The Cask of Amontillado

Table of Contents Introduction Figurative/symbolic expressions Allegory Works Cited Introduction The ‘Cask of Amontillado’ is a literary classic story, which can pass as an ordinary narrative piece of literature to the average ordinary reader. To readers with a critical eye however, the figurative speech, and the hyperbole contained in the story cannot go unnoticed.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Cask of Amontillado specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Figurative/symbolic expressions Irony – Montresor, who is committed to punishing a perceived wrong, is also committed to carrying out a wrong without being punished for it. By his own admission, Montressor states that â€Å"a wrong is unredressed when retribution overtakes its redresser† (Poe 3). As such, Montressor states that he would punish the person who inflicted him with injuries, because to him, the wrongs committed against hi m were worthy of punishment. Ironically, though, Montresor states that he would be avenging insults with death, since he perceived that as the ultimate revenge. Unfortunately, Fortunato seems not to have suffered the pain of dying, as Montresor would have liked. Paradox – Montresor triggers a paradox by juxtaposing in the same sentence the phrase â€Å"punish with impunity,† two words that are ordinarily antithetical. As human nature would have it, people are often quicker to see weaknesses in other while ignoring their more apparent flaws. As such, Montresor finds his companion’s â€Å"transgression† worthy of the cruelest death, and believes that his cause is so right that he deserves to get away with it. Sarcasm – In human speech, very few styles of expression are as cruel as sarcasm. Although in this case Fortunato is ignorant of the sarcasm, Montresor is nevertheless invoking it when he says, â€Å"my dear Fortunato, you are luckily met†Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ (Poe 3). It is as if Montresor, if he were understood for his true intentions, were saying, ‘It is your ill-luck that you have met me today’. It is often the cruelest hearts that fashion the most effective sarcasms: sarcasms so sharp-edged that they slice through their target audience’s ears without their ever getting to understand their full true meaning. The cruelty resident in Montresor’s dark mind is exhibited in his solitary musing: â€Å"I was so pleased to see him that I thought I never should have done wringing his hands† (Poe 3). Oxymoron – Montresor engages in oxymoronic speech by describing the attendant’s abandonment of their duties at his palazzo as â€Å"making merry in honor of the time† (Poe 4). This was in direct disregard for his instructions to them not to leave the house at all while he is away.Advertising Looking for essay on american literature? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first pa per with 15% OFF Learn More Of course, there is the implication that he knew beforehand what they would do. By the attendants behaving just as he had anticipated, Montresor gets his perfect alibi. To protect themselves from the charge of absconding duty, they would swear that he had been on a journey and had not at all returned that whole day. Hyperbole – There is a sense of this in Fortunato’s statement that he drinks to â€Å"the buried that repose around us† (Poe 5). Dead bodies may be immobile but as to whether they are at rest, is a matter of conjecture. Allegory Poe’s tale can be interpreted as an allegory of the pain, death, and the senselessness of vengeance. To reflect all the three identified themes, Poe (knowingly or unknowingly) divided his story into three parts. In the first part, Monstresor is infuriated by what he perceives as an insult from Fortunato. As a result, he vows to inflict vengeance on Fortunato. This part of the story symbolizes people’s desire to avenge for the wrongs committed against them, and to inflict pain on the people who wrong them. As reflected in the conclusion of Poe’s tale, while inflicting pain on a person may seem like the perfect vengeance, it does not fetch as much pleasure as the avenger would like to. The tale also makes an attempt to convince readers that death, is not necessarily a painful or even bitter experience to those who are dead or dying. This is symbolized by what sounds like Fortunato’s laughter when he finally realizes his fate. Poe also hints at the emptiness of revenge through Montresor’s description of his feeling as â€Å"sick† soon as he realized he had just killed Fortunato. The second part of Poe’s take is apparent when Montresor lures Fortunato underground, and gets him drunk. The third part of the tale on the other hand is reflected in the long journey that two take, only for Montresor to encourage Fortunato into r eaching â€Å"the extremity of the niche† (Poe 7), where he found iron staples hindering his progress further into the crypt. Here, Montresor chained Fortunato up, ready to avenge the perceived wrongs committed against him. His vengeance was only pleasurable for a short period, because Fortunato’s cry only lasted several minutes. At the end, Fortunato made fun of his tormentor, and upon his death Montresor admits that his â€Å"heart grew sick† (Poe 8).Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Cask of Amontillado specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Works Cited Poe, Edgar Allan. The Cask of Amontillado. Feedbooks, n.d. Web. This essay on The Cask of Amontillado was written and submitted by user Tyrese N. to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here. The Cask of Amontillado Introduction Edgar Allan Poe is perceived as one of the greatest authors and poets of all time. His works have elicited the need for analysis by various scholars and parties from the field of literature. His short story, â€Å"The Cask of Amontillado†, portrays various stylistic approaches, thus necessitating an analysis to evaluate the writing style.Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on The Cask of Amontillado specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More â€Å"The Cask of Amontillado† is a story involving horror due to Montresor’s vengeful motive upon Fortunato. Poe’s work on this piece of literature has been considered as one of the world’s perfect short stories. The narrative meets the qualities of a classic short story as theorized by Poe since it can be read in a single sitting. This paper will analyze the stylistic devices that Poe applies in the short story, â€Å"The Cask of Amontillado†. Summary The story’s narrator, Montresor, opens up his revengeful motive towards Fortunato, his acquaintance, by claiming that he insulted him irreparably (Poe 1200). Montresor seeks to use Fortunato’s liking for wine in a bid to carry out his revenge in a way that curtails the risks of being identified. Montresor brings the idea of using Luchesi to taste Amontillado, but Fortunato suggests that he is not good enough for the task and regards him as a competitor as well. The two proceed towards Montresor’s burial vaults, which are exposed and filled with nitre. The nitre causes Fortunato to cough, and thus takes the wine to counter the effects even after being told by Montresor to go home. The two continue exploring the vaults that contain body remains of Montresor’s family members. Fortunato tries to see if Montresor is a true mason by making a hand movement, but the latter does not recognize and he justifies himself by showing him a tr owel implying a stonemason (Poe 1202).  Montresor tells an intoxicated Fortunato to access a small recess through a wall made of bones to get the Amontillado before trapping him. Fortunato starts squalling as the walls go up. The alcohol levels in his system drop as he starts moaning helplessly and later laughs at Montresor, who is not in the mood for jokes, as he continues piling the layers of the wall. Fortunato stops conversing with Montresor after making the final plea, â€Å"For the love of God, Montresor† (Poe 1204), but the latter continues to call his name twice. Montresor positions the final brick and plasters the walls before reassembling the bones on the fourth wall. Montresor says that the bones have not been disturbed for fifty years, and he makes a conclusion in Latin that translates to â€Å"May he rest in peace† (Poe 1205).Advertising Looking for critical writing on american literature? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Analysis Poe’s short story depicts a simple plot that portrays various aspects of his style in a compact way. Therefore, the analysis will explore the title, the use of irony, and other aspects writing and stylistic devices that Poe applies. The Title The title, â€Å"The Cask of Amontillado†, sounds mysterious and it tends to elicit fright. â€Å"Amontillado† simply refers to an alcoholic beverage that is linked to sherry. The title seems to conceal the story’s subject since moat people are not familiar with the various types of liquor unless one is a wine connoisseur. On the other hand, â€Å"Casks† are used for the storage of alcoholic beverages. Montresor communicates that Fortunato possesses a â€Å"pipe of what passes for Amontillado† (Poe 1201). In this light, the â€Å"pipe† implies the â€Å"cask†, which could mean a â€Å"casket†. Poe uses the title to conceal and reveal the horrific nat ure of the story artistically as depicted by Fortunato’s ambitions of finding the Cask of Amontillado only to discover his death casket. Additionally, Amontillado has different meanings to Montresor and Fortunato. To Fortunato, Amontillado represents pleasance and delectation, while Montresor uses it for the pursuit of his vengeful mission. The use of irony Poe uses three types of irony in the story as a literary tool that facilitates the readers’ understanding of the friendship that exists between Montresor and Fortunato. He uses situational, dramatic, and verbal irony throughout the story to make it intriguing to the audience. In verbal irony, the speaker uses parables to imply the opposite meaning of what is being said. For instance, the name â€Å"Fortunato† implies good fortune, but it seems to be the contrary in this story. Fortunato turns out to be unfortunate as he is eventually trapped and killed by the revengeful Montresor. Verbal irony is also depicte d as Montresor leads Fortunato to the vaults. Montresor pretends to be caring about Fortunato’s health by noting, â€Å"We will go back; your health is precious†¦You are a man to be missed. For me, it is no matter. We will go back; you will be ill, and I cannot be responsible† (Poe 1203).Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on The Cask of Amontillado specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Montresor’s intentions are the opposite since he intends to destroy Fortunato’s health by killing him. Fortunato proceeds deeper towards the vault as his coughs persist, but Montresor tells him that they will go back before it gets late and that his cough is nothing to worry about at the time. Going deep into the vaults means that Fortunato would meet his dark fate, which is signified by Amontillado. Fortunato’s source of pleasure turns out to be his painful ending as Montresor revenges on him.  Poe also uses dramatic irony in the story whereby he reveals some things to the audience, which are unknown to the characters. Fortunato’s dress code appears ironical as it depicts his eagerness to taste the rare alcoholic beverage. He posits, â€Å"The man wore motley. He had on a tight-fitting parti-striped dress, and his head was surmounted by the conical cap and bells† (Poe 1202). In this regard, Fortunato’s dressing mode symbolizes a fool that can be easily tricked into his death. Fortunato also says, â€Å"I will not die of a cough† (Poe 1202). Montresor affirming, â€Å"The cold is merely nothing† (Poe 1202). The readers know what is looming for Fortunato, but he is not aware of what may happen to him according to his enemy’s plans. Fortunato toasts bodies that had been buried in the catacombs without realizing his impending death (Poe 1203).  In situational irony, the opposite of the anticipated outcomes occurs. Poe utilize s this type of irony during the night of the carnival. He posits, â€Å"I had told them that I should not return until the morning and had given them explicit orders not to stir from the house. These orders were sufficient, I well knew, to insure their immediate disappearance, one, and all, as soon as my back was turned† (Poe 1203). This assertion implies that the Montresor wants his servants not to leave without him, which ensures that they would do the contrary. Another instance of situational irony is whereby the non-existent cask containing the Amontillado turns out to be the connoisseur’s casket. Fortunato ultimately discovers his coffin instead of the rare wine that he anticipates.  Montresor commits a premeditated murder of Fortunato, which is not punished legally after fifty years (Poe 1205). Therefore, it is ironical that Fortunato has been resting in peace as Montresor lives freely with impunity. The plot A good story should entail aspects of an initial con dition, the conflict, complication, climax, suspense, and the conclusion. Poe initiates the story by depicting the painful history between Montresor and Fortunato. Montresor claims, â€Å"Fortunato had hurt me in other ways a thousand times, and I had suffered in quiet† (Poe 1200) implying that there were personal differences that existed between them.Advertising Looking for critical writing on american literature? