Lords Of The Rings Essays - Fiction, Literature, Fantasy

Lords of the Rings Who was the title character (describe thoroughly): The title character is a hobbit named Frodo Baggins (one of Bilbos younger cousins and also his favorite). Frodo is a Brandybuck and a Baggins. Frodo and Bilibo have the same birthday (September 22). Since Bilbo and Frodo had the same birthday and Frodo was Bilbos favorite, Bilbo decided to ask Frodo to come to live with him so they could celebrate their birthday together. The Fellowship of the ring Frodo receives the ring. The way Frodo receives the ring: Frodo gets the ring from an envelope that Bilbo gave Gandalf and Gandalf gave Frodo. Bilbo did not want to give up the ring but Gandalf took the ring. After Gandalf took the ring in the envelope he gave it to Frodo and told him ?what ever happens do not put the ring on?. That's how Frodo got the ring. Who are the main characters, and what are their roles: The main characters consist of Sam Gamgee, Marry Brandybuck (a man not a woman), and Pippin. These three hobbits made a conspiracy, which was because after Bilbo vanished the three became suspicious. Sam was their spy because it was easy to spy for Sam. The reason it was easy for Sam to spy was because he was Frodos house keeper, so when Frodo and Gandalf talked, Sam could stop mowing, trimming the flowers or what ever the case may be and listen to the two talking. Their roles are: Sam's role is a hobbit that wanted to see Elves and got to see them. Also Sam saved Frodo, Pippin, and Merry in the ?Old forest?. Pippins role is a hobbit that thinks he knows it all, and saved them from farmer Maggot. The way he saved them from farmer Maggot is that farmer Maggot hates trespassers and sends his dogs after them, but farmer Maggot knew Pippin and was fond of him so they were not tore apart. Mary's role is a hobbit and a leader ( when Frodo was not). Merry was the leader oF the conspiracy( or at least it seemed that way). I like Merry the best all three because he is not an idiot like Sam and he is not Self centered like Pippin. I like Pippin the least. Tell about the story: At first Bilbo lived alone until he invited his cousin Frodo over to live with him. Frodo accepted his invitation. They celebrated their birthday together every year. The last year they celebrated their birthday together was when Frodo turned Thirty three (the first year male hobbits enter manhood). On that night Bilbo made a speech and then disappeared ( put the magic ring on )? Just as Bilbo and Gandalf had planed. The reason Bilbo and Gandalf planed this, is because, Bilbo wanted to die in peace? So he and Gandalf made a plan. When Bilbo left he left every thing Frodo? Except for the ring. Bilbo did not want to give up the ring and Bilbo got angry when Gandalf tried to take it but Gandalf also got angry and made Bilbo give him the ring. At the time when Gandalf had taken the ring from Bilbo, Bilbo had already began to say things like: ?My precious, yes! My, my precious!? When Gandalf took the ring it was in an envelope with Frodo's name on it. The reason it h! ad Frodo's name on it, is because Frodo was Bilbo heir and Bilbo was going to give the ring to Frodo, but he had second thoughts? Until Gandalf came. After Bilbo left, Frodo stayed in The Shire fore a few more years. But while the years passed Gandalf found out many things about the ring. Gandalf told these things to Frodo and also told him that the ring was evil and that he had to travel to Mt. Doom in Morador where he could destroy it. On his way to Mt. Doom He met people like Tom Bombadail, Strider, and Mr. Butterbur. Also on his way when he stops in Buckelbury to leave Pippin (or so he thinks). When he gets there he finds out all about the conspiracy. Strider aside from Merry, Pippin, and Sam is the

