The Man Who Liked Slow Tomatoe Essay Example For Students

The Man Who Liked Slow Tomatoe Essay Symbolism in The Yellow WallpaperThe Yellow Wallpaper is overflowed with symbolism. Symbols are images that have a meaning beyond them selves in a short story, a symbol is a detail, a character, or an incident that has a meaning beyond its literal role in the narrative. Gilman uses symbols to tell her story of a womans mental state of being diminishes throughout the story. The following paragraphs tell just some of the symbols and how I interpreted them, they could be read in many different ways. The title itself, The Yellow Wallpaper, is symbolizing the role men play in a patriarchal society, where men are the more dominant sex, and how women are trapped; in a life of male control. For instance, At night in any kind of light, in twilight, candlelight, lamplight, and worst of all moonlight, it becomes bars!;(Gilman 211) This shows how the narrator feels trapped by the paper. Another symbol that refers to the role women play is, And she is all the time trying to climb through that pattern, it strangles so; I think that is why it has so many heads.;(Gilman 213) This is meaning that if a women tried to play a role in society she was just not taken seriously, or felt like trying to play a role was getting nowhere. We will write a custom essay on The Man Who Liked Slow Tomatoe specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now The way Gilman describes the wallpaper tells of what the narrators mind is thinking, and when you follow the lame uncertain curves for a little distance they suddenly commit suicide.;(Gillman 206) She doesnt think this on the conscious level but more on the unconscious level. When the narrator writes, (The designs) destroy themselves in unheard of contradictions.;(Gillman 206) She is speaking of her state of mind subconsciously, the narrator is on the brink of losing her mind at this point. Gillman writes, There is a recurrent spot where the pattern lolls like a broken neck and two bulbous eyes stare at you upside down. (Gillman 207) She was explaining how the wallpaper is like a watchdog; or a guard of some type, watching her every move, naturally making her nervous. I think that the narrator feels much alone in life, even though she has a family who cares for her. She is clinically depressed so naturally she is going to feel isolated from the world. Speaking about a house that the narrator grew up in, she writes, and there was one chair that always seemed like a strong friend.; (Gillman 208) The chair gave her a sense of companionship or maybe protection as the armrests and the back surrounded her. As she sits in the room for hours on end, her mind allows her to see herself as an acquaintance portrayed as a stranger trapped behind the design in the wallpaper. But int the places where it isnt faded and where the sun is just so-I can see a strange, provoking, formless sort of figure, that seems to skulk about behind that silly and conspicuous front design.;(Gillman 213) Later in the story when her mind is slipping more she tries to help the women; get out from the entrapment of the wallpaper, for instance, As soon as it was moonlight and that poor thing began to crawl and shake the pattern, I got up and ran to help her.;(Gillman 214) The narrator says, I dont like to look out of the windows even-there are so many of these creeping women, and they creep so fast. I wonder if they all come out of that wallpaper as I did?;(Gillman 215) She is saying that there are many women out there that feel trapped just as she did. Symbolism plays a soul part of The Yellow Wallpaper. Gillman gets her point across if the reader can catch what she is trying to say. Gillman put together a remarkable collection of symbols throughout her story. Some are easy to find and others I havent even found. The point to the story is that women could not play a role in society back then because society felt it was wrong, society wanted women in the household. .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb , .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb .postImageUrl , .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb , .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb:hover , .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb:visited , .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb:active { border:0!important; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb:active , .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u07ad0539c7c3118c377d598e50351beb:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Homeless: What Has Been Done To Decrease The Problem? EssayGuth, Hans P., and Gadriele L. Rico Discovering Literature second edition (1997) 204-216. Text Book.