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Fortunato also insults Montresor, thus causing him to vow for revenge. This section provides a good basis for the story’s initial situation. The conflict aspect of the story is comes out when Montresor posits, â€Å"I must punish him with impunity† (Poe 1201). This statement translates into his vengeful strategies that depict the conflict in the story. The story is not complicated and it might only confuse the reader on the aspects of Amontillado and Luchesi. The climax of the story stands out when Fortunato is chained in the catacomb as Montresor starts erecting the walls that would act as Fortunato’s casket. The suspense is created where Montresor positions and plasters the bricks for the tomb. The denouement of the story happens when Montresor places the final brick thereby ending the suspense that calls for the conclusion by writing, â€Å"In pace requiescat!† (Poe 1205). The Tone Montresor describes various events elegantly, which intrigues the reade r. For instance, Montresor describes the bones and human remains in a tone that does not evoke fear. He says, â€Å"We passed through a range of low arches, descended, passed on, and descending again, arrived at a deep crypt, in which the foulness of the air caused our flambeaux [torches – pronounced â€Å"flam-bow†] rather glow than flame† (Poe 1204). The Setting The story adopts a horrific and gothic setting. The setting of the story proceeds from freedom to confinement as Montresor kills Fortunato by confining him in a casket. The carnival aims at creating happiness and celebrating freedom, but it turns out to be the opposite for Fortunato. The dusk hours imply that something horrific is imminent as manifested by Montresor’s trap. The season is considered as a period of â€Å"supreme madness† (Poe 1203), and thus it evokes a feeling of uncertainty. However, the actual setting of the story is not specified, but events are perceived to take place in the European setting since the names of the characters like Fortunato and Luchesi have a European origin. Amontillado is a wine of Spanish origin whereas Montresor’s coat of arms originates from Scotland. Conclusion â€Å"The Cask of Amontillado† is a perfect short story that depicts Poe’s stylistic features of his works. The title creates a concealed horrific topic that requires the readers’ interpretation of the â€Å"Cask† and â€Å"Amontillado†. Poe uses symbolism, irony, suspense, and horror to give the story a creative element as the setting flows from freedom to confinement. The plot used is simple as it initiates the issue between Montresor and Fortunato before proceeding to build up the conflict that climaxes at Montresor’s catacombs. Therefore, Poe depicts his exceptional writing skills in authoring the short story, thus making him one of the greatest writers and poets of all the time. Works Cited Poe, Edgar. â€Å"The C ask of Amontillado.† The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Eds. Nina Baym et al. New York: W.W. Norton Company, Inc., 2012. 1200-1205. Print. This critical writing on The Cask of Amontillado was written and submitted by user Kinsey Q. to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

Does the GEICO Gecko Need a Grammar Lesson

Does the GEICO Gecko Need a Grammar Lesson Today I heard a GEICO commercial that included a line something like this: To show our appreciation, call within the next 15 minutes This sentence contains a grammatical error!   Was it intentional? The thing is, these sorts of sentences are all-too-common in the writing I see every day.   GEICO might have intended this one, or the error may have been an oversight   but many of my clients make these errors frequently and unintentionally. You may be saying to yourself, WHAT grammatical error?   Looks okay to me! Let me explain. Take a look at the the first half of GEICOs sentence: To show OUR [Geicos] appreciation Ask yourself, who is the natural subject of this sentence?   What would naturally follow from the first half of the sentence?   If you think carefully, youll see that it would be something relating to whom? To GEICO of course!   GEICO is the natural subject of the sentence. A grammatically correct sentence might read, To show our appreciation, we are offering you a NEW CAR with FREE insurance for the vehicles lifetime! Now *that* would be a great sentence.   Yes, I like that sentence. Another alternative would be to write a different first half of the sentence that would naturally lead toward making the customer the subject of the sentence.   For instance: To show YOUR appreciation, call us within the next 15 minutes and tell us how adorable the gecko is! Id call to praise the gecko in an instant.   Hes pretty cute.   And he gives great car insurance.   If he looked at me just right with those beady little eyes, Id probably even forgive him for having his grammar a little mixed up. Do you think the GEICO gecko needs grammar help? Or do you think GEICOs ad people made this error intentionally?   Please take our 1-Question Survey and/or share your opinion below. And if you need writing help, please contact The Essay Expert for a FREE 15 minute consultation.   Well make sure you dont make it into someone elses grammar rants. Category:Grammar Writing TipsBy Brenda BernsteinNovember 22, 2010

Friedrich Nietzsche on Nihilism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Friedrich Nietzsche on Nihilism - Essay Example This essay discusses that every emotion, every act and every move that a man attains to complete is null or does amount to nothing. Hence, this particular thought defines the process by which the individuals today are able to simply believe on what they think is right or factual; other things not happening accordingly with these particular personal notions that they have may be considered null and unimportant. This particular idealism about human existence and the source of human belief on the basis of non-moral thought is called nihilism. Nihilism, as noted, is one particular belief that opens the thought to the possibility of humans succeeding without the particular assistance of moral principles. It primarily focuses on the proof that could be attested as related to the possibility by which human elements for existence such as emotions, dreams, and aspirations are plain abstract creations of the human mind. Through his writings, Friedrich Nietzsche has actually