Freeze Tag Drama Class Improv Game

Freeze Tag Drama Class Improv Game The Basics Freeze Tag (also known simply as Freeze) is an improvisation game and a great drama exercise for performers at any level. It works best in groups of eight or more. Two volunteers step onto the stage while the rest of the actors sit and wait for the right moment to join in. I Need a Location As with most improv activities, audience participation is essential. The actors on stage will request suggestions for a specific location. If this is a classroom exercise, the drama instructor should encourage the audience to be creative with their suggestions. For example, Stuck inside a giant vending machine or In the break room of Santas Workshop is far more inspiring than Shopping mall. The performers listen to a few of the suggestions. They then quickly select an interesting setting and the scene begins. The goal of the actors is to invent characters and dialogue off the cuff. They should quickly establish a storyline and conflict. Also, they should be encouraged to move about the stage space, pantomiming whatever they wish to incorporate into the scene. Calling Freeze! After the actors have been given enough time to create an interesting situation, the performers sitting in the audience can now participate. All they need to do is shout, Freeze! The actors on stage will then stand motionless. Whoever called out freeze enters the stage space. He or she takes the place of one of the actors, recreating the exact same pose. This can sometimes be challenging if the actor happens to be in a ballet position or crawling on all fours. But thats part of the fun! Keep It Going A brand new scene begins with a different setting and different characters. No more suggestions are taken from the audience. Instead, it is up to the performers to invent the situation. Drama instructors should ask students to let the physical positions influence the storyline of the next scene. For example, if one set of performers is frozen while in the middle of a tug of war contest, the next scene could take place at an Amish barn raising. Also, instructors should make certain that each scene is given enough time to develop. Usually, two or three minutes is ample time to establish character and conflict. At first, improvisation activities might be very challenging for unseasoned performers. Yet, we often played these sorts of games when we were children. Remember: Improvisation is simply an advanced form of playing pretend.

5 Answers to Questions About Direct Address

5 Answers to Questions About Direct Address 5 Answers to Questions About Direct Address 5 Answers to Questions About Direct Address By Mark Nichol 1. I want to tell athletes at my school, where the mascot is a wildcat, to be proud of their team’s accomplishment. Should I write, â€Å"Be proud Wildcats† or â€Å"Be proud, Wildcats†? I see things like this written all the time without a comma, but something tells me I should include one. You’re right. Both exhortations are correct, but if you write, â€Å"Be proud Wildcats,† you’re telling your readers to be proud Wildcats. â€Å"Be proud, Wildcats† is addressed directly to the athletes; you’re telling the Wildcats to be proud. It’s a subtle difference, but the version with the comma conveys the meaning you want. Also, when pondering whether to write something the way you see it all the time, consider the source: Direct address shows up a lot in informal, conversational (and frequently careless) writing such as email messages and written notes, but in published form, a comma generally (and correctly) separates the term of address from the statement. 2. One issue that comes up in my email communication is the situation in which I am addressing a known group of families, ladies, parents, or students. If I begin my email with â€Å"Hello, Ladies,† should â€Å"Ladies† be capitalized? According to The Gregg Reference Manual, in the salutation of a letter (or an email message) a form of direct address capitalize the first word and all nouns. 3. When should familial terms like mom be capitalized? Capitalize mom and related words when the term is a form of direct address substituting for a name: You’re asking, â€Å"Can I go see a movie, Mom?† just as you would ask, â€Å"Can I go see a movie, Jane?† When you speak of your mother to another person, substituting mom for her name, the word, for the same reason, is capitalized: Compare â€Å"I asked Mom if I could go see a movie† and â€Å"I asked Jane if I could go see a movie.† But if you precede mom with a pronoun, it is a generic noun, equivalent to a designation for any other person: â€Å"I asked my mom if I could go see a movie† is equivalent to â€Å"I asked my dentist if I could go see a movie.† 4. Why is the word miss not capitalized in your example â€Å"Please, miss, can you tell me the time?† The capitalization system for addressing people by a term other than a name is confusing. The first letters of words for job and familial titles are capitalized, but titles of respect like sir and miss, as well as terms of endearment (such as dear), are styled entirely in lowercase letters. 5. In â€Å"Your majesty, his imperial highness summons the prince to the Command Council Tent,† should I change his to His? Yes, but you shouldn’t uppercase only the first letter of his. Both â€Å"your majesty† and â€Å"his imperial highness† are used as titles; thus, all those words should be initially capitalized: â€Å"Your Majesty, His Imperial Highness summons the prince to the Command Council’s tent.† Technically, because â€Å"his imperial highness† is in the third person, it should not be initial-capped unless it precedes the person’s name, but such courtesies for monarchs are often excepted from this rule. (Also, if there is an official body called the Command Council, by all means capitalize its name. However, although you would capitalize room or chamber, for example, if there were a designated space for it to meet, because of a tent’s ephemeral nature, I don’t think tent merits the same treatment. Note that in the reference to the Command Council, I’ve made that body’s name possessive.) Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Style category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:When to Use â€Å"That,† â€Å"Which,† and â€Å"Who†People versus Persons10 Tips About How to Write a Caption

Religion, Literature Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Religion, Literature - Essay Example However, after Nietzsche had developed an independent mind, their difference grew, as they perceived humanity and life through different perspectives. This paper delves into Nietzsche’s disappointment with Wagner and how his religious views diverged from Nietzsche’s views. Nietzsche describes Wagner as a musician who is the master than anyone he knows in the discovery of tones that are peculiar to tormented, oppressed, and suffering souls (Darby 56). Wagner could even give a speech to dumb misery. He could be master of everything that was small, but he refused to be this according to Nietzsche. Several other factors made Nietzsche disappointed in Wagner. The work begins by showing that he and Wagner were opposites (Darby 60). He goes on to state that the book was for psychologists and that all Germans were excluded from those he intended to read his books. This was most likely in reference to Wagner and his roots. Nietzsche then goes on to express his admiration for Wagner and his ability to express both his misery and suffering in his creations of short music. After this, he goes on to take a critical stand on Wagner’s attempt at large work production (Nikos 65). Nietzsche was also critically disappointed at the physical aspect of Wagner’s music (Nikos 65). He even went on to try to expose Wagner as more of an actor than of a composer. According to him, Wagner’s feet, lungs, heart, throat and intestines were affected uncomfortably. Nietzsche also says he was disappointed to discover that in Wagner’s music existed no pleasing melody or rhythm. Rather, Nietzsche contends, Wagner’s music was merely a way of enhancing gesturing and posing theatrically. Nietzsche also reveals that he wanted and desired profound, wanton, cheerful, roguish, graceful, and tender music. He reserves praise for Chopin, Peter Gast, Liszt and Rossini, and all Venetian music. He, in fact, ends the Intermezzo with his poem, Venice. He found the discussed qualities

