Ophelia and Gertrude Essay

Ophelia and Gertrude Essay The classical and world-renowned Shakespearean play Hamlet has two very prominent and important female characters as the main roles, Ophelia and Gertrude. As to a surprise, they are similar in many ways. This essay will inform the reader about their similarities or likeness. It is quite obvious that both Gertrude and Ophelia are both motivated by love and a desire for quiet familial harmony among the members of their society in Elsinore. Out of love for her son does Gertrude advise: Dear Hamlet, cast thy nighted color off, And let thine eye look like a friend on Denmark. Do not for ever with thy vailed lids Seek for thy noble father in the dust. (1.2) Likewise does she ask that the prince remain with the family: â€Å"Let not thy mother lose her prayers, Hamlet, / I pray thee stay with us, go not to Wittenberg.† Later, when the heros supposed â€Å"madness† is the big concern, Gertrude lovingly sides with her husband in the analysis of her sons condition: â€Å"I doubt it is no other but the main, / His fathers death and our oerhasty marriage.† She confides her family-supporting thoughts to Ophelia: â€Å"And for your part, Ophelia, I do wish / That your good beauties be the happy cause / Of Hamlets wildness,† thereby attempting to keep a loving relationship with the young lady of the court, even though the latter is of a lower social stratum. When Claudius requests of Gertrude, â€Å"Sweet Gertrude, leave us too; / For we have closely sent for Hamlet hither,† Gertrude responds submissively, â€Å"I shall obey you.† Familial love is first among Gertrudes priorities. When, at the presentation of The Mousetrap, she makes a request of her son, â€Å"Come hither, my dear Hamlet, sit by me,† and he spurns her to lie at Ophelias feet, Gertrude is not offended; her loyalty to family overrides such slights. She considers Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to be friends of her son, and only for that reason sends them to learn about him; she would never use them as Claudius later does in an attempt to murder Hamlet. And even at the moment of her death, her last words include, â€Å"O my dear Hamlet.† Yes, Gertrude is pro-family. Ophelia manifest great familial affection In similar fashion does Ophelia manifest great familial affection, agreeing to comply with the advice of her brother Laertes: â€Å"I shall the effect of this good lesson keep / As watchman to my heart.† When her father, Polonius, makes inquiry regarding the â€Å"private time† which Hamlet has been giving to Ophelia, she replies unreservedly, â€Å"He hath, my lord, of late made many tenders / Of his affection to me,† and elaborates mightily on the subject. Polonius insists that she â€Å"from this time forth† not â€Å"give words or talk with the Lord Hamlet,† and Ophelia dutifully complies with his wishes: â€Å"I shall obey, my lord.† She later even gives him her love-letters from Hamlet. When she acts as a decoy so that Polonius and Claudius can observe the prince, resulting in Ophelias chastisement by the protagonist, she nevertheless keeps him as the main focus in her life: â€Å"O, what a noble mind is here oerthrown!† Her love for brother, father, boyfriend, and others generally, override her love of self. Her respect for the opinions of immediate family is greater than her respect for her own opinions even in the matter of her courtship. Bonds of family and friends Another similarity between these two lady-characters is that they suffer from a severing of the bonds of family and friends. Gertrude is displeased with Hamlet when, with The Mousetrap, he upsets King Claudius: Guildenstern says to Hamlet, â€Å"The Queen, your mother, in most great affliction of spirit, hath sent me to you.† And when the hero meets with his mother, her concern is: â€Å"Hamlet, thou hast thy father much offended.† Of course, Gertrudes grief over the kings upset is soon upstaged by her sons killing of Polonius behind the arras: â€Å"O me, what hast thou done?† and â€Å"O, what a rash and bloody deed is this!† Gertrude, unaware of Claudius murder of King Hamlet, probes the prince for the cause of the disturbance within him: â€Å"What have I done, that thou darst wag thy tongue / In noise so rude against me?† and â€Å"Ay me, what act, / That roars so loud and thunders in the index?† Even when Hamlet has afflicted his mother s soul with great distress, she still tries to preserve the mother-son relationship by referring to him as â€Å"sweet†: â€Å"O speak to me no more! / These words like daggers enter in my ears. / No more, sweet Hamlet!† Even after Hamlet has done considerable emotional damage (â€Å"O Hamlet, thou hast cleft my heart in twain.†) Gertrude still tries to keep the familial bond from being totally severed by asking â€Å"What shall I do?† and by not revealing to Claudius that her son mistook Polonius for his uncle. Similarly, Ophelia suffers from the severing of the bonds of family and friends. She is traumatized by Hamlets visit after the ghosts appearance, when he has assumed the â€Å"antic disposition,† with â€Å"his doublet all unbraced; / No hat upon his head; his stockings fould,† and other aspects which make him appear as one â€Å"loosed out of hell.† Frank Kermode says that this â€Å"antic disposition† is a foil to Ophelias coming madness (1137). Polonius asks, â€Å"Mad for thy love?