noted the different phases of Nihilism as particularly the real explanation for human existence. Among the said phases of the philosophy of nihilism are to be noted as follows: (a) Anti-moralism: Nietzsche strongly believes that Christianity has blinded the entire society in believing that there are different guidelines to be followed to be able to attain the assurance of being a rightful individual. It has been noted though this particular phase of nihilism that Christendom has actually created a notion that people are absolutely confused with regards the importance of free will and being subjected to moral rules that they must continuously give attention to. The two contradicting issues about personal authority on one's self, according to Nietzsche, is a complete confusion that the belief of Christendom has actually implied upon the human society today. (b) Perspectivism: According to the writing of Nietzsche entitled the Gay Science that God is dead. Likely, this notes the fact that he believes that with God gone, the basis of human morality would also be gone. Hence, through this, people would be able to completely decide on their own and realize their full capacity to be the best individuals that they really could be. It is through this that the nothingness of men could actually become a source of being for everyone. (c) The will to Power: Nihilism implies the need of being truly free of obligation to complete anything or to confide so as to submit to certain laws. By being free, one would be able to know the real essence of the will to power. The need of each individual to become powerful in the real sense shall wipe the nothingness out of human lives. Conclusion If carefully examined, Friedrich Nietzsche's thoughts and has been provoked by the fact that Christianity during his time has actually made it certain that the philosophies and traditions which they preferred to make the human individuals follow were particularly unconventional at some point.

No need for topic Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 7

No need for topic - Essay Example The various components of this chapter are highly related with the course content in the sense that Presidential powers might impose significant impact on the entire political system of the nation. In this regard, American constitution provides Presidents with the powers to frame proposals and develop effective strategies (Ginsberg, Lowi, Weir and Tolbert 492-534). Ginsberg, Lowi, Weir and Tolbert (492-534) stated that Presidents have the responsibility to safeguard every state against any kind of assault as well as national violence. Thus, it is quite vital to understand the powers of Presidents that have extensive influences on various federal aspects of the US (Ginsberg, Lowi, Weir and Tolbert 492-534). Ginsberg, Lowi, Weir and Tolbert (492-534) further stated that although Presidents are somehow unable to introduce any strict legislation and do not possess leading role in making law, they play imperative role in other spheres that include budget creation and dealing with key national problems. However, a President can expand his/her power through performing effective management practices. Going public is also regarded as one of the chief sources of Presidential power. Particularly, in the political system of America, the varied constitutional powers of Presidents have huge role to play in directing the nation towards right path (Ginsberg, Lowi, Weir and Tolbert

Analysing Britains Role In The European Union Politics Essay

Analysing Britains Role In The European Union Politics Essay It was only on January 1, 1973 that Britain became an official member of the European Union. Ultimately, what was seen through this was twenty-two years of little participation from Britain in the affairs of Europe. Twenty-two years before its entrance, Britain was given the opportunity in 1950 to participate in the negotiations that paved the path for the emergence of the European Coal and Steel Community; nevertheless, when an invitation was extended to the Labour Government of the time, Prime Minister Clement Attlee declined to participate in these discussions. Later, when the ECSC and its six member-states passed consensus to expand the ECSC, Britain was invited to the negotiations but Prime Minister Anthony Eden ultimately withdrew his Conservative party from the discussions. By 1974, a year after its official membership, Britain had become regarded as an awkward partner to the European Union, a standing that continues to be seen between Britain and the EU as a result of the pol icies that Britains respective leaders have taken towards the European Union. Conservative Government Strained Relations of 1973 1974 Edward Heath, who took the reins of Britain in 1970, was at the helm of building a stronger relationship with the European Union. His pro-European attitude led to the ultimate admittance of Britain into the EU. Nevertheless, admission came at a time when Britain and the rest of Europe began to see a strain to their economies. The success that the EEC had seen prior to Britains admission was not shared; instead, Britain entered during a period of recession which led its membership to not have positive connotations with Britons. While Edward Heath and Georges Pompidou had started to build a close relationship after Britains entrance, Britains attempt at increasing the quality and size EECs institutions and proposing the concentration of its activities in Brussels angered the Commission because, through it, Britain continued to imply that the Commission was ineffective. When it came to the Economic and Monetary Union, Britain once again earned a reputation of being an awkward partner in the EU. Britain disappointed its EU partners when it declared that it would not enter the sterling into the joint float unless certain agreements were reached by the EEC to underwrite the sterlings value. While the rest of the member-states had agreed to place the bank in Luxemburg, Heath insulted the EU by pressing for centralization of the European reserve bank to be located in Brussels, which fared negatively for him as a result of member-states believing that Britain was meddling in issues that they have no involvement in. As Britain continued to slowly integrate into the EU, the British government continued to strain its relationship with the other EEC members. Instead of acting in a diplomatic manner, British officials openly voiced their opinions of the incompetence seen within the EEC, which often angered the original six. Heaths push for what he believed were necessary changes to the external energy policy of the EU was often seen