Introduction to Economics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Introduction to Economics - Essay Example Inventions are mostly related to the technological development. Generally, the technological solution of any problem is called invention. In spite of the fact that in today’s growing world many of the inventions are recorded (and performed) in fields far outside of the technology (Peng, 2010). Innovation The process through which an invention is brought in order to provide the users with the industry or market is called innovation. Innovations are critically important for the development of economy. Innovations are produced on the side of production and not on the consumption side. According to Schumpeter â€Å"But innovations do not usually appear spontaneously and neither are they generated in the following way: new wants are first created by consumers and under their pressure production apparatus is adjusted. It is the producer who usually initiates economic change, and if necessary edifies consumers...so if in the theory of circular flow it is not only possible but it is simply necessary to regard wants of consumers as independent and in fact basic factor, then in the analysis of changes our point of view must be reversed.† (Stokes, Wilson & Mador, 2010) Innovation doesn’t happen by chance but these are planned. Therefore it is necessary to a strategy and vision for innovation. Its strategy includes alternative plans, an actual overview of opportunities, effective analytical tools and the functioning of any speciality that one could have. Answer # 1 (b) Types of Innovation Innovation was clearly identified by the first economists named Joseph Schumpeter (Schumpeler. 1934). He classified innovation in five types in the 2nd chapter of his book The Theory of Economic Development (1934). According to Schumpeter the five main types of an innovation are (Stokes, Wilson & Mador, 2010): 1. Conquering a new source of raw materials 2. Introducing a new good 3. Introducing a new method of production 4. Opening a new market 5. Reorganising an indus try in a new way. Answer # 1 (c) Some of the examples of a Schumpeterian type of innovation are: 1. The development of a new or improved product conquering a new source of raw materials. 2. Internet-based financial services are an example of a new method for the introduction of new goods in market. 3. Pilkington's float glass process is an example of introducing a new method of production. 4. Direct marketing and internet marketing are examples of opening a new market. 5. BPR (business process re engineering) and TQM (total quality management) systems: Is the new method of innovative management. This method would be helpful in reorganizing the industry in a new way. Answer # 2 (a) Output per Worker Output/worker England Portugal Wine 3 4 Cloth 6 2 Absolute Advantage A nation that produces any service or good more efficiently than any other is said to have an absolute advantage of the production of that service or good (Zhang, 2008). In the above example it is not true that England h as absolute advantage over Portugal in every sector. By using the Labour theory of value it can be seen that in England one unit of wine is exchanged with three units of cloth, however, in Portugal two units of wine is exchanged for one unit of cloth. Therefore England has an absolute advantage in production of cloth whereas Portugal has an absolute advantage in wine production because in England one unit of cloth require less labour for its production and for the production of wine in Portugal

Health Care Museum Essay Example for Free

Health Care Museum Essay My proposal for a new health care hall of fame museum would include several things. My museum will pay tribute to the five most significant developments in the evolution of health care in the United States. These developments has helped change and save the lives of many people. Exhibit 1: Vaccines and Medications Vaccines and Medications are very important. With these two we have had a significant decrease in the number of people that were hospitalized or caused death. With the â€Å"advances in medical science† you can be protected against more diseases. Medicines can either heal, prevent, or stop diseases or a sickness. Medicine can be used in the form of a tablet, syrup, drugs, and exercise. When we get sick we take medicine for many different reasons. With the help of medicine it will â€Å"restore us back to normal†. Exhibit 2: Prevention and Control of Infectious Disease If you do not have control of infectious diseases from spreading, then we all can be at risk of a big epidemic of disease that are contagious. You have different community partners and health care providers that work with people to discuss the pros and cons of the infectious diseases. We all should work together to prevent the spreading of any kind of germ. This can be something as simple as washing your hands more frequently throughout the day. You would also use vaccines and medicines to prevent and treat infectious diseases. Exhibit 3: Technology Technology is a great advancement for the health fields, especially now that it is improving every day. Technology has become an important source to obtain medical information. Everyone is using technology on so many  different ways. They are using it to reach â€Å"wider populations,† contact with patients, public awareness, community outreach, and any questions that you may have medically, you can chat with doctors and nurses online as well. Exhibit 4: Medical Equipment Medical Equipment is something I choose, because with the different types of medical equipment it can save many lives. You have different types of medical equipment. â€Å"Diagnostic medical imaging machines† are used to help with diagnosis. MRI, Ultrasound, CT scanner equipment is used to maintain a person’s function. These are just some of the medical equipment’s. You also have other machines that monitor your vital organs in your body. Like EKG machines to monitor your heart, lung and dialysis machines. Exhibit 5: Oxygen Oxygen is needed by all living organism. Without oxygen humans will not be able to survive. In institutions like hospitals, they keep a supply of oxygen in stock that is provided to patients who have difficulty breathing. We must take care of ourselves in order to have a longer life span and in order to live healthy. All of my exhibits that are presented to you, I feel are very important and vital in the health care field. These are all thing that we need in the health care and in order to survive. Reference 1. Health Statistics. Health U.S. 2010: With Special features on death and dying. Hyattsville MD:CDC, National Center for Health Statistics, 2011