Multiple Main Characters in Your Story Follow These 3 Tips

Multiple Main Characters in Your Story Follow These 3 Tips 3 Tips for Featuring Multiple Main Characters in Your Story Writing a novel with multiple main characters   can seem insurmountable. Who’s on stage when, and what do you do with the others at the same time? When your top priority is crystal clarity for your reader, you must somehow weave different perspectives in a way that makes sense. Common wisdom says you get one perspective or point-of-view (POV) character per scene, preferably per chapter, and usually per book. My latest novel, The Valley of the Dry Bones, has one perspective character throughout. Though it’s written in third person, it’s limited to just my lead character’s perspective. He is the camera, so everything that happens on every page is seen through his eyes, heard through his ears, and any internal dialogue is his. That’s the easiest, most direct, and clearest way to handle POV. Using more than one is not for the faint of heart. It’s complex and tricky, and only more so if you go beyond two. I first used two perspective characters when I wrote my novel Left Behind. So why did I do it? Because the scope of my story demanded it. I needed my airline pilot (Rayford Steele) to get around the world- and I told a cosmic tale that also impacted him and his immediate family. But meanwhile, I also needed my globe-trotting journalist (Buck Williams) to be where Rayford wasn’t. If your story likely requires more than one main character to make it work, it’s crucial you learn to deftly navigate featuring multiple main characters. So what’s the secret? A few clear guidelines can make it work. Here are three: Need help writing your novel?  Click here to download my ultimate 12-step guide. How to Successfully Feature Multiple Main Characters 1. Think Reader-First You want nothing to stand in the way of the reader’s experience. She should know who your POV character is without having to re-read or ferret it out. When I began a scene Rayford Steele’s mind was on a woman he had never touched, there was no question he was the main character and that we would experience this scene through his lens. For some reason, many beginning writers mistakenly assume that rendering a scene from one character’s perspective means it must be written in the first person from his or her point of view. As you can see from the example above, it can be done just as well in third-person limited. Also, remembering that you get only one POV character per scene should keep you from head hopping- where readers get a peek inside the minds of others. Say Jim is your POV character and he notices Mary is scowling. You can say, â€Å"Jim thought Mary looked skeptical, so†¦Ã¢â‚¬  But you cannot say, â€Å"Mary was skeptical. She doubted Jim knew what he was talking about.† If you do, you have hopped into her head mid-scene and have either switched the POV from Jim to Mary, or you have slipped into an Omniscient Viewpoint where the author is not limited to one person’s perspective. You know all and tell all, and unless you are a master like J.K. Rowling, you’re unlikely to sell such a manuscript. I’ve written 192 books, two-thirds of those novels, and I wouldn’t even attempt such a thing. In Left Behind, when I switched to my second POV character, I added double the space between paragraphs (and some authors or publishers also center a typographical dingbat like * * * between paragraphs, just to make things clearer) and introduced him this way: Next to a window in first class, a writer sat hunched over his laptop. He shut down the machine, vowing to get back to his journal later. At thirty, Cameron Williams was the youngest ever senior writer for†¦ Handling it that way ensured that no reader could miss that I had switched from Rayford in the cockpit to Buck in first class. 2. Make Your POV Characters Distinct In subsequent books in the Left Behind series, I used as many as five different perspective characters for one novel. That made it even more vital to make clear to the reader who my perspective character was whenever I switched. But just as important, my individual perspective characters had to be crisply distinct from one another. I established Rayford as a middle-aged family man, while Buck was younger and single. Another perspective character was female, another an elderly man. The more distinct the better. Some novelists have multiple perspective characters speak from their POVs in the first person. That can make it easier to distinguish between characters, provided you work hard to give each his own voice, pace, vocabulary, and delivery. 3. Choose Carefully The point of having multiple main characters is to allow your story to expand geographically. But you may find, as I did, that eventually your perspective characters wind up in the same scene. Then from whose perspective do you tell it? If one of your main characters is most main, if you know what I mean (in Left Behind  Rayford and Buck were both strong leads, but Rayford was really the star), stick with that character. Otherwise, choose the one who has the most to gain or lose in the scene. You Can Make This Work As you can see, there’s a lot to consider when you try to tell a story featuring more than one main character, but if you’re careful and intentional and always consider your reader first, you can enhance a story this way and make it something special. Our best writing often results from working through such difficult challenges. Need help writing your novel?  Click here to download my ultimate 12-step guide. Tell me how you’ve handled multiple main characters, or pose any questions raised by this post. Connect with me in the comments below.