as conflicting with the positions of the other member states; France had continued to insist that an internal policy would need to be first established before the EU could even consider the feasibility of an external policy. The British, on the other hand, did not believe that internal energy policy was as crucial as the EUs external policy on the matter. Unfortunately, the start of the Arab-Israeli war brought about oil shortages that brought many EU nations down to their knees; the Dutch and the Germans, who at first supported Britains argument in preventing an interna l policy, began suffering heavily from the shortages in oil and shortly after began supporting the creation of an internal European oil/energy policy. In a show of their awkward partnership, Britain decided that not back down from their original position of rejecting an internal energy policy for the EU, which led the continuing of European oil shortages. Britain focused on its own domestic interests, feared that the establishment of internal energy policy would give the EU an opportunity of obtaining access to Britains oil reserves in the North Sea. As a result, Heath would not concede to EU pressure and refused to consolidate and distribute energy resources equally amongst EU member-states. What started as a constructive and optimistic entry into the EU ended with conflict and stress between Britain and the EU member-states. While Heath was genuinely interested in strengthening the European Union, his actions were seen as Britain being uncooperative as a result of its desire to benefit from the EU for the sake of its own national interests. Regrettably, the Labour party that took office in 1974 would continue Britains role as an awkward partner. Labour Government of 1974-1979 The Labour party that succeeded Heaths government in 1974 began to take a backseat in international politics as it attempted to repair the country. Domestically, Britain had become plagued with economic and political problems caused by both the oil crisis and by Heaths inability to control British trade unions (Guido, 1984). As a result of the oil crisis, inflation hit British society hard and was predicted to remain on the rise, while the balance of payments saw a deficit in the billions by the end of 1974. While Prime Minister Harold Wilson had to work with hung Parliament, he also found himself, at the same time, being forced to deal with the problems of his divided country. Britains membership in the EU continued to be an issue to many Britons, which allowed Wilson to unite Britain in a campaign against the European Union (Bilski, 1977). Wilson, in seeing the negative opinion Britons had of the EU, decided to become a protector of Britains national interests by pressing for British membership in the EU to be renegotiated with acceptable terms. What began as peaceful negotiations that aimed to adapt and reshape the terms of Britains membership in the EU soon turned harsh by April 1974; at the renegotiations held in April, Britain demanded to have the right to withdraw itself from the EU if any future negotiation led to terms that Britain would not agree to (Ernst, 1974). While the Commission was disappointed with Britains tone, it felt obligated to sit down with Britain to renegotiate its terms of membership. After Wilson strongly campaigned for his government against the EU on CAP; cash rebates; and Britains membership terms, domestic polls showed that a higher percent of Britons supported EU membership. While the referendum produced high support for membership from the public, Wilson continued to see hostility towards the EU from within his own party. As such, Britain found itself again as an awkward partner to the EU based on the negotiations of pollution control and Britains claims from the ERDF. When the EU proposed changes to emission limits, Britain quickly rejected the proposal and claimed that the standards were unsuitable for Britain. While the EU suspected that Britain was influenced by its chemical industry, West Germany argued that the lax standards that British chemical plants had gained by not accepting the emission limits would give British companies a price advantage over European competitors. In continuing the souring of its relationship with the EU, Britain was accused of making claims from the ERDF for projects that were supposed to be funded by British funds. The ERDF was established with the mindset that only projects that were not funded through national money could be claimed. Instead, Britain had decided to put in only claims that would allow it to recover the money it had itself put into the ERDF fund. To the EU, this attempt at recovering its own funds showcased Britains inability to have a community-based mentality. Finally, when it came time to look into energy policy again, Britain once again took the steps to make it an awkward partner with the EU. Britain continued to object the proposal of placing controls on the production and distribution of oil energy even when the EU attempted to accommodate each and every demand by the British government. Nevertheless, Britain continued to argue that it needed more time to look into the effects of such proposal, which angered all the member-states who wanted to obtain an accord on an outline of the policy. In discussing the upcoming conference of 1975, Britain showed again showed its disinterest in cooperating with the EU when it announced that it would not agree to be represented by a single EC seat at the Paris conference. Annoyed, Germany sent out a letter to the member-states that expressed anger at the lack of community within the EU as a result of Britains position on the seat allocation. Germany argued that with its weak economy, Britain was in no position to negotiate on these issues without any consequences (Davidson, 1975). Members-states continued to argue that the negative attitude of the British government hindered their ability to develop a common policy. While the Wilson administration tarnished Britains reputation within the EU, the emergence of James Callaghan as the next Prime Minister did little to make the EU hopeful of a better relationship with Britain. While Callaghan took a peaceful approach towards the EU early on, domestic hostility towards Britains membership in the EU continued to remain high; which led Callaghan to remain cautious in his relationship with the EU. The letter from Callaghan to Labour Secretary Ron Hayward, while positive at first, continued Britain on its negative relations with the EU. Callaghan claimed that the EU was not working in the interests of Britain and that the only reason for not withdrawing from