attention deficit disorder :: essays research papers

In 1917 and 1918 there was a worldwide outbreak of encephalitis. Many children showed ADD like symptoms afterwards, leading doctors to further speculate that the disorder was the result of brain damage, resulting in perhaps the first names for ADD, Post-Encephalitic Disorder and Minimal Brain Damage. When it was later learned that these children were not brain damaged after all, the name changed to Minimal Brain Dysfunction. In 1937 doctors first reported evidence that stimulant medication helped relieve the symptoms of hyperactive children. These reports were largely ignored until the 1950's, when there was a rapid increase in the use of drug therapy in psychiatry. By the mid 1960's, stimulant medication had become a common treatment for hyperactivity. In 1960 Stella Chase and other researchers began to write about "hyperactive child syndrome," which they believed to have a biological, rather than environmental cause. In 1965 the American Psychiatric Association established a diagnostic category for what was now called Hyperkinetic Reaction of Childhood. In spite of the work of Chase and others, this condition was still largely believed to be caused by the child's environment, rather than being biological in origin. As a result, poor parenting was often blamed for ADD behavior. Over the next 15 years, research began to reveal the neurological origin of ADD. One of the many who studied ADD in the 1970's was Canadian psychologist Virginia Douglas. She is credited with identifying four major characteristics of the syndrome: deficits in attention and effort, impulsivity, problems in regulating arousal levels and a need for immediate reinforcement. It was largely due to Douglas's work that in 1980 the American Psychiatric Association established a new diagnostic category, Attention Deficit Disorder With or Without Hyperactivity. In 1987 the APA revised the name to Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder. More recently, with growing