The uss cole bombing Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

The uss cole bombing - Research Paper Example As such, this paper will analyze the reasons that brought about the occurrence of these attacks in addition to the outcome in terms of what happened to the bombers after the attack. This terrorism incident took place on October 12 2000, which was on a Thursday. The vessel that had been docked was being refueled at one of the ports in Aden in Yemen. This was a routine fuel stop for the vessel, which was under the command of the Commander Kork Lippold. The attack on Cole, which is a US Navy Destroyer, was accomplished by two suicide bombers. They are said to have been travelling in a tiny motorboat that had been filled with explosives. They are estimated to have been around 200-300 kg (Whitaker, 2003). The small boat that the two were travelling in was said to have approached the destroyer from its port side. Subsequent to this, the explosion was executed at 11: 18 in the morning Bahrain time. According to witness reports, the boat sidled towards the side of the port side. It came so close that it even made it possible for the sailors who were on board to exchange greetings with the two suicide bombers who were planning to execute the crime. This was just before the explosion when they stood at attention and detonated the explosives minutes later. At the moment of the explosion, the crew members had already started lining up to take their lunch in the gallery. As a result of the explosion, a hole that was 40 feet wide was blown into the ship on one of its sides. The members of crew fought as they were making attempts to get space within the engineering spaces. The CIA officials believe that this blast was caused by a sharp charge which refers to the explosives that are designed to fit into the hull of the boat. They managed to bring the damage under control after three days. After the inspection of the vessel following the attack, divers ascertained that the keel within t he hull had not experienced any

Compare and contrast the key principles of associationist and social Essay

Compare and contrast the key principles of associationist and social constructivist theories and their implications for learning and teaching in the classroom - Essay Example t theory has been the basis for today’s organizations and associations and carefully outlines the way in which they carry out their daily processes (George L. Hersey, 1972). The associationists believe that the human mind is simply a concoction of vital elements that are governed by some automatic mechanisms. These automatic mechanisms are nothing but the associations that are being discussed in the present context. In fact, Hume had once said that As such, the degree of association is pretty atomic as well as mechanical in nature. The theory of Associationism has a number of principles that have largely worked towards making it an effective theory despite differing opinions of individual intellectuals. The primary facet of Associationism is that the association between the mental elements is built up by the mind through constant learning from experience, wherein all such experiences are molded into a set of basic beliefs and ideas. All of these ideas are elementary in nature and are rather unstructured and independent from each other. In order to define complex ideas, subsets of these simple and unstructured ideas (which are now rules guiding the individual in decision making) are used to build up a solution for such a complex idea (George L. Hersey, 1972). As such, it can be seen that Associationism is plainly an attempt by the mind to reconstruct and develop the human mind based on experiences through the individual senses. As all such rules are constructed through experience, there is very little space for theoretical assumptions and such associations are therefore a concatenation of a number of individual ideas that have been built up over time. The solution built up by the resulting association is what projects a systematic picture of the mind and its beliefs. The Social Constructivism theory is a theory pertaining to the study of knowledge that details on how specific social phenomena evolve within different situations and social contexts. As such, a