What are the tensions between modern and classical liberalism Essays

What are the tensions between modern and classical liberalism Essays What are the tensions between modern and classical liberalism Essay What are the tensions between modern and classical liberalism Essay The ideas of modern liberals are quite different from those of classical liberals. However, even though there are tensions between the two forms of liberalism over a variety of topics, they nevertheless agree on the main liberalistic concept on individualism, the belief in individual sovereignty, that individuals should be the ultimate decision makers on how they behave. In spite of this fundamental consensus, there is a still tension between classical and modern liberalists over numerous topics, such as over the concept of the state, their views on equality of opportunity, and also over their belied of freedom. The first cause of tension between classical and modern liberals is their differing opinions concerning the state. Classical liberals subscribe to the idea of negative freedom. This is the idea of an absence of and government interference and external constraints of the individuals self-regarding acts. Negative freedom suggests a clear distinction between the individual and the state. Since all liberals subscribe to the Hobbesian view of human nature the belief that all people are selfish, aggressive and competitive. Therefore the state acts in its own interest, and is also oppressive, imposing a collective upon society, thus limiting the freedom and responsibilities of the individual. Despite this, classical liberals see the state as a necessary evil. They therefore believe in a minimal state, acting only to maintain domestic order and personal security, known to classical liberals as a night watchman state. However, although modern liberals also believe that the state is a necessary evil, they believe that a state is more of a necessity, while classical liberals see it as being more evil. Modern liberals are believers in positive freedom. The philosopher T. H. Green argued against negative freedom, saying that the unrestrained to pursuit of profit had given rise to new forms of poverty and injustice. The economic liberty of the few had shattered and reduced the life chances of many. According to Green, individuals had sympathy for one another and had the capability of being altruistic. He argued that negative freedom in business would allow a businessman to employ labour at the cheapest rate possible, thus exploiting workers and impeding on their liberty. Freedom of choice in the market, was, therefore an inadequate conception of individual liberty. For this reason Green developed the idea of positive freedom which would give people freedom. Hence he developed the idea of positive freedom which would give people freedom from the social evils which crippled peoples lives. Freedom is therefore the ability of the individual to develop and achieve individuality. This involves the ability of individual to realise their own potential, attain skills, knowledge and achieve fulfilment. The working class is therefore held back by the disadvantages of poverty, sickness, unemployment and ignorance.

African American Outline Essay Example for Free (#2)

African American Outline Essay African (466) , American Civil War (234) company About StudyMoose Contact Careers Help Center Donate a Paper Legal Terms & Conditions Privacy Policy Complaints ? It happens to be common knowledge that throughout history African Americans have been oppressed, segregated, and disregarded as civil human beings. In the dawn of history Africans were regarded as animals and as such they would do the job of animals, however this paper will look at their sacrifices and fights to be treated as equals. United States Congress. (1866, April 9). Civil Rights Act.

Surrogate motherhood Dissertation Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Surrogate motherhood - Dissertation Example Surrogate motherhood is a theme that evokes numerous opinions. There are many supporters of surrogate motherhood as well as many opponents. Neither of them is right or either of them is right in their own way. This research project is not focused on considerations of opponents or proponents. The literature review presented further on is focused on a current paradigm of surrogate motherhood. It is supposed that it is relevant to pay for surrogate motherhood to women who have already given birth to their own children. Physical and emotional load of surrogate motherhood is evident and it is not an easy labor. There should be no commercial spirit of surrogate motherhood, but it should be paid like any other kind of labor. Legal aspect of surrogate motherhood A common surrogate motherhood criticism is determined by the claim that it is impossible to buy or to sell a child. A child is not a commodity and money relationship is irrelevant from this perspective. In the New York State Task For ce on Life and the Law it is concluded that â€Å"the exchange of money for possession or control of children.., threatens to erode the way that society thinks about and values children, and by extension all human life†Ã'Ž Thus, from this perspective, a child’s birth is the natural outcome of a certain deal and it can be transferred from one party to another for money. A supposition that children in this case are treated like commodities can be contradicted by the fact that sometimes parts of a human body are treated like objects (Meehan, 2000). It can be argued that commodities require cleaning, cherishing etc, so it is not wrong in this context to treat children as commodities or objects. Thus, it is relevant to consider in this context people who pay money to buy a child from a surrogate mother. A good treatment is usually guaranteed to a child who is bought. From another perspective, such kind of an immoral treatment is irrelevant, because children are not commodi ties from the very beginning. Babies are given by God and it is not proper to sell or too buy them. With this respect one may argue that for example, when an individual wants to meet his spouse he pays for a matrimonial agency. But in this case a future spouse is not bought; it is just a money transfer to a matrimonial agency. Thus, it can be said that not a child is bought, but services of a surrogate mother are bought. Moreover, the services of a commercial surrogacy agency are bought. At this point it is relevant to talk about surrogacy arrangement. It is a cruel reality of the modern world that parents want to become legal parents and receive custody rights and for this purpose they have to pay a certain sum of money. A surrogate mother wants to get money for her services of bearing a child since it is a hard work to bear a child. An interesting suggestion is provided by†¦: â€Å"In a commercial surrogacy agreement, the commissioning couple could be thought of as buying pa rticular services from the surrogate mother. But it is not necessary to suppose that anything at all is bought or sold† (Mitchell, Pellegrino, Elshtain, Kilner & Rae, 2006). In this case obligations of one party imply that it gives money to another party in case obligations are fulfilled. This is a pragmatic paradigm that is often discussed in the contemporary researches and studies in this field. Therefore, we can surely claim that no illegal basis lies in terms of these contracts. There is a well-known paradigm suggested by Blyth and Potter, who claim that surrogacy does not imply buying or selling children, because future parents â€Å"might even imagine that they have purchased a particular baby.., what they have paid for is not necessarily the same as what they think they have paid for† (Mclachlan&Swales, 2009). This is an interesting claim and it is worth considering. There is such kind of cases, when future parents rejected to take the baby from a surrogate mothe r when it has already come into the world. Therefore, a legal