A Man for All Seasons (Friend or Foe) Essay

In the book, A Man For All Seasons by Robert Bolt there are a few people that can’t be trusted by Sir Thomas More, the main character in the book. Richard Rich is definitely one of those men who can’t be trusted and along with Thomas Cromwell the two destroy More’s life slowly but surely and to the point of death. In the end of the book More is executed for high treason and his family goes from being very well off to having to start over. So this book shows that through deceitfulness of two, one can fall. There are two main reasons that Rich would be considered a â€Å"Foe† and those are his weak moral character and his devalue of More’s friendship. These are reasons to make someone a â€Å"Foe† because if a person doesn’t hold true to their morals then they are easily persuaded and if a person had the friendship of More then they would be idiots not to keep that friendship and respect. In the following paragraphs I will give examples from the book of these reasons. One reason why Rich is a â€Å"Foe† is because his moral character isn’t very strong and throughout the book there are many times where it is shown that Rich doesn’t have a strong moral character, for example: Rich: But every man has his price? More: No-no-no- Rich: But yes! In money too. More: No no no Rich: Or pleasure. Titles, woman, bricks-and-mortar, there’s always something. More: Childish. In this quote (pg.4) it shows that Rich can be bought and he is trying to tell More that this is normal because everyone â€Å"has his price†. However, More, being the kind and charitable man he is, tries to explain that being able to be bought is not normal and it is a moral weakness in someone’s character and tries to help him get a job as a teacher where there is no temptation of bribery. Another example of how Rich’s moral character is weak  is when he is talking to Cromwell and Cromwell tells him that he is to become Secretary to the Council, which he asks Rich not tell anyone about it. However when Cromwell repeats the question over and over, Rich, finally, says he would but it would depend on the bribe. The quote is as follows (pg.71-72): Cromwell: No ceremony, no courtship. Be seated. As his majesty would say. Yes; see how I trust you. Rich: Oh, I would never repeat or report a thing like that- Cromwell: What kind of thing would you repeat or report? Rich: Well, nothing said in friendship-may I say â€Å"friendship†? Cromwell: If you like. D’you believe that-that you would never repeat or report anything et cetera? Rich: Yes! Cromwell: No, but seriously. Rich: Why, yes! Cromwell: Rich; seriously Rich: It would depend what I was offered. In the beginning of the book More trusts Rich as a friend and he helps to get Rich a job as a librarian for the Duke of Norfolk, however, Rich stabs More in the back by joining Cromwell, who dislikes More very much and wants to see his demise. For instance in this quote he gives away information about a goblet given to More from a litigant that he was given by More who gave it to him in secret because he didn’t want to be bribed because he thought this was wrong. The quote is as follows (pg.75-76): Cromwell: Just so. This goblet that he gave you, how much was it worth? Come along, Rich, he gave you a silver goblet. How much did you get for it? Rich: Fifty shillings Cromwell: Could you take me to that shop? Rich: Yes Cromwell: Where did he get it? It was a gift from a litigant, a woman, wasn’t it? Rich: Yes Cromwell: Which court? Chancery? No, don’t get drunk. In which court was this litigant’s case? Rich: Court of Requests Cromwell: There, that wasn’t too painful, was it? Rich: No! Another example of how Rich devalues Mores friendship is when he is confronted about it and denies it. This happens when Cromwell confronts Rich about his friendship with More and he denies and when Cromwell says that More got him a job he devalues that by saying that More only recommended him to the Duke even though Rich couldn’t have gotten the job himself. This also shows that Rich doesn’t hold to his views under pressure, which makes easily changed. The quote is as follows (pg.36-37): Cromwell: †¦.There you are in a comparative backwater-yet the new Lord Chancellor’s an old friend of yours. Rich: He isn’t really my friend†¦ Cromwell: Oh, I thought he was. Rich: In a sense he is. Cromwell: Well, I always understood that he set you up in life. Rich: He recommended me to the Duke. In conclusion Sir Thomas More can’t trust Richard Rich because of his morally weak character, he devalues More’s friendship and he cracks under pressure. More also can’t trust Cromwell and when Cromwell and Rich are united they are dangerous even to though the smartest of men which More is one. I believe that Rich by himself would not be considered as dangerous as Cromwell, however, that is just my opinion. Robert Bolt’s A Man for All Seasons Robert Bolt’s A Man for All Seasons is a provoking historical drama. Thomas More, who is considered to be an honest man, is entangled in the politics of the day and having to decide between his own welfare and his personal conscience. Thomas is an absolute saint of the church, but now he had to choose between two different kinds of loyalty. The theme seems to be recurring, regardless of the age or setting. In fact, it is the Common Man who reminds the audience â€Å"The 16th century is the century of the common man.  Like all the other centuries.† By performing different characters with same personalities, â€Å"Common Man† enabled the audience to understand the complexities of More’s character in the way of juxtaposition. The Common Man in the play is actually an alienation device, which was first invented by Bertolt Brecht. Here, the Common Man is an effective device to maintain interest, interpret the action and convey the themes. He just like the Chorus in ancient Greek drama, whose role was to review the action, explores motivations and issues, foretell what might happen and explore any consequences. Both the Common Man and the Chorus relate the play to audience’s everyday life and their frame of reference in modern society. He is the linkage between the audiences and the stage. Just like how he is called, the Common Man, has all the characteristics ordinary people does. He has ordinary morals, ordinary doubts and ordinary concerns, which means he is always ready to compromise, distrustful of martyrdom and plays things low. He is the â€Å"Old Adam†, he is â€Å"us all†. Thomas More, who is the Chancellor of England during Henry 8th, is just the opposite of Common Man. At that time, Henry and his wife Catherine had been unable to birth a boy to be the heir of England, so Henry wanted to divorce with her and marry Anne Boleyn, but cannot get permission from the Pope. Henry tried very hard to get help from Thomas More because he is known to be an honest man and had very good reputation across the whole Europe. Henry pointed out extremely clearly that â€Å"Because you are honest. What’s more to the purpose, you’re known to be honest.† However, More is a strong principled man who held his belief firmly, he was loyal to the Church, at the same time, as the Chancellor of England, he cannot be disloyal to the King. Cardinal Wolsey, the former Chancellor, was executed for unable to help the King with the divorce. In order to keep himself and his family safe, Thomas More decided to keep silent and seek protection from the laws. If More’s â€Å"self† is unchangeable, the Common Man’s weakness is in his readiness to adapt and change into almost anything as a means to survive. Compared with the Common Man, the characteristic of honest of Thomas More is clearly observed. In Act One, More offered Rich a silver goblet, and spoke  frankly and bluntly that the goblet was a bribe from a woman who had a case at the court. More can certainly not say so, but he didn’t. When the King came to his house to talk about the divorce, the King pointed out directly that â€Å"Because you are honest. What’s more to the purpose, you’re known to be honest.† But when it comes to the Common Man, it all turned to be upside down. Matthew stole the wine of Thomas More, but lied about it; In order to protect himself, the Publican denied stoutly about knowing who Cromwell was; Jailer chose not to report Sir Thomas More’s statements for his own safe. The Common Man lies to survive, he holds his belief on self preservation, he is not a great man, he cannot affect the decisions of the Parliament, and he is only a common man, a man do whatever it take s to survive. More is also very loyal, to both the King and the Church. He didn’t want to betray either side, so he chose to be silent. He is a liberal thinker and a man of integrity. Even he didn’t want to swear to the Act, and resigned from his office, but he still concerned for the country. He warned Norfolk about threaten from the old Church and asked him to â€Å"keep an eye on the Border†. However, the Common Man doesn’t have this good quality. Matthew, a person who should be loyal to his master, Sir Thomas More, offered information about him to Cromwell, Rich and Chapuys for money. He became one of the sources of Cromwell; he sold his soul out and turned into an accomplice who sent More to death. When Sir Thomas More resigned from the position, he had to cut down Matthew’s wage, and without hesitate, Matthew left him and went to be the servant of Rich Richard. These two men’s acts are so different that we can see Thomas More’s characteristics of loyal clearly. Sir Thomas More is a man of principle as well. He held his belief in God so strong that nothing can bend it. He is a son of the Church. When Roper proposed to More that he wanted to marry his daughter, he refused for Roper was an heretic. More knew that Roper was a good young man and admired him a lot, but he still said no for his principles. Roper married Margaret as soon as he turned back to the Church. In order to uphold the principles, he insisted not signing on the Act, even he is threatened by death. But the Common Man changes the principles according to convenient. At first, the boatman tries to bilk More for more money, but eventually, after More is  dangerous to get close to, he even refused to take him home. Whether it is the Steward, the Boatman, the Publican or the Jailer, each persona is full of self-interest and simple pragmatism. â€Å"It isn’t difficult to keep alive, friends . . . just don’t make trouble, or if you must make trouble, make the sort of trouble that’s expected.