Business ethics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 6

Business ethics - Essay Example If many patients working under the old plant have already been diagnosed with Cancer, the firm cannot risk continuing with the operations knowing the health implications involved. Even if a cleanup occurs, it is not a guarantee that the scenario will occur again due to the plant being old. Option B, on the contrary, is also unethical because it will expose the workers from Liberia at a serious health risk, not to mention the negative effects on the community. Paying employees’ low wages because of the country they come from is unethical. Employees should not be shown favoritism due to their nationality or ethnicity. The strategy by the firm to cut on labor costs at an expense of the workers in Liberia is very unethical. The firm opting to use Low-tech methods that would cause a health risk to the workers and the community because of toxic hazards released to the Environment is against the Environmental principle of managing toxic wastes. , From an Ethical point of view Option C, can work as the best option among the three options that TK Company has now. Now the Government is offering low interest rates on their financial facilities, thus the firm could resort to take a loan at a low interest rate and use it to improve their new facilities. Facing out the old facilities is ethical on TK’s part because it will reduce the chances of more employees being exposed to cancer infections. In addition, the mechanism they are using to reduce the workforce is very ethical, because no employee will be laid off in an inhumane manner, but has a chance to receive their pension, in addition to all the other retirement benefits. Even though the debt liabilities will rise, the firm can manage it well in the future after the operation at the new facility picks up (Vincent, 2011). Vincent asserts that, every organization, including TK has ethical rules and guidelines, which they refer to as ‘code of ethics’ that they have to