† and Ophelia responds, â€Å"My lord, I do not know; / But truly, I do fear it.† This is a time of uncertainty for her, for she has invested herself heavily in â€Å"the love for Hamlet, and her filial love† (Coleridge 353). When she later agrees to be a lure for Hamlet so that her father and the king can study his conduct in her presence, she feels the full loss of the princes affection for her: â€Å"Get thee to a nunnery: why wouldst thou be a breeder of sinners? [. . .] We are arrant knaves all; believe none of us. Go thy ways to a nunnery.† The severance of the ties with Hamlet cause her to pray for help: â€Å"O, help him, you sweet heavens!† and â€Å"O heavenly powers, restore him!† and â€Å"O, woe is me, / To have seen what I have seen, see what I see!† Later, as the Mousetrap begins, Ophelia readily consents (â€Å"Lady, shall I lie in your lap?†) to Hamlets resting his head on her lap: â€Å"Ay, my lord,† hoping to somewhat restore a dying relationship along with the heros sanity. And she cannot be too agreeable in her efforts with him: â€Å"You are as good as a chorus, my lord,† and â€Å"You are keen, my lord, you are keen.† Male influences Both Ophelia and Gertrude are victimized by male influences in the play. Ophelia is interfered with in her love-life by her brother Laertes, her father Polonius and by Hamlet himself. She is presented â€Å"almost entirely as a victim† (Boklund 123).Gertrude is intruded upon in her relationship with Claudius by Hamlet, by Laertes and by Claudius. The rejection of Ophelia by the prince, plus the loss of her father at Hamlets hands, brings about madness in Ophelia, and later indirectly her death. The devious machinations of Laertes and Claudius effect the accidental death of Queen Gertrude, who imbibes the poisoned cup. Deaths Both Ophelia and Gertrude die incidental, unostentatious deaths of no special moment. Hamlets death and royal burial by Fortinbras is in sharp contrast to the passing of these ladies. Ophelias demise is publicized by the queen: â€Å"One woe doth tread upon anothers heel, / So fast they follow; your sisters drownd, Laertes.† That Laertes should respond with the question, â€Å"Drownd! O, where?† seems out of place, since the most logical question from a loved one would be, â€Å"How?† or â€Å"Why?† The queen replies that â€Å"her garments, heavy with their drink, / Pulld the poor wretch from her melodious lay / To muddy death.† Laertes says briefly, â€Å"Alas, then, she is drownd?† and the queen even more briefly, â€Å"Drownd, drownd.† Until the reaction of Laertes and Hamlet in the grave, Ophelias passing seems to go almost unnoticed. Likewise, when Queen Gertrude later drinks from the poisoned cup on the occasion of the Laertes-H amlet contest of foils, she experiences a quick, quiet death: â€Å"No, no, the drink, the drink,O my dear Hamlet, / The drink, the drink! I am poisond.† And there is no more to the matter, possibly because everyone else is dying at the same time. Another experience which both Ophelia and Gertrude have in common is that they are both attacked verbally by Hamlet. When the prince suspects that Ophelia is a lure (Coleridge 362), he lambasts her with: â€Å"Or, if thou wilt needs marry, marry a fool; for wise men know well enough what monsters you make of them. To a nunnery, go, and quickly too. Farewell.† The Queen The queen also bears the brunt of Hamlets melancholic mood. After the â€Å"play within a play† Gertrude asks to see her son, who comes immediately but not in a good humor. At one point he is so aggressive that she thinks perhaps he is going to murder her: â€Å"A bloody deed! Almost as bad, good mother,/As kill a king and marry with his brother.† This alarms the queen, who blurts out, â€Å"As kill a king!† in her appalled mental state, shortly followed by â€Å"What have I done, that thou darst wag thy tongue/In noise so rude against me?† Hamlet leaves the queen in an emotionally spent condition: â€Å"I have no life to breathe / What thou hast said to me.† Both Ophelia and Gertrude possess complex temperament and motivation, thus qualify as rounded, not flat or two-dimensional, characters (Abrams 33). Also both women have a delicacy about them. In recognition of this delicacy, the ghost asks the protagonist to disregard revenge on Gertrude: â€Å"Taint not thy mind, nor let thy soul contrive / Against thy mother aught.† Ophelias delicacy is revealed in the appearance of her insanity and later death resulting from the loss of her father and the affection of her boyfriend. WORKS CITED Abrams, M. H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. 7th ed. New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1999. Boklund, Gunnar. â€Å"Hamlet.† Essays on Shakespeare. Ed. Gerald Chapman. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1965. Burton, Philip. â€Å"Hamlet.† The Sole Voice. New York: The Dial Press, 1970. N. pag. http://www.freehomepages.com/hamlet/other/burton-hamlet.htm Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. Lectures and Notes on Shakspere and Other English Poets. London : George Bell and Sons, 1904. p. 342-368. http://ds.dial.pipex.com/thomas_larque/ham1-col.htm Kermode, Frank. â€Å"Hamlet.† The Riverside Shakespeare. Ed. G. Blakemore Evans. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1974. Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1995. http://www.chemicool.com/Shakespeare/hamlet/full.html No line nos.