† The metaphor of water appeared many times in the play. Water is flowing and changeable. The succession of characters the Common Man portrays provides an image of that fluidity. When people are aligned with the Common Man, they can find it difficult to comprehend Thomas More. For he got so many opportunities to save his life and reunite with his families. It’s hard to understand his martyrdom and strong belief in the law. In the contrast, Common Man knows the time and precisely when the stakes are too high, †If it’s worth that much now, it’s worth my neck presently. I want no part of it. They can sort it out between them. I feel my deafness coming on.† More also has an understanding of them, even when they steal his wine. â€Å"Matthew, I shall miss you.† While the play centre on More’s choice to die rather than sign over his name on the Act, it’s easy to determine how More’s characteristics are presented to the audience. If More is defined with his words, â€Å"a man’s soul is his self†, then the Common Man may best be defined by his philosophy, â€Å"better a live rat than a dead lion†. Even at times the Common Man is dishonest, manipulating, unscrupulous and disloyal; he is a master of living in the society. He changes his values easily like the water bounce back when hit on the bank. Thomas More held his unchangeable principles The alienation device has challenged our perspectives and left us with much to ponder. Ultimately, it is not only how we, the audience, perceive the Common Man or even how he sees himself. Most importantly, it is the understanding that those in power have of the Common Man and his motives, ideals and aspirations. ACT 1, SCENE 1 Conversation between Thomas More and Richard Rich. RICH: Well there! ‘A friend of Sir Thomas and still no office? There must be something wrong with him.’ MORE: I thought we said friendship†¦The Dean of St Paul’s offers you a post; with a house, a servant and fifty pounds a year. †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. RICH: It’s hard. MORE (grimly): Be a teacher. This conversation, as well as the previous one, sets up the contrast between Sir Thomas More and Richard Rich which is prevalent throughout the entire play. In this opening scene, Rich and More argue over whether or not anyone can be bought. While Rich believes â€Å"every man has his price†, More refuses to agree with the notion that everybody could succumb to the temptations of status, power, wealth and women, or the notion of suffering. Rich means to say that men want to avoid suffering and are therefore attracted to the possibility of escape, and More instantly recognises this idea as one of Machaevelli’s. As Machaevelli is historically understood to have written on the government, and how putting political appropriateness above ethical issues and morality was the sensible approach to be taken in aquiring status, Rich’s corruptibility and the suppression of his conscience is foreshadowed in that Machaevelli’s theories both interest and attract him. More warns Rich of the temptation involved in aquiring a high-ranking job, and offers him an Italian silver cup. The silver cup symbolises More’s attempt to test and teach Rich, and is significant throughout the play as it represents the commencement of Rich’s corruptibilty, which eventually escalates into much more evil and immoral actions later on. The cup also represents the differences in principles and morailty between More and Rich. While More’s principles don’t allow him to keep such a â€Å"contaminated† object, Rich jumps at the chance of receiving something so valuable for free. In between this opening conversation with More and the next important step in Rich’s complete loss of innocence, and More’s own demise, a number of changes occur in character relationships. Rich and Cromwell’s relationship becomes closer and more valuable. More recognises this and assumes Rich no  longer requires More’s assistance in aquiring employment. Rich objects to this, claiming he would rather work with More than Cromwell, however More again refuses Rich a job as he is certain Rich is untrustworthy and to an extent, dangerous. This is obvious in that while More points out to Norfolk that Rich is in search of employment, he does not â€Å"recommend† him. Matthew (More’s servant and one representation of the common man), also predicts that Rich will amount to nothing, but as we see later on, Rich’s deception and lack of morality and principles ultimately, and ironically, gets him everything he ever wanted. More talks to Cardinal Wolsey, the Lord Chancellor, who tries to convince him to approve of King Henry’s divorce, but More believes the divorce is unacceptable without the Pope’s consent. Despite Wolsey’s warnings of consequences associated with disapproval, More refuses to set aside his beliefs and conform, giving a clear insight into his belief in staying true to ones self and not conforming to something you don’t agree with out of fear. This persona of More foreshadows his stance on events that come later in the play. More also refuses to allow Roper to marry his daughter Margaret due to Roper’s dynamic religious beliefs, labelling him a heretic, and disapproving of his inability to stay true to the English Church. Rich becomes Norfolk’s secretary and librarian, and Cromwell undermines him for this. Rich admits he isn’t really friends with More anymore, which explains why he hasn’t yet aquired a better job. However, when Cromwell offers him employment he declines, showing that he isn’t ready to become a walking representation of Machaevelli’s theories yet, but later bribes Matthew for information on More which undermines his morality once again. Chapuys and Cromwell also bribe Matthew for information, which shows how most of the characters are immoral (especially contrasted to More) and highlights the difficulty More will face in his newly appointed position as Lord Chancellor. After deceiving More, Rich attempts to convince More to give him a job once again by telling him of Chapuys and Cromwells bribery towards Matthew. More refuses again and Rich’s violent behaviour and badgering spark fright in More’s family, who try to convice More to have Rich arrested. More believes the idea of this is infallible because Rich has not broken the law. King Henry visits More personally in an attempt to receive his approval, as the approval of a man with such an honest and moral reputation would be sure to make the King  feel moral as well. However More is unable to discard his conscience, telling the King: â€Å"This is my right arm. Take your dagger and saw it from my shoulder, and I will laugh and be thankful, if by that means I can come with Your Grace with a clear conscience†. Once again he is portrayed as a man of irrefutable morality, in that he won’t approve of something he believes is wrong by the law, or unacceptable by God. CROMWELL: †¦Well, congratulations! †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. RICH: †¦.You enjoyed it! In this Dialogue between Rich and Cromwell at The Loyal Subject, Cromwell bribes Rich with the position of â€Å"Collector of Revenues for York† in return for information. Rich is subtly coerced into admitting he will be bought, which pleases Cromwell in that he was relying on Rich’s corruptibility for information on More. Cromwell seeks Rich’s help in making the King’s divorce â€Å"convenient†, and despite Rich’s â€Å"laments† over his own corruptibility, he informs Cromwell of the bribe More once received. Cromwell believes More will change his stance on the King’s divorce, but Rich objects, saying More will not be easily frightened. While Rich represents how one can sacrifice their own moral conscience in the face of gain, Cromwell appears to have nothing to gain, which makes him appear more evil in that he is trying to bring More down for the sake of it. Guilt is a recurring theme throughout the play, and is strongly exemplified in this extract as despite Rich’s own guilt, he easily succumbs to the temptation Cromwell offers to him, revealing his pathetic character traits which were first brought to light in the opening scene. Between Rich’s ultimate betrayal of More, and complete transformation to a representative of Machaevelli’s theories, several events occur. Act two opens, which is two years later than the previous Act. The Act of Supremacy has been passed, which states that King Henry VIII is now the head of the Church of England. Staying true to his religious beliefs, More is unable to continue in his position as Lord Chancellor due to his belief that the King is attacking the Church of England. His disapproval of the King’s actions  force him to resign in order to keep his moral conscience, as he can’t be so closely connected to someone he sees as having no conscience, let alone work for them. Cromwell intends to use the information he gained from Rich in order to blackmail More into recognising the King as the head of the English Church, and consenting to the King’s divorce. The next time we see Rich is when Cromwell questions More about his stance on the issues regarding the King, and Rich notes what it said. However, while the knowledge that the King isn’t pleased with More’s actions, and the many attempts from everyone (even his family) to make him sign the Act of Succession unsettle More, he will not sacrifice his self for anything. More takes notice of Rich’s fancy clothes, which represent Rich’s gradual rise through position and status in society. It is now clear that the contrast in Rich’s and More’s ascent and descent are simultaneous with Rich’s lack of regard concerning moral principles, and More’s refusal to ignore his moral principles and conscience. More is eventually taken to prison for refusing to agree to The Act of Succession, which deems the King’s first marriage (to Catherine) invalid, while confirming that Queen Anne’s children are the heirs to the throne. More feels he will be condemned to hell if he is to approve, and while his death has been forshadowed, the play argues that his sacrifice of life is nothing compared to the other characters who sacrifice themselves and their consciences. As More’s family comes to the Tower of London to see him, his love for them is highlighted, while his absolute love for God is further highlighted in that he is willing to sacrifice a happy life with his family who he loves so much in order to serve God, and protect what he believes to be right. CROMWELL (backs away. His face stiff with malevolence): My lords, I wish to call (raise voice) Sir Richard Rich! †¦.. NORFOLK: Prisoner at the bar, you have been found guilty on the charge of High Treason. The sentence of the court is that you shall be taken from the Court to the Tower, thence to the place of execution, and there your head shall be stricken from your body, and may God have mercy on your soul! Prior to this extract (during More’s trial in which he is being charged with high treason), Cromwell attempts to convince the jury that More’s silence  regarding the King can be interpreted as nothing but disapproval. More once again refuses to take the Act of Succession, as he sees taking the oath as lying to God, which would be sacrificing his self. Rich is called to the stand, and claims he heard More say â€Å"Parliament has not the competence† to declare Henry VIII the head of the Church of England. More denies this, and tells the court there were two other people present during the conversation with Rich, but Cromwell undercuts this by saying they could not be at the trial and heard nothing anyway. Ultimately, More’s attempts to teach Rich were futile and unsuccessful, as Rich’s actions directly led to More’s death. When More realises his fate, he publicly denounces the Act of Supremacy and while he considers himself loyal to King Henry, he understands his premature death is because he refused to recognise the King’s marriage to Anne Boleyn. More also realises Rich has a new chain of office, and mildly scolds him: â€Å"Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world†¦but for Wales?