The Argument for Gay Marriage Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

The Argument for Gay Marriage - Essay Example This paper highlights that many wars are being fought which render more dead bodies than politically favorable results. The concept of two individuals choosing to solidify their commitment to one another, seems not only valid but also, refreshing considering all the hate that occupies the human race. Further more, any type of government should never be permitted to dictate whom should or should not be permitted to marry whom. Considering that the term â€Å"human rights† implies an entire species as opposed to certain facets of a species, there is no way that one group of individuals should be permitted to socially exclude another group of individuals from sharing in rights that should be afforded to all humans equally without regard to sex, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation or economic means. The very same argument which states that gays should not be allowed to be married, is virtually synonymous with the one used by white supremacists in the time of slavery and segreg ation, to maintain the institution of slavery. During the time of slavery in America, African American s were not permitted to vote, own land, patronize establishments or hold public office. It was stated during these times that blacks were â€Å"not white† or were lesser people than those who were white. This is no different from the ideology behind â€Å"protecting the sanctity of marriage† which is perpetuated by the conservative republican party. The only difference is that heterosexuality is considered the â€Å"norm† while homosexuality is considered to be a lesser condition of human sexuality. This is just another way of socially isolating a group of individuals and thereby limiting the rights of said individuals. There is no moral grounds for this and any argument which claims to establish such grounds, is an obtuse attempt at superiority and dominance over other human beings.

Social psychology Essay Example for Free

Social psychology Essay Thesis: Stereotypes have many negative effects such as inducing a discriminative movement, having an impact on the psychological identity of a person, and leading to prejudices. I. Stereotypes may induce a discriminative movement. A. Fat persons are not hired in some companies. B. Stereotypes tend to prevent people from learning real facts about an individual. C. Generalizations can induce false accusations. II. Stereotypes may have an impact on the psychological identity of a person. A. A little boy who grows up in a minority group restrains his own achievements because of negative stereotypes about his group. B. The persons in a minority group tend to fall into an unsafe or negative behavior. C. Stereotypes can promote success in the majority of groups. D. An individual can feel lost as he or she doesn’t match the stereotype attributed to the group. III. Stereotypes lead to prejudices. A. All Arab people are considered as dangerous. B. The media provides a lot of negative images about Arab people. C. The negative images may prevent friendship. People are All the Same Soren Kierkegaard said once: â€Å"Once you label me you negate me. † Indeed, people tend to judge all the time the people that they consider different from them. Our brains are simply wired to stereotype others by some basic generalizations. People categorize the persons every day by race, gender, religion, ethnic background, and so on. However, it is when people overuse these generalizations that the danger can appear. Stereotypes have many negative effects such as inducing a discriminative movement, having an impact on the psychological identity of a person, and leading to prejudices. First, stereotypes may induce a discriminative movement. A good example is when any company wants to hire a fat person. Indeed, these companies focus only on the physique of the person who is applying for the job instead of looking at his or her real skills. The physique of the fat person acts as an obstacle to the other persons. In other words, it stops people from learning real facts about the subjected individual. People usually see the fat persons as lazy, not healthy, incompetent, or even as handicapped. This generalization allows people to believe that fat persons don’t have a legal right to be hired when in fact, they do have this right. Also, based on other negative generalizations, people may be accused for example for criminal facts without having any credible proof. As Alane Michaelson explained in his essay ‘stereotyping Consequences,’ they tend to accuse them just because of their race, their religion, or any other characteristic that make them belonging to another social group. Thus, discrimination is one of the greatest risks associated with stereotypes. Second, stereotypes may have an impact on the psychological identity of a person. When a little boy grows up in a minority group where the people are always seen as incompetent, he may start to believe on these critics and, consequently, start to restrain his own achievements unconsciously. Hearing perpetual stereotypes about a group may cause the persons belonging to this group to believe that all the stereotypes that are said out by the minority group are true. Therefore, as Julie Moore mentioned is her article ‘The Effects of Stereotyping,’ the persons in minority tend to fall into an unsafe or negative behavior. Consequently, children cannot grow up properly with all these stereotypes that surround them in their daily life. However, the impact on the identity of the individual can have an opposite effect when it comes to positives stereotypes in the majority groups. In this case, instead of limiting their achievements, people improve their skills until they reach the generalized fact. In this manner, these people will feel that they are â€Å"true† participants in the group as they fit to the stereotype. In contrast, some people may also feel not appropriate to the group that they belong as they don’t belong to the stereotype attributed tothe gr oup. Thus, generalizations made about a group can have an important impact on the identity of the persons belonging to this group. Third, stereotypes lead to prejudices. In her article ‘The Effect of Stereotyping,’ Julie Moore explains an example that is related more or less to the main idea of the first paragraph: when a white female person doesn’t approach an Arab person who is next her as she believes that all Arab persons are dangerous. Thus, the female judges before meeting or speaking with the man. Obviously, this prejudice doesn’t come from nowhere; it is actually partly the result of the media effect that tends to throw a lot of negative images about the Arabian people. They always project images of Arab with weapons in a manner to show to the world that they are dangerous. Also, because of these negative prejudices that people usually make, building relationship with new friends can often be a big obstacle. If the white woman knew that the Arab man was in fact a rich famous surgeon in America, she would directly establish a conversation with him. Thus, prejudices can often lead to surprised result. Yet another example related to prejudices is Brent Staples’ experiences. Through his essay ‘Night Walker,’ the black man explains how people, especially girls, are afraid of him when he walks behind them in a dark and empty street because of his skin color and the way he dresses. Consequently, while stereotypes appear as a natural fact and help people to understand certain groups as a whole, they don’t include and allow individual differences. By creating stereotypes, people promote more discrimination, prejudices, and a significant impact on the individual’s identity. Therefore, to prevent all these negative effect of stereotypes, people should take into consideration that even if every individual belongs to a certain group, it doesn’t mean that a person is like all the other members of the group. People should dare to approach the persons that are different than them by letting go the negative images and learning about each other as special individuals. Finally, creating relationship with people that are totally different would be like a benefit that may lead to a rich and interesting life. Works cited Aronson, Joshua, â€Å"The Impact of Stereotypes. † BU Today. Science Tech. 28 Mar. 2008. Web. 13 Apr. 2013. Michaelson, Alane, â€Å"Stereotyping Consequences. † eHow. Culture Society. 13 Jun. 2010. Web. 13 Apr. 2013. Moore, Julie, â€Å"The Effect of Stereotyping. † Mental health. Yahoo. 4 May 2007. Web. 13 Apr. 2013. Staples, Brent. â€Å"Night Walker. † The Short Prose Reader. Ed. Gilbert H. Muller and Harvey S. Wiener. 13th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill 2013. 220-23. Print.