the EU was that it would tarnish Britains relations with the United States. Callaghans statement in regards to the US angered member-states who complained that Britain was providing more attention to the United States than to its partners in the EU. A prominent theme in Callaghans government, US-Briti sh relations did little to lift Britains reputation within the EU, and its relations would continue to spiral downward with the rise of the Thatcher government. Rise of Thatcher: 1979 to 1990 Elected in 1979, the Thatcher government that rose to power following Callaghans Labour government became quickly aligned to the U.S. government, much to the anger of Britains EU partners who were against influence stemming from the United States. Nevertheless, by 1981, the European Union was suffering an economic downturn and was facing bankruptcy. In order to counter this problem, the EU proposed increasing the VAT ceiling by an additional one percent, which Britain strongly refused to accept. Relations between Britain and the EU continued to sour during this financial crisis because Britain continued to hold up any compromises and refused to agree on any proposals set forth by the EU. As the EU member-states grew irritated with Britains reservations on agreeing to new agricultural prices, member-states decided to call for a majority vote on the price levels. In retaliation, Britain protested this action, stating that it breached Britains right to utilize a veto on the topic. Never theless, already weary with Britains inability to compromise, member-states rejected Britains complaint because they believed that agricultural price levels were not of national interest for Britain. As a result of Britains lack of cooperation, France proposed removing Britain as a member of the EU and making it a nation with special status in the EU (Hansard, 1982). When the EU finally ran out of money in 1984, it proposed adding an additional budget of two billion to aid them for the rest of the year. As usual, Britain became an awkward partner by announcing that it would reject a supplementary budget, asserting that the EU should learn how to operate with the budget it had been already been given. Hearing this, member-states grew weary with the already unpopular British government and labelled Thatcher as being counter-productive to the success of the Union (The Economist, 1984). Member-states were disappointed with Britains primary concern over the budget rather than on the wellbeing of the EU partnership. Already blacklisted as a hardliner, Thatchers strong cooperation and identification with the U.S. did little to help her image with the EU. The Reagan Administration, on a hunt for terrorists in Syria and Libya, was set on placing restrictions on these two countries and urged Britain to join its cause. Britains involvement in urging EU sanctions against Syria left many EU member-states troubled by Britains strong partnership with the United States. While the early 1980s saw a more peaceful and relaxed time for the interactions between Britain and the EU, Britain did appear again as an awkward partner by the end of the 1980s. When proposals for a single European currency were suggested at the 1988 meeting in Hanover, Thatcher quickly responded that she would not take any steps of integrating the sterling pound into the EMS. Additionally, Thatcher rejected any ideas of creating a European central bank, stating that a central bank would require a central government to succeed, to which she argued that her government was not ready to accept a centralized European government. Nevertheless, frustrated by Britain, the EU decided to proceed without the British and establish a committee to look into the possible ways to strengthen the EMS (Hansard, 1988). Concerned at the route that the EU began taking, Thatcher publically denounced the committee and proclaimed that Britain would never agree to the establishment of a European Central Ba nk, a statement which continued to strain relations between Britain and the EU (Ibid, 1988). When discussing a European technological cooperation budget in 1986, Britain once again was labelled as the EUs awkward partner in its refusal to accept the amount of funding proposed by the other member-states. The EU believed that it would be giving Britain more value for its investment in research and development; nevertheless, Britain would not budge from its original budget proposal (Peel, 1987). Once Britain backed down and agreed to fund the program in 1987, member-states had become frustrated with the termination of the program as a result of lack of funding from the British (Sharp, 1987). When the EU expressed interest in reviving the plans for the European Defence Community in 1987, Thatcher warned against the idea in fear that the establishment of such defence policy would counter the links that the EU and Britain had established with the United States. These strong views from Thatcher made Britain seem to be uncooperative with the goals set forth by the EU. While some member-states were also unwilling to establish an EDC, the tone that Thatcher used which made her sound more concerned with Britains relationship with the United States made Britain an awkward partner for the EU. Her focus on preserving ties with the United States rather than worrying about European interests greatly hindered her ability to work with her EU partners. At home, Margaret Thatcher began facing attacks from the Labour party, who accused her of attempting to slow the development of the European Union (Independent, 1989). They argued that the EU would continue its development with or without Britain and that it would be dangerous for Britain to be left as a second-class member (Independent, 1989). The public was further enraged by Thatchers tone against the EU; numbers in the country showed that the public had become more pro-Europe since the referendum in 1975 (Independent, 1989). As a result, Thatcher saw herself being forced to become much more neutral and conciliatory towards the EU. While members of her cabinet continued to attack the EU on monetary policy, Thatcher decided to accept only the first condition of the Delors proposal for the creation of a monetary union. Thus, throughout 1989 and 1990, the proposal for a monetary union became a primary theme for both the EU and Britain. Due to the fact that Thatcher personally opposed Britains membership in the ERM, government officials quickly grew angry with her stance and many subsequently resigned from their posts. Officials argued that Thatchers views were not consistent with the views of the British government and that by remaining out of