life back up but one incident (that reflects his past life) turns everything upside down.Although Charlie is now strong, his sister-in-law Marion is not, and she makes the decision to keep his daughter from him. Charlie may be better suited now to take care of his daughter, but Marion manages to remain in control of the situation.Charlie makes the choice to go back to the bar where he had spent much time in the past, and he makes the absurdly innocuous choice to give the bartender the Peters' address, which leads to the incident of Duncan and Lorraine's visit to the Peters' apartment that destroys the entire effort to get his daughter back.The reader, therefore, can never truly know how big of a role Charlie plays in his own downfall. He lives, as we all do, in an absurd world and this absurdity magnifies the impact of even the smallest decision. The existential idea of free will is important in â€Å"Babylon Revisited.† Sartre postulate s a concept of being-in-itself that corresponds to one phenomenal world, and it does not lie within the power of the individual to choose it. Individuals exist by virtue of personal choice. He believes â€Å"there is no universal a priori structure of consciousness, no common human nature, no native set of desires shared by all men that dispose us to project one kind of values to the exclusion of others or to give being-in-itself one kind of meaning rather than another† (Olson 133). Each individual is absolutely free.Charlie Wales exercised his free will prior to Helen's death in a series of wasteful actions that Fitzgerald presents as having a connection to the biblical idea of â€Å"Babylon. † The writings of the â€Å"Fathers of the Church describe Babylon as the ancient center of luxury and wickedness† (Baker 270).Fitzgerald develops the Babylon motif by presenting Charlie's actions as â€Å"catering to vice and waste† (215). Here, Fitzgerald's work c an be seen as assimilating Nietzsche's idea that God is dead and each individual must be the god of himself in a world without a God (Lavine 325).Since the existentialist mentality has as its basis the concept that an individual is free to make choices for the life he or she lives, he or she is absolutely responsible for the world in which he or she lives. The concept of being-in-itself did not cause Charlie to choose this life.If, therefore, he made a bad choice, he cannot hold anyone else responsible. Not until after the stock market crash does Charlie realize the consequences of his actions and feel the guilt of those consequences. He realizes that, like all individuals, he is responsible for everything he does (Toor 157).Charlie is held responsible for his actions in that he loses both his wife and daughter. He cannot reclaim his daughter until he accepts the consequences of his past. Charlie Wales pays the penance for his choice to drink and live the life of Babylon (Eble 42).H e realizes that he must pay the price: It [money] had been given, even the most wildly squandered sum, as an offering to destiny that he might not remember the things most worth remembering, the things that now he would always remember – his child taken from his control, his wife escaped to a grave in Vermont (Fitzgerald 216).For Charlie, the suddenness of the Depression creates a sense of dislocation, a feeling that he is living in two worlds at once. He is committed to the idea of recovery and the new way of life he has created, but he still clings partially to many of the habits he formed during the boom (Way 91).Charlie Wales makes the existential choice to live the â€Å"Babylonian† concept of â€Å"vice and waste. † He now, however, feels the stress of his actions, and he makes the choice to try to reconcile his former failings. The recovery is the important change that Charlie makes.His main purpose is to regain custody of Honoria. Charlie feels as if he has paid the price for his past choices and has sufficiently recovered enough to look after Honoria himself. He tells Marion and Lincoln that he is anxious to have a home and anxious to have Honoria in it.He states that â€Å"things have changed radically† with him (Fitzgerald 220). The memory of Helen drives Charlie to work hard and make himself a better person. He is working to get Honoria not only for his own sake, but for the sake of his dead wife.Fitzgerald is showing the sort of strength in Charlie that the reader does not see in Marion. Charlie has learned to control his drinking. When Marion finds out he had been in a bar before coming to her apartment, she chides him. He responds, â€Å"I take one drink every afternoon and I've had that† (213).He is trying to prove that he can control his drinking habits. He has one drink to enjoy the idea and taste of alcohol but will not allow himself to drink in excess. This is his idea of control, â€Å"I take that drink deliberately so that the idea of alcohol won't get too big in my imagination† (Fitzgerald 221).He knows it will be difficult to persuade Marion to let Honoria go, but he is