Principal Strengths And Weaknesses Of Norwegian Integration Politics Essay

Principal Strengths And Weaknesses Of Norwegian Integration Politics Essay The foreign policy of the European Union (EU) compromises two major tools. First, deepening dictates a horizontal (among members) process where member states tie up their relations on stronger grounds. Second, enlargement is associated with a vertical growth (between members of the EU and the candidate countries) that absorbs new members into the Union creating new markets, new employment potential, and a wider geographical status. The basic difference between these two processes is that the latter must also include the satisfaction of an outsider (i.e. the candidate country). As strange as it may sound to a Turkish citizen, some countries are willing to opt out the so-called opportunity of becoming an EU member. Any expression of opposition to the European Union or to the project of European integration, generally labeled Euroscepticism, comes from many different quarters and spans across the political spectrum. One basic idea is that European integration might be accompanied by a certain disintegration of the political system at the national level. In the recent European Parliament elections, many Eurosceptics entered the European Parliament, thus suggesting that Euroscepticism is on the rise across Europe. In surveying the nature of Euroscepticism across European states, Szczerbiak and Taggart (2000) identified Soft and Hard Euroscepticism which implicitly suggest particular features of Eurosceptical attitudes to Europe. For Hard Eurosceptics, the EU may be opposed because it embodies some previously identified  «enemy » (e.g. capitalism for communism, socialism for the right, bureaucracy for populists, supranationalism for nationalists, or neo-liberalism for socialists). For Soft Eurosceptics, the EU is problematic when it development runs counter to interests, policies or issues they support. (Szczerbiak and Taggart 2008) Euroscepticsm in Norway In the Norwegian context, Euroscepticism is usually associated with the question of membership. To the question why the membership issue was and is so hotly debated in Norway there is no single answer, but rather several partial ones. A leading expert in the field of political behavior, Professor Henry Valen, points to the interplay of history, geography and social structure(Miles 1996). Historically, centuries of foreign rule first by the Danes, then by the Swedes and the fact of being a young nation (i.e. Norways comparatively recent independence since 1905) made many Norwegians fierce patriots. To this should be added the large geographical distance to mainland Europe. The country has traditionally pursued a policy of non-involvement in European conflicts. Furthermore, the Norwegian Euroscepticism can be traced to both the economic and cultural territorial cleavages that shape the Norwegian party system, thus cutting across the main left-right dimension in Norway i.e. socio-economic competition between Labour and the Conservatives. (Eliassen and Sitter 2003). The centre-periphery cleavages derived from the national revolution and the rural-urban cleavages that were arose during the industrial revolution are other two explanatory dimensions of Euroscepticsm in Norway (Rokkan and Urwin 1983). Domestic politics reflect economic inequalities and conflicts of interest stemming from the huge geographic extension of the country from south to north and the gap in living conditions between the densely inhabited and industrialized areas of south and the thinly populated rural and coastal districts. Furthermore, throughout the EU debates there were unusual but strong alliances between farmers and fisherman, urban radicals, and partisans of lingui stic, religious and teetotalist counter-cultures. Miles (1996) finds that on most of these dimensions there has been a remarkable stability since the early 1970s. The economic dimension of Norwegian Euroscepticism is illustrated in the sectors that face uncertainty or decreased subsidies if exposed to free trade and competition, primarily agriculture and fisheries, but also to a smaller extent the public sector. Fear that integration might undermine Norways regional policy, which entails both economic transfers and positive discrimination in the forms of tax-breaks and other financial incentives, provides further grounds for economic opposition. In terms of identity or culture, European integration has been perceived as a potential or actual threat to Norways moral-religious heritage (Eliassen and Sitter 2003). Foreign and security policy added as further dimension to the Norwegian Euroscepticism. Until 2000, there was scarce evidence of that Norway was responding to the end of the Cold War and changing military and security realities of the 1990s, and the distance between Norwegian and EU security policy was greater than at the beginning of the decade (Eliassen and Sitter 2003). This is rooted partly in the perception that Norway is a different country, in terms of either geopolitics or its international profile. The EU and the USs changing approaches to security and defense (beyond sole focus on traditional concerns of defense of state bounders), has little effect on the Norwegian foreign and security policy. However, even in narrow terms of security concerns, Norway is finding that its non-NATO neighbours are increasingly addressing regional concerns through the EU institutions. Given its NATO membership and geostrategic position, Norway would be in a prime position to play a strong role in shaping the EUs emerging security and defense policy. Thus, even in the absence of EU membership, Norway joined the Schengen agreement on police cooperation and border control and performs surveillance on the European It has also established close cooperation with the EU on its Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Historical outline of Norways foreign economic relations since independence Norway is no stranger to complex relations with the outside world (Claes and Fossum 2002). Its foreign policy has historically striven to strike a balance between internationalism and national self-assertion. Although united under a common king as early as 872, it lost its independence in the late Middle Ages, was ruled by Denmark from 1390 to 1814, and then was the possession of the Swedish king until obtaining independence in 1905. In order to find the connection between a nations national identity and her foreign policy, one must first deal with whether Norwegian identity formation has yet ended up with a solid national identity. Anthony Smith (1993) outlines fundamental features of a national identity as such: a historic territory (homeland); common myths and historical memories; a common mass public culture including dialect languages and shared customs/traditions; common legal rights and duties for all members; and a common economy with territorial mobility for members. Internalizing Smiths features of national identity as well as making, Norwegian society has come up with an accomplished national identity without question. The main priority in Norwegian foreign and security policy after the Second World War was always the Atlantic relationship, built around NATO membership and a strong reliance on the United Kingdom and the United States. In 1960 Norway joined the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) which included the United Kingdon, Finland, Sweden, Austria, and Liechtenstein. However, Norways applications to join the European Community in 1962 and 1967 and vetoed by France indicated that there was potential for conflict in the Norwegian political system concerning stronger orientation towards the European Community. The opposition was not limited to the internal dimensions. Externally, membership meant a potential break with the traditional non-supranational Nordic and EFTA approaches. As a consequence, it was felt by many Norwegians that Nordic cooperation might be jeopardized by opting for EC membership. The 1972 Trauma In the 1972 referendum on EC membership, a majority of 53 percent of the population voted against. Community to ensure duty-free trade for manufactured goods, the European question receded from its political agenda. The negative referendum outcome caused something like a political earthquake in Norway. It marked a broad popular protest against the exclusive competence of the government to handle questions of foreign policy and international economics generally and against EC membership specifically. The No in a way became part of the Constitution, standing above the government, the Storting (parliament) and the political parties. Despite the rejection in 1972, and the following silent treatment of the membership issue, the prospect of the Single European Market triggered negotiations to link the EFTA states with the EC through the creation of the European Economic Area