the ERM, Britain would be unable to take part in the discussions surrounding a monetary union. With a government pressing for entry into the ERM, Thatcher eventually agreed that Britain would become a member of the ERM on October 5, 1990 (Elliott, 2005). While Thatcher agreed to enter the ERM, her partnership with the EU once again became awkward when she refused to allow the EU to move to the second stage of the Delors report. Much to the anger of Parliament and her cabinet, Thatcher argued that national interests could not allow her to hand over the sterling to the EU (Hansard, 1990). As a result of her stubbornness, the EU saw Britain as an awkward partner and Thatcher lost her Deputy PM, who resigned in frustration. Her Deputy PM argued that the uncooperative tone that Thatcher had taken with the EU would make it more difficult for Britain to hold influence over the future of the monetary union. Additionally, he blamed Thatcher for the inflation that Britain was suffering as a result of her disinterest in joining the ERM (Independent, 1990). The resignation of Geoffrey Howe slowly gave way to the end of Thatchers reign as Prime Minister and rise to the government of John Major in November 1990, which hoped to build better relatio ns with the European Union. Conservative Government of 1990 to 1997 While the Major administration that took over tried to mend relations between Britain and the EU, it constantly found itself returning towards the hostile relationship found under the reign of Thatcher. In 1991, President Delors provided Britain an opportunity to accept an opt-out clause in regards to accepting a single currency. While Thatcher still argued against the concept of accepting any compromise on monetary union, Major felt that an opt-out clause in the Maastricht Treaty would help Britain overcome its hesitation on the topic. Nevertheless, because only Britain was given this opt-out opportunity, it was again placed as an awkward partner as a result of its unwillingness to completely cooperate with the union. By 1992, Britain had assumed the EU Presidency and now found itself strongly on the defence of the Maastricht Treaty. Major believed that standing in complete support of ratification of the Treaty would show the EU that Britain was dedicated to its role within the EU. At the same time, he believed that the treaty would hinder attempts at centralizing the EU. Nonetheless, Delors interpretation of the Maastricht Treaty as an opportunity for the EU to become a federalist state upset both Britain and many of the EU member-states. As a result, Denmarks referendum led to a defeat of the treaty, which shocked many nations, including Britain. Consequently, Major now found himself advocating the ratification of a treaty that every other member-state had wanted to renegotiate. Thatcher condemned Majors support for the Maastricht Treaty and called for a British referendum on the treaty. With trouble at home, Major faced anger and criticism from member-states who claimed that Britain continued t o remain focused on her self-interests and ignored the problems facing the EU as a whole. Fear that France would vote against the Treaty gave way to a loss of confidence in the ERM, which led to the pound sterling being forced out of the ERM as a result of Britain being able to maintain the sterling above its set lower limit (Hansard, 1992). This latest development in the problems during the British presidency only served to fuel Britains role as the EUs awkward partner. As a result of resentment towards the EU within Britain, Major struggled to maintain positive relations with the EU; the nominations for the President of the Commission in June 1994 showcased Britains struggle and awkwardness as a partner. At the meeting, Major vetoed the appointment of Jean-Luc Dehaene, announcing that he would never agree to his nomination (Barber, 1994). EU member-states grew angry by Britains stance, claiming that Britain was driven by its domestic interests rather than its interests with the EU. Britain became the awkward partner when the Council was forced to agree on the nomination of Prime Minister Jacques Santer of Luxemburg instead of their original nomination. Majors actions against Germanys nomination of Dehaene quickly deteriorated Britains relationship with German Chancellor Helmut Kohl. What started as a desire for complete EU cooperation ended with Britain having a tarnished reputation amongst its EU partners. Majors actions against the EU, through his threats, vetoes, stances and public speeches, led to his government being isolated from the politics of the EU. While a large portion of the problems with the EU emerged as a result of influence stemming from domestic policy at home, Majors angry tone towards the EU over the election of a new commission President, and over the mad cow crisis of 1996 only served to further distance Britain from the EU. Britains Present Day Status Though this report only discusses the governments of Heath, Wilson, Callaghan, Thatcher, and Major, it is important to note that despite the fact that relations have somewhat improved between Britain and the EU, there still remains tension between the two partners to make Britain continue its path as an awkward partner. While the Blair and Brown administrations have improved Britains relationship with the EU, there still exists an awkward relationship between the two partners. Though political parties have change, Britain continues to maintain its position as the EUs awkward partner as a result of the domestic fear in accepting the EUs role and influence in British politics; the strong sense of maintaining national pride and through the rejection of European federalism; and finally, as a result of the continued focus on maintaining a strong relationship with the United States. Nevertheless, while domestic uncertainty towards European Union has remained prevalent in Britain, one can say that the EU has indeed had an impact on British politics and Britains foreign policy. Once known for its dominant decision-making role in international affairs and in its own domestic policies, Britain has shifted its view of global politics to that where it has realized that its relationship with the United States and the EU are equally important for the success of the nation. Thus, while Britain still remains an awkward partner to the EU, the steps and actions that Britain has taken in the two most recent administrations and with any luck in the upcoming administration can be claimed as an attempt by the British nation to take slow and calculated steps towards ultimately embracing its membership within the European Union.