confident that if he accepts her recriminations patiently and convinces her of his newly acquired steadiness of character, he will ultimately be successful. Another element of Charlie's recovery that Fitzgerald addresses is his renewed relationship with his daughter.Fitzgerald makes it obvious in the beginning of the novel that Honoria was not the first thing on the mind of her parents during their Babylon days. When the barman asks why he is in town and Charlie responds that he is in Paris to see his daughter, the barman replies questioningly, â€Å"Oh-h!You have a little girl? † (211). Someone who knew Charlie fairly well during his drinking days did not even know that he had a daughter. Fitzgerald contrasts this idea of having no relationship with his daughter by showing with tenderness and affect ion the scenes in which Charlie tentatively establishes contact with Honoria.He buys her toys and takes her to the circus, creating once again the atmosphere of love between them. Although he may be buying the love of his daughter, Marion grudgingly admits that Charlie has earned the right to his child (Way 91). Fitzgerald also shows the intense love that the child has for her father.She wants to go with him to Prague and asks when she will get to be with him (217). Charlie has recovered to the point that he wants to be with his child and she wants to be with him. Ultimately, when Marion denies him the child, he again shows strength of character (Way 109).He remains lonely but self-confident, â€Å"He would come back some day; they couldn't make him pay forever† (Fitzgerald 230). Sartre believes that â€Å"there are moments of anguish when life loses its meaning: when the objects that formerly drew our attention fade into oblivion and the desires that had previously guided o ur conduct seem vain or petty† (Olson 131).This creates an ugliness in the world to which people must react. These â€Å"moments of anguish† in â€Å"Babylon Revisited† occur when Charlie's friends manage to show up at the most inopportune times: â€Å"Sudden ghosts out of the past: Duncan Schaeffer, a friend from college.Lorraine Quarries; one of a crowd who had helped them make months into days in the lavish times of three years ago† (Fitzgerald 217). In a foreshadowing of the more crucial intrusion that Duncan and Lorraine will make later in the story, the first encounter with the duo is when they intrude on Charlie's luncheon with Honoria.They invite him to come sit in the bar with them and also invite him to dinner. They cannot accept the change in Charlie. Their intrusion is an unwanted product of Charlie's past, and they are outside forces that affect his life that he cannot control (Cooper 52). Later in the story, Lorraine invites him to dinner, re minding him of their drunken exploits. As a temptress, she has lost her charm for Charlie. He instead goes to meet with the Peters and his daughter (Baker 272). Just as Charlie has regained permission to take his child, the final, and most detrimental, intrusion occurs.Lorraine and Duncan crash the apartment, unmistakably drunk. They loudly and brutishly encourage him to join them for dinner. He tries feverishly to get them out of the apartment, but they are the reminders of his old life that Marion needs to change her mind. Lorraine will not let Charlie forget about his mistakes, â€Å"All right we'll go. But I remember once when you hammered on my door at 4 a. m. I was enough of a sport to give you a drink† (Fitzgerald 227). Charlie knows that he has lost Honoria because of these outside forces that try to make him weaker.Fitzgerald shows that Charlie is stronger because of his life change. Charlie dealt with the encounters by choosing to be strong, â€Å"Somehow an unwelc ome encounter. His old friends liked him because he was functioning, because he was serious; they wanted to see him, because he was stronger than they were now because they wanted to draw a certain sustenance from his strength† (218). This strength has led to Charlie's feeling of isolation. He goes to the Ritz bar in search of Duncan and Lorraine with the idea of finding them and letting them know that they possibly ruined his life.They had done their sorry work and vanished from his life (Baker 273). Existential philosophy includes alienation from the world, from one's fellows, from oneself (Finkelstein), and Charlie suffers this type of alienation. He has lost his family and his life. When he eventually fails to regain custody of Honoria, he questions why life dealt him this hand: â€Å"He wanted his child, and nothing was much good now, beside that fact. He wasn't young any more, with a lot of nice thoughts and dreams to have himself. He was absolutely sure Helen wouldn't have wanted him to be so alone† (Fitzgerald 230).