Ambiguities Answered in Derek Jacobis Richard II Essay -- Richard II

Ambiguities Answered in Derek Jacobi's Richard II Â   The plain text of a script does not live and breathe as a visual performance must. Both director and actors have to make choices in a production, to interpret and make clear the plot and purpose of the play. The Derek Jacobi Richard II uses the capabilities of film to remove many of the ambiguities that plague interpretation of that text. In doing so, it creates a passionate yet ineffective King Richard who, between his own insecurity and Northumberland's conniving, hurls the crown to the willing if uneasy Bullingbrook. Richard's character becomes evident through costume, acting, and script choices. Throughout the play, Richard wears some of the lightest colors on stage -- his white robe at court in I.i, his sky-blue garments at the lists in I.iii, even a pure white robe as opposed to the off-white the "caterpillars" wear in the bathroom in I.iv. Even in the deposition sequence of IV.i, the brown robe Richard is clad in is still light, almost pastel. This wardrobe choice has two effects. The light colors draw visual attention to Richard, just as he continually tries to draw aural attention with his high-flown speeches. Yet the constant parade of pastels and watered-down shades also makes Richard look weak, particularly next to the more soberly-dressed court or the much darker-clad Bullingbrook and Northumberland. Richard's costume style reinforces the impression: in the white robe he seems to typically use for court occasions, the huge sleeves incapacitate his hands (obviously intended in the period as an emblem of leisure, but here also serving as an image of powerlessness) and the high collar forces his neck up, strengthening an appearance of arrogance and aloofness. ... ...n the shoulder and thrusting the summary of charges at him, expressively rolling his eyes at the dethroned king's constant refusals, to his smug parting of Richard and his queen. The Derek Jacobi production of Richard II provides its own answers to many of the ambiguities posed by the text alone. Richard is portrayed as an ineffective ruler ripe for overthrow, and Bullingbrook as a more capable man boosted to power by the scheming of the Machiavellian Northumberland. Many other interpretations are valid -- indeed, some of this production's choices were made easier by judicious cuts in the script -- but this production provides an entertaining, reasonable, and self-consistent interpretation of the welter of events surrounding the deposition of a king. And, in so doing, the production proves the almost limitless variety of theater, particularly of Shakespeare.