The Epic of Gilgamesh :: essays research papers

Before we read 'The Epic of Gilgamesh' we were learning about ancient civilizations. This book gives us a story to understand how people acted, who they looked up to, & what they believed in. 'The Epic of Gilgamesh' may not be an important text to read, but it's better then taking notes. By reading the story & doing a BBQ everyday is like the same thing. So 'The Epic of Gilgamesh' should be read in the ninth grade global history, since it fits so well with the curriculum. No matter what time period it is just about all civilizations have gender roles. In ancient Sumer most of women in the story are portrayed differently. One of them was a slut (Harlot). Another was completely crazy who hated rejection (Ishtar). After Gilgamesh washed & changed his clothes Ishtar fell in love with him. So Ishtar asked Gilgamesh to marry her. When she was rejected she was furious. Ishtar went to her father Anu & told him what happened. ?My father give me the bull of heaven to destroy Gilgamesh? this quote was found on page 87. Every civilization, country, & state needs a leader if it hopes to be successful. Leaders need to take charge & keep things in order, but a good leader would also be open to change. At the beginning of the story Gilgamesh is hated by all of the people of Uruk. They thought that Gilgamesh was arrogant & he was unfair. Everything changed when Gilgamesh met Enkidu. They started out as friends but when Nisum adopted Enkidu as a son, Gilgamesh & Enkidu got even closer. When Enkidu died Gilgamesh was devastated so he had a statue made for his brother.?Then Gilgamesh issued a proclamation through the land, he summoned them all, the coppersmiths, & the goldsmiths, the stone-workers,& commanded them , ?Make a statue of my friend this quote was found on page 96. This was reckless of Gilgamesh but instead of staying locked up in his room he requested to have something made in his friend?s honor. Gilgamesh showed excellent leadership qualities by taking charge of the situation. Through out this book when ever the characters are faced with a problem they turn to religion. The religion of the story is polytheism which is the belief of many gods.

Kashmir Problem

I think that if war is seen as real possibility, all efforts should be on its prevention as war brings killing of innocent people, hunger and devastations. The region of Kashmir would hardly be able to restore uniqueness of the legendary beautiful mountainous area. Moreover, 7 million of people are endangered to be killed. But for what?This question is a matter of interest for many politicians, historians and economists as many countries are involved in the conflict – India, Pakistan are the primary participants of the conflict, and the US has its own position towards the problem. Pakistan and India are known to have dispute over Kashmir as they are willing to divide the region. â€Å"Line of Control† is introduced as a violated truce.The problem is that India views Kashmir region as a part of its nation and it claims that Pakistan has occupied illegally portion of the region. Therefore, Indian government is going to prevent unification between Kashmir and Pakistan. In its turn, Pakistan residents are allowed to choose freely whether they want to live in Kashmir or in Jammu. It goes without saying that India rejects such plebiscite. In my opinion, the most dangerous thing is that both countries are nuclear power. It means that in war they may refer to nuclear weapon which can destroy not only Pakistan or India, but also all neighboring states.I think that everything should be done to solve the conflict peacefully to avoid killing. The article mentions that India had invented more than 300 kg of weapons-grade petroleum in 1995, and it is hard to image what the consequences of such attack may be. Additionally, both countries are hardly equipped with ballistic missiles and fighter jets which could be armed with nuclear weapons.The conflict is worse by the fact that India suffers from terrorist attacks and may refer to military response, whereas Pakistan views India as aggressor which is willing to take full control of Kashmir threatening in such a wa y Pakistan nation. It is rather hard to decide whether India or Pakistan can be considered right. The situation is two-fold, but it is necessary to press Pakistan to give up terrorism as it encourages India to attack.ReferencesKashmir. New York Post On-line. Retrieved March 28, 2008, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/kashmir/front.html