†. Rich’s transformation to everything More ever despised is completed with his perjury. Ironically, More’s own refusal to perjure himself led to his death, while Rich’s willingness led to his financial and social prosperity. A Man for all seasons In Robert Bolt’s, â€Å"A man for all seasons†, Sir Thomas More did not die in vain. He stayed true to himself. More achieved more in the end because he didn’t let death worry him. His last words illustrate this â€Å"His will not refuse one who is so blithe to go† (pg. 99). More understood that he was in line with his beliefs. More fought for what he believed in and refused to be molded into something that he wasn’t. He knew that by dying, he would be proving a point to the public and let it be known that Cromwell had set him up. By More dying, he proved a point to himself and the public. That he was honorable and not going to succumb to the deceitful thinking of Cromwell and the King. â€Å"I have not disobeyed my sovereign. I truly believe no man in England is safer than myself.† (pg. 40) This clearly demonstrates the fact that More knew what he was on about and wasn’t going to go against his  beliefs for the sake of living. More strongly believed in the church and the Head of the Church, the Pope. He sustained in doing what you feel right in your heart, not what people tell you. More knew that if he stayed alive, it would have been sufferable, living in jail for the rest of his life, no job and little sight of family. He did what he thought was right. â€Å" I do no harm, I say none harm, I think none harm. And if this be not enough to keep a man alive, in good faith I long not to live†(pg. 97) When More died it sent a message to the public that the Kin was wrong in what he was doing. As More died in front of a lot of people, it certainly showed to the public that it was honorable and he put his point across in the clear way. â€Å"†¦.but because I would not bend to the marriage† (pg. 78) More is simply stating that he wouldn’t agree with the King for the clear intention of staying alive. More knew that Cromwell had set he up, yet had no way of proving it and knew that no-one would believe him. Cromwell was hunting More for his beliefs not actions. People’s greed justified that they could go after More in order to get what they wanted. An example of this Machiavellian principle is Richard Rich. He helped to kill More, he even lied under oath, all it get what he wanted. As More said to Cromwell, â€Å"In matters of conscience, the loyal subject is more bounden to be loyal to his conscience than to any other thing.† (pg. 92) This suggests that More believed in what he was saying and it didn’t matter what Cromwell was saying, More simply dismissed it. More died for the fact that he would not succumb to the beliefs of the public and the monarchy. He stayed true to himself and this is the most important factor in life. If you are denying yourself to order to get something or somewhere, you are cheating yourself. A man for all seasons A Man for All Seasons is the story of a man who knows who he is, expressing courage and faithfulness at all costs. In addition, every character has their own ends to meet, and the only distinguishable feature between them is  how they go about it. Some characters disregard all sense of morality as they plunge into an approach, which primarily encompasses self-interest. In all, most of the characters in the movie personify selfishness in one way or another. Of course there are some whose selfishness is more noticeable than others; however, at some point they are all deficient in their consideration of others and live chiefly for personal profit. All except for one, Sir Thomas More he is a man who subconsciously is a slave to his own conscience. He executes selfless acts in order to do what he knows is legal, and what he thinks is right. He is one of very few people who have died with their integrity intact. Every other character sold themselves out to the king. To be honest, I think I would have sold myself out to the king to, if the consequence was to be beheaded if I did not. That is why I envy Sir Thomas because of his individualism, ethics, and courage he had during his stand against the King. Sir Thomas More was a character who was faced with a number of difficult choices. The major one being, when Henry VIII’s first wife was unable to produce an heir to the throne, he used that as an excuse for the pope to grant him a divorce, so he could marry a new wife. The King is backed by everyone on this request except the highly regarded and religious Sir Thomas More. When the old Chancellor of England, named More his successor, it became important for Henry to get More’s support, but More could not be swayed. He made his decision to oppose the marriage early on, but even though it was something he did not waver from, he still had trouble with it. More made a very difficult decision in opposing the King and his family, but regardless of the consequences, he felt that he was morally correct and for him to choose any other path would have been impossible for he could not oppose the church and God. I think Alice’s and his daughter Margaret’s complaints probably had the most impact with More because he cared very deeply about his family and probably would have caved in to the King, if he had he not felt he was correct in his decision and there was no other alternative. Honestly, I think everyone should have moral values of some kind, but I do not know about having such strong morals that a person is willing to give up their life and family to stand for what they believe in. Above all, Thomas More did what he did because his ultimate goal was to be with God. Consequently, he felt he had to do what God wanted and not what his king wanted him to do. In addition, having an attitude like that did  put a damper on his relationship with his wife. I think they loved each other very much, but she did not feel entirely appreciated by him. It was evident that Thomas’s formidable intelligence intimidated her and she felt inferior to him. That was probably common in that day and time because women of that era rarely were educated, whereas the men were. In the end, their love for one another was evident in the scene up in Tower of London. Both of them getting teary eyed, knowing they will never get to see each other ever again. Even after that scene Thomas felt he was making the right decision because he was able to explain why he made the decision to go against the King. Chiefly, no one supported More’s decision not even his own family, but More’s family did support him. Especially his wife Alice she knew her husband better than any other human being. Therefore, when she finds herself at her limit in comprehending why her husband would take such a stand against the king, it bothers Thomas More. Mostly because she is his anchor in life and he needs her support, and needs her to understand why he is doing what he is doing. In the end, I think she understands why Thomas did what he did and the human risk of taking a principled stand against power. On the other hand, everyone else decided they were going to support King Henry VIII or be two faced about his moral standards. A great example of this was with the character, Oliver Cromwell, he represented the basic evilness of the film and threaten to have More executed for not acquiescing to the marriage. All he ever did was try and make the king happy. For instance, he said, â€Å"When the King wants something done, I do it†. I think Cromwell said this because he did not want his head to be cut off; therefore, all he did was kiss up to the king. In the end, it did not help him because he was tried and found guilty of treason. One character that did not get tried for treason was Richard Rich. He was one of the characters that betrayed Sir Thomas More. Throughout the film it was obvious to the viewer Richard Rich only cared about himself. By far, his worse act of selfishness was when he lied and sold out Thomas More for he could become Attorney General of Wales. As a result, I think Rich was a piece of scum for doing such acts of treachery to an old friend. I also believe Thomas More thought so because he said, â€Å"Richard, it profits a man nothing to trade his soul for the whole world, but for Wales†. I thought that was a tremendous slap in the face to Richard. Another character that betrayed Thomas More  after being his friend was the Duke of Norfolk, he foolishly badgered More to relent and join the King’s supporters. Obviously he did not realizing the depth of More’s integrity. Consequently, Norfolk conducted the trial for High Treason against his former friend, never aware that More had eased his passage from trusted friend to state enemy by purposely offending him. Above all, that is why I envy Sir Thomas More because of his individualism, ethics, and courage he had throughout his stand against King Henry VIII. It would have been hard for a person to purposely make an enemy out of a good friend. Even when you know it is for their own good. I do not think it would be possible for me to do that, which is why I envy Thomas. Aside from envying him I did not agree with what he did. In my eyes, putting his morals before his family was wrong of him. There had to have been other ways to voice your opinion back in that era without losing your head. I feel Sir Thomas More caused great suffering to his family that was unnecessary. In conclusion, I think you made us watch the movie for that particular reason. To show us how diverse each person’s attitude is towards their higher power. Now days in America, people are permitted to voice their opinion, and we take it for granted not realizing what a privilege it is to be able to speak out with no consequences.