â€Å"Babylon Revisited† opens in the Ritz bar, a symbolic prison for those trapped in Charlie's lifestyle. Charlie spent many nights in the â€Å"prison† of the Ritz bar, when he was in his prime party era. Charlie drinks himself into a sanitarium before he begins to come out of the prison of alcoholism.The story then ends again in the Ritz bar. Charlie has come full circle since the beginning of the story. He found happiness in knowing that he would take Honoria home, and then his past of loneliness finds him. The intrusions lead to his ultimate loneliness again (Griffith 237).He is sitting in the Ritz bar when he finds out that Marion has refused to let Honoria go. He realizes that his loneliness will not end because of the mistakes that he has made: â€Å"Again the memory of those days swept over him like a nightmare†¦ the men who locked their wives out in the snow, because the snow of twenty-nine wasn't real snow.If you didn't want it to be snow, you just paid some money† (229). The prosperity that he once had is now imprisoning him in a life of solitude and loneliness. The sentence that he must pay in this prison is six more months of loneliness before he can try to get custody of Honoria again (Baker 274).LeVot, in his discussion of Fitzgerald's life, notes that this story marks the end of an era. This is the foreclosure of the almost divine privileges Americans had enjoyed before the Depression. â€Å"Charlie Wales feels like a king stripped of his kingdom, his past, his illusions† (256).Ten years after he wrote the story, Fitzgerald stated that the story was his farewell to youth. Just as Fitzgerald is fearful that his own irresponsibility will pass to his daughter, Charlie tries to wipe out the past so it will not affect Honoria. LeVot states, â€Å"A great wave of protectiveness went over him. He thought he knew what to do for her.He believed in character, he wa nted to jump back a whole generation and trust in character again as the eternally valuable element† (256). He wants to revive an earlier virtue, for the sake of Honoria. This revival will help to alleviate the loneliness he feels without his daughter.Fitzgerald felt the loneliness brought about by his addiction to alcohol (LeVot â€Å"Fitzgerald in Paris† 51). Bruccoli states that when Charlie remembers his Paris nights that these were probably Fitzgerald's own memories, â€Å"When Fitzgerald went pub-crawling by himself, it was sometimes hard to terminate his revels† (239).His talent and charm often rescued him from the social morasses he created. Bruccoli shares an incident when Fitzgerald showed up drunk at the Paris Tribune and ripped up copy. He sang and insisted that the other reporters join in. When several friends tried to take him home, he insisted that they tour the bars.He finally passed out, but when they delivered him to his apartment he refused to go in. They eventually had to carry Fitzgerald into to his apartment, kicking and screaming. This account was forgiven, as were most of his other escapades (239).Charlie Wales, unlike Fitzgerald, has not been forgiven and remains separated from his wife and daughter due to alcoholism. He had to work hard to regain his life. The existential absurdity is that he was unable to get custody of Honoria, although he paid the penance for his past sins.Charlie chose to live the life of â€Å"Babylon† and lost everything. After doing everything right to change his life, the outside forces of Duncan and Lorraine ruined his plans to make a home with Honoria. These outside forces are the consequences of the past life that Charlie chose to live.Existentialists not only believe in free will but also living with the consequences of past decisions. Charlie's past decisions led to his ultimate loneliness and alienation. Sartre makes the point that alienation is one of the greatest tenets of ex istentialism.Although Fitzgerald is not an existentialist, his characters in â€Å"Babylon Revisited† are good examples of the ideas of the existentialist movement and how those ideas affect and shape a person's existence.Works Cited Baker, Carlos. â€Å"When the Story Ends, ‘Babylon Revisited. The Short Stories of F. Scott Fitzgerald: New Approaches in Criticism. Madison, Wisconsin: U of Wisconsin P, 1982. 269-277.Bruccoli, Matthew J. Some Sort of Epic Grandeur. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1981.Finkelstein, Sidney. Existentialism and Alienation in American Literature. New York: International Publishers, 1965.Fitzgerald, F. Scott. â€Å"Babylon Revisited† and Other Stories. New York: Macmillan Scribner Classic, 1988. 210-230.Griffith, Richard R. â€Å"A Note on Fitzgerald's ‘Babylon Revisited. ‘ † American Literature 35 (May 1963): 236-239.Lavine, T. Z. From Socrates to Sartre: the Philosophic Quest. New York: Bantam, 1984.LeVot, Andr e. F. Scott Fitzgerald: A Biography. New York: Doubleday, 1983.LeVot, Andre. â€Å"Fitzgerald in Paris. † Fitzgerald/Hemingway Annual 5 (1973): 49-68.Olson, Robert G. A Short Introduction to Philosophy. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1967.Toor, David. â€Å"Guilt and Retribution in ‘Babylon Revisited. ‘† Fitzgerald/Hemingway Annual 5 (1973): 155-64.Way, Brian. F. Scott Fitzgerald and the Art of Social Fiction. New York: St. Martin's, 1980.