agreement (EEA). As an intergovernmental agreement between the EU and the three remaining EFTA partners (Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway), the EEA became the backbone of Norway s economic relationship with the EU. The vote against membership of the European Community in the 1972 set the scene for an approach to European integration based on an ever closer cooperation short of actual membership. Despite the rejection of membership, Norway was required to respond to and accommodate European integration. What started as bilateral relationships between each EFTA member and the EU evolved into coordinated multilateral interaction in the early 1980s. [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦] (Eliassen and Sitter 2003) The 1994 No referendum to EU membership In the wake of the 1994 referendum , in Norway, enormous offshore oil and gas resources had been developed, increasing the level of Norwegian exports and adding one more sensitive sector to the Norwegian negotiation agenda with the EU. In the EU, a more ambitious direction was employed both to harmonize economic regulations of the members in order to create a common market and economic union, and also to create a political union with common foreign policy. The impact of these changes together with political considerations, including loss of sovereignty in critical decision-making areas, made the distance between Norway and the Union extended. The No slogan EU campaigns 1994 slogan centered on three words environment, solidarity and national rule all of which were threatened by the Union. Norwegian Method of European Integration The combination in increasingly close cooperation in a growing range of policy sectors while excluding the possibility of full membership has come to represent a join-as-much-as-we-can-get-away-with approach to European integration on the governments part has been called the Norwegian method of European integration (Eliassen and Sitter 2001). The results in both 1972 and 1994 referendums were marginal No majorities, and this has been combined with a permanent pro-integration majority in Parliament, hence the basis for the Norwegian method of European integration. Strenghts of the Norwegian method in European integration The European Economic Area (EEA) has been, is and will be the cornerstone of Norwegian involvement in European integration. The deal entails comprehensive membership in the EUs Single European Market, and most Norwegian parties consider a well-functioning EEA an essential prerequisite for Norway not applying for full membership of the EU. Enlargement of the Single European Market was, of course, both for the EU and the EFTA countries, the key motive behind the EEA agreement (leaving aside the broader political goals of extending European integration), and this is perhaps the aspect of the EU Norway relationship that has worked best. Nevertheless, under the EEA arrangement Norway has seen much better economic development over the last decade than the EU average. The Norwegian North Sea oil wealth is almost a blessing for the Norwegian economy, but not the only, explanation for this. In most sectors, the differences between the EEA and EU arrangements for trade in the Single Market are minor. In several respects, Norway has even outperformed the EU. Interest rates have fluctuated, but with some lag they have followed the Euro-zone. The government debt was eliminated, the foreign trade surplus grew, non-petroleum industrial investment increased and business did not emigrate to the Euro-zone. To be sure, the economic slowdown in the opening years of this century also hit Norway, but less severely than most of the EU member states. Unemployment in Norway stand (relatively stable) at the end of 2009 at around 3 percent, about half the EU average. This can be put down largely to the relatively tight fiscal policy pursu ed in Norway, even in the face of the temptation to use more oil money. In fact, a large degree of convergence between Norway and the Euro-zone in terms of monetary policy has taken place despite the lack of a formal relationship. Norways has secured ad-hoc participation in several EU policy initiatives beyond those covered by the EEA The most spectacular of these, are the Schengen arrangement on passport free travel and associated policies and Norways close cooperation with the EU on its Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Perhaps most significantly, the EU-Norway relationship is dynamic. Although this means that the EEA treaty is upgraded when the EU enlarges, most of the responsibility is on the three EFTA members unilaterally to adapt to developments in the EU. This means both EU Treaty change and substantial developments in EU policy. Weaknesses of the Norwegian method in European integration The Norwegian quasi-membership in the EU (Eliassen and Sitter 2004) entails ever-closer cooperation, and the advantages of the supposed discretion that such arrangements entail shrinks with the deepening and widening of the EU. The first challenge is associated with the deepening of the EU. Although the EU as a whole is generally pleased with Norways performance, it shows little interest in developing this system much further to accommodate deepening of European integration. The EEA and Schengen systems are static compared to the very dynamic developments within the EU. Both arrangements are becoming ever smaller parts of the whole, and this is particularly evident when the EU moves into new areas such as counter-terrorism. In other rapidly developing areas such as foreign, security and defense policy, the overall Norwegian strategy is not always clearly developed, and the EU side justifiable questions whether Oslo is prepared to accept the full implications of ad hoc participation in any given initiative. The price for access the Single Market is accepting EU market regulation and competition policy. In terms of the free movement of goods, services, capital and labour, there is little difference between the EEA agreements and full EU membership, and the EEA competition policy has brought a degree of supranationalism to an otherwise intergovernmental agreement. Although Norway has adopted less to EUs competition policy than most member states, it has partially adopted the EUs prohibition approach and remains under pressure to follow EU states in adapting to the EU system (Eliassen and Sitter 2003). The EUs eastern enlargement, or widening, makes up the second element of the challenge of the future and the dilemma of quasi-membership. The tenfold increase in the fee for Norways access to the EU Single Market agreed as part of the EEA enlargement deal not only illustrates the shifting balance between the costs and benefits of quasi-membership (and some EU states perception of Norway as a rich relative who is unwilling to contribute to the common good), but also the potential consequences of the growing asymmetry between the EU and EFTA partners in the EEA. Conclusion Are Norwegians as Eurosceptic as we often think? The question of how and to what extent Norway should participate in European integration has been the most important issue in national politics since the Second World War. The current Norwegian method of European integration lies between the alternatives of full membership and withdrawal from the EEA. At the same time, Norways non-membership of the EU understood as economically sensible for a country rich on natural resources is seen by most of the EU members as an indicator of self-reliance and national independence which suggests cultural introversion and a lack of need to actively trade and communicate in cultural, scientific and commercial matters with the rest of Europe. Despite this quite false picture that is developing, are Norwegians as Eurosceptic as we often think? In light of this, I have identified four arguments against the standard story of Norwegian Euroscepticism: High degree of integration with European markets when looking at the share of import and export from/to EU of total (2000-2009); High degree of compliance with EU Norms, revealed through the percentage of EU directives not transported (EU and EEA scoreboards) between 1997-2009; Considerable pragmatism by Norwegian political parties (i.e. there is a difference between talking and acting). All parties have governed on the EEA and if it was not supported, at least it was accepted as a compromise; Norwegian citizens have average attitudes towards European unification (European Social Survey 2008). Thus, a general lesson for the study of Euroscepticism is that it fails to grasp the distinction between opposition to European integration and opposition to EU membership. It tends to overemphasize the significance of formal membership and ignore many different Norwegian ties to the EU. Membership is not so much a question about the EU, but primarily about domestic issues in Norway, as in most of the member states.