A Whole New Beginning

The entrance to the school gate was bursting with pupils, teachers and parents, creaking with the strain of opening and shutting as wave after wave of people came through it. The temperature was 5 degrees Celsius and the grass was still wet and appeared bedraggled from the rain that had fallen last night. The air was so cold that even when you breathed your breath was hot enough to create puffs of steam, and after stepping out of your house because of the cold your face feels like it is freezing up and it starts to get numb. Even though it was this cold there were still groups of people standing outside the gates of a high school. There were groups of children scattered around everywhere, some were new pupils and some were old but they were all in different groups; there were the athletes talking non-stop about the latest football match, the nerds all huddled up talking about if they had done all of their homework over the holidays and comparing answers. The grungers just standing silently listening to their music that would probably want to make any normal person want to kill themselves; the Asian minority groups standing around talking about things that no one can understand because it is being spoken in there native tongue. Some of the older girls were wearing the latest fashion and had put on tons of makeup, and the boys were trying to impress them with their aftershave, and sleek haircuts and a swagger in their walk which they thought made them look cool. Looking around one could see the Year Nines looking excited at being in their second year of high school; they were no longer the new kids and they can now look down on the Year Eights. However, they also appeared apprehensive as they would be choosing their GCSEs for next year. You could also see the year tens pretending to mature even though it is a cover for their feelings of worry because they must start their GCSEs this year, and they know that if they fail then they will have failed life. On the opposite side there were the new pupils, some talking with their friends from their old school about what they did in the holidays and others just hanging about walking back and forth like wound up toys, looking nervous and wondering what their first day of high school would be like, with the few who were hanging about with their parents, hoping that they would not get embarrassed and wanting their parents to leave. In the middle of this all there was a small group of teachers talking amongst them selves and the older teachers welcoming the newer ones into the school. There were some of the new teachers looking around at all of the children trying to figure out which ones were the polite students and which one were the dreadful students(the ones that were any teachers worst nightmares). Suddenly, the school bell rings with a deafening volume and all you can see is all of the children and parents staring as the teachers are first to enter the school. Shortly after the teachers entered the building all of the newer students rush towards the gate hoping to get to their classroom in time so that they are not late. All of the upper school pupils are still standing there and talking, like the school bell has not affected them because they know that there is no point in rushing to get to class because every one will make it; unlike normal school in this school it isn't the students that are late it is the teachers.

Three Factors Leading to World War I essays

Three Factors Leading to World War I essays Albert Einstein once said: "You cannot prevent and prepare for war at the same time." In the case of the First World War, an attempt to do precisely that was among the reasons that caused the war to break out. Since the beginning of the 20th century, European economies were thriving more and more, making it easy for an Arms Race to begin. Leading up to the Great War, some things went awry in Europe. An inflexible system of alliances, the Triple Entente (Britain, France, Russia) pitted against the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy), made hostilities and national rivalries grow. Germany emerged as an economic and industrial giant which suddenly demanded, in Kaiser Wilhelm's words, "a place in the sun" as well as world power status, which threatened and worried all its surrounding rivals. This essay will examine three of the main causes for World War I: the nationalistic tensions within Austria-Hungary, the Arms Race in the pre-war years, and the failure of German diplomacy in combination with the Schlieffen Plan. Furthermore, this essay will show these three causes may be central to the problem, but they were not the only causes of war breaking out. One of the expressions of rivalries between nations was the Serbian nationalism, which was growing in strength within Austria-Hungary. This disgruntled the Austrian Emperor to such an extent that when the assassination in Sarajevo gave him the opportunity, he immediately retaliated against the Serbs, effectively causing the chain reaction which would start WWI. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was composed of a huge number of separate nationalities and kingdoms, all of which the Emperor of Austria ruled. Serbia was one of these countries, and at the turn of the century, it was trying to gain independence from the Empire. Historian Norman Lowe says Serbian nationalism was one of the many "causes of friction which threatened to upset the peace of Europe." He tells of Serbia's ...

Political Career Timeline of US President Barack Obama

Political Career Timeline of US President Barack Obama    Barack Hussein Obama II graduated high school with honors in 1979 and was president of the Harvard Law Review long before he ever decided to enter politics. When he decided he wanted to run for the Illinois Senate in 1996, he ensured his candidacy by successfully challenging the nomination petitions of his four competitors. This marked his entry into federal politics.   Timeline of Barack Obama's Political Career 1988: Obama is a summer associate at the Chicago law firm Sidley Austin.1992: Obama graduates from Harvard and returns to Chicago.1995: In July, Obama - at 34 years of age - publishes his first memoir, Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance. In August, Obama files paperwork to run for incumbent Alice Palmers Illinois Senate seat.1996: In January, Obama has his four competitor petitions invalidated; he emerges as the only candidate. In November, he is elected to the Illinois Senate, which is controlled by Republicans.1999: Obama begins running for Congress.2000: Obama loses his challenge for the congressional seat held by Rep. Bobby Rush.2002: In November, Democrats usurp Republican control of the Illinois Senate.2003-2004: Obama amasses his legislative record and serves as chair of the Health and Human Services Committee.2003: Obama begins running for US Senate; the leading Democratic candidate withdraws in 2004 due to a sex scandal.  David Axelrod [begins having ] camera crews video virtually everything Obama does in public. He uses this footage to create a five-minute online video for the Jan. 16, 2007, announcement that Obama is running for president. 2004: In March, Obama wins the primary with 52% of the vote. In June, his Republican opponent Jack Ryan withdraws due to a sex scandal. He delivers the Democratic National Convention address in July 2004, and in November he is elected to the US Senate with 70% of the vote.2005: Obama files paperwork for his leadership PAC, The Hope Fund, in January. Shortly after his election to the US Senate, he delivered a well-received address arguing faith should have a greater role in public discourse.2006: Obama writes and publishes his book, The Audacity of Hope. In October, he announces he is considering a run for the presidency of the United States.2007: In February, Obama announces his candidacy for US president.  2008: In June, he becomes the Democratic Partys presumptive nominee. In November, he defeats Republican presidential nominee John McCain to become the first African-American president of the United States of America and the 44th president of the country.2009: Obama is inaugurate d in January. In his first 100 days in office, he expands health care insurance for children and provides legal protection for women seeking equal pay. He gets Congress to pass a  $787 billion stimulus bill  to promote short-term economic growth, and he also cuts taxes for working families, small businesses and first-time home buyers. He loosens the ban on embryonic stem cell research and improves relations with Europe, China, Cuba and Venezuela. The president is awarded the  2009 Nobel Peace Prize  for his efforts. 2010: Obama delivers his first State of the Union speech in January. In March, he signs his health care reform plan, known as the Affordable Care Act, into law. Opponents of the act claim that it violates the US Constitution.2011: Obama signs the Budget Control Act to rein in government spending.  He also signs a repeal of the military policy known as Dont Ask, Dont Tell, which prevents openly gay troops from serving in US Armed Forces. In  May, he green lights a covert operation in Pakistan that leads to the killing of al-Qaeda leader  Osama bin Laden  by a team of US Navy SEALs.2012: Obama began running for his second term, and in November, he wins with nearly 5 million more votes than his Republican counterpart.2013: Obama gets a legislative victory with a bipartisan agreement on tax increases and spending cuts, which is a step toward keeping his re-election promise of reducing the federal deficit by raising taxes on the wealthy. In June, his approval ratings tank because of an alleged cover-up of events in Benghazi, Libya; because of allegations that the IRS is targeting conservative political organizations seeking tax-exempt status; and due to revelations about the US National Security Agencys surveillance program. The Obama administration struggles with many domestic and international problems. 2014: Obama orders sanctions on Russia because of its annexation of Crimea. John Boehner sues the president, claiming he has overstepped his executive powers regarding some parts of the Affordable Care Act. Republicans gain  control of the Senate, and now Obama has to contend with the fact that Republicans control both houses of Congress during the final two years of his second term.2015: At his second State of the Union address, he claims that the United States is out of the recession. With Democrats outnumbered, he threatens to use his executive powers to stave off any potential Republican interference in his agenda. Obama has two major Supreme Court victories in this year: The Affordable Care Acts tax subsidies are upheld, and marriage equality becomes reality. Also, Obama and the five world powers reach a historic nuclear deal with Iran. And Obama launches his Clean Power Plan to reduce greenhouse gases and emissions.2016: In his final year in office, Obama tackles gun control but is met with strong opposition from both parties. He delivers his final State of the Union address on January 12, 2016. In March, he becomes the first sitting US president since 1928 to visit Cuba. 2017: Obama delivers his farewell address in January in Chicago. During his last day in office on January 19 - he announces that he will commute the sentences of 330 nonviolent drug offenders. Also in his final days, Obama  presented Vice President Joe Biden with the Presidential Medal of Freedom with Distinction.

THERAPUTIC HYPOTHERMIA POST CARDIAC ARREST Essay

THERAPUTIC HYPOTHERMIA POST CARDIAC ARREST - Essay Example One of these means is identified to include the use of reflective analysis, whereby after any major task with a patient, the nurse sits back to reflect on the nursing practice that was executed, using a series of methodologies and procedures. In this paper, such clinical judgment in the nursing management of a patient is undertaken. The patient was taken care of after post cardiac arrest during the first 6 hours of his initial admission to the hospital. As part of regular nursing practice, there are several decisions and actions that were taken that were based on academic and clinical reasoning. The reflective paper will therefore give a general profile of the patient, after which there will be a vivid discussion of the care that was rendered. There will then be an appraisal of the care, which shall take the form of a critical analysis of the care before a reflective conclusion is given. This is the case of Mr. B, whose actual name is withheld for ethical reasons to keep the identity of the patient anonymous. Mr. B was admitted to the hospital for the reason of a post cardiac arrest. This means that the patient was going through a moment of cessation of what was to be the normal circulation of blood into his heart (Sonneville et al., 2013). Such instances of cardiac arrest have been attributed to a failure for the heart to effectively contract and expand as part of its regular functionality (Peberdy et al., 2010). It was realised that Mr. B’s instance of cardiac arrest had come about whiles he was undergoing treatment for acute exacerbation of Asthma in one of the medical ward. Some of the specific instances of symptoms that he showed at the time of being reported to the ward were I was in charge included an arrest with a rhythm of pulseless electrical activity (PEA). It would be noted that under very normal situations,