The Doryphoros :: Essays Papers

The Doryphoros Description This stone sculpture is a naked human-like figure standing six feet tall. The body is in chiasmos stance with the left leg slightly bent and the left foot slightly behind the right. The head is turned slightly downward and to the right, and its size is approximately 1/6 of the body. The hair is cropped closely to the head with no part. The body has a defined musculature, however the forearms appear to be missing. There is an object behind and to the right of the right leg that is about 2 feet tall and 10 inches wide. Formal Analysis This sculpture seems to epitomize the ideal male human form. All of the body parts seem perfectly proportioned and the muscles are beautifully defined as if the image were of an athlete. The image is youthful with a calm demeanor. The right missing forearm looks as if it used to be resting at his side, while the left elbow was probably at a 90 degree angle, with the hand holding something. The slight bend in the left leg gives the impression of movement, as if the image was frozen while walking. The counterpoised stance adds an air of nobility to the "man". Historical Analysis The sculpture is a Roman copy of the original Greek bronze made by artist Polykleitos in 450BC. It is recorded that he made the Doryphoros as an example of perfect proportion. He wrote a book to accompany the statue called, "The Cannon of Proportion, " and countless artists copied the statue because of its perfection. This regal figure was named Doryphoros (Greek for "spearbearer") because it originally held a long spear in its left hand.