History Essays Winston Churchill War

History Essays Winston Churchill War Winston Churchill War These were the words of Winston Churchill when he entered the Buckingham Palace one day, â€Å"But whether it be peace or war we must strive to frame some system of human relations in the future which will put an end to this prolonged hideous uncertainty, which will let the working and creative forces of the world get on with their job, and which will no longer leave the whole life of mankind dependent upon the virtues, the caprice, or the wickedness of a single man.† At about this same time, thousands of people almost worshipped this man, n enigmatic personality and a charismatic leader, who rose to power because of his charisma and his leadership qualities. At this point of time, this great leader was concerned more with the essentials of balancing the harmony and the eternity of his beloved country, England, and he seemed to be quite completely weary and tired of politics. However, this did not mean that the events and happenings taking place all around him did not affect him at all; in fact, it was quite the contrary. He was frankly horrified and appalled at the Fascist rabble in Italy, at the Reichweir rumored to be creating secret aerodromes in Russia, and at the haranguing of Hitler in Germany. Churchill felt that all these incidents could not be considered to be independent; they were all the frank expressions of nations that were demonstrating a certain will power and self command. This was probably the primary reason why Winston Churchill decided that he would come out of retirement from his country house and stand as an independent candidate for the by-election of 1924. Although it is true that this leader lost in this election, as he had in the past two others, it did not deter him in the least, and on the other hand, he became aware that he was an individual who had managed to gather enough support from several factions during the elections. Mr. Baldwin, at this time, offered Winston Churchill a Conservative seat at Epping, and this meant that this leader could return to Epping as a full fledged Conservative leader. It would help to get an idea about the man, and his life, before one can assess his leadership qualities. Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill was born in the year 1874 in Oxfordshire, to prominent Tory politician Lord Randolph Churchill. The young boy grew up under his father’s tutelage, and when he was old enough, he saw action both at India and at Sudan. He was captured during the Boer War when he was working as a journalist, and he managed to escape from prison later. In 1900, Winston Churchill was appointed the Conservative Member of Parliament for Oxfordshire, but he was apparently disillusioned by his party’s activities, and he therefore joined the Liberal Party in 1904. When in 1905 the Liberal Party won the elections, Churchill was appointed as the Under Secretary, after which he entered the Cabinet as the president of the Board of Trade. In 1910, he was appointed the Home Secretary, after which he became the Lord of Admiralty, a post that he held during the First World War. However, after the disastrous Dardanelles campaign, for which Churchill became the scapegoat, he resigned and joined the Army. From the year 1917 onwards, Winston Churchill was appointed leader of several governmental posts, until the year 1940 when the Prime Minster of England Neville Chamberlain resigned, and Winston Churchill took his place. It must be remembered that Churchill had been opposing Nazi developments in Germany for a long while now, and he took this opportunity to oppose the Nazis officially, while at the same time refusing to surrender to Germany. This act in itself served as an inspiration for the people of England at the time, and this leader worked tirelessly through the war, and built up close ties with the President of the United States of America, Roosevelt, while at the same time trying his best to maintain cordial relations with the Soviet Union. In 1945 during the elections, Churchill lost power, but he remained the leader of the opposition. At the time, he warned his people of the Cold War and tried his best to encourage European and also trans-Atlantic unity. In 1951, the charismatic Winston Churchill became the Prime Minster again, but in 1955 he resigned his post, but he remained a working and accomplished and capable Member of Parliament until his death in the year 1965. Winston Churchill has been known for his early accomplishments in life, in much the same way as other leaders like Lenin, Stalin and Hitler, but there is an intrinsic difference between him and other leaders. While the others mentioned above tried to use their victories in order to create dictatorships in their country, Winston Churchill was an individual who was affected by war, and who grabbed any opportunity he could to make use of the war to lead his own country towards an inevitable victory. Perhaps, the fact that Churchill belonged to a military family helped him a great deal in his endeavors, and when he was sent to India and Sudan on various assignments, the young man, barely twenty four at the time, wrote to his mother back in England, â€Å"I never felt the slightest nervousness, I felt as cool as I do now†. What was even more surprising was that Winston Churchill had been posted both as a war correspondent as well as a serving soldier in India and in Sudan, and it was here that the young man revealed two other aspects of his character: he had a literary bent of mind, and he also had a keen interest in public affairs. As a matter of fact, although Churchill wrote all his life, politics and public affairs almost seemed to consume him; perhaps the fact that his father Randolph Churchill had been a public failure as a politician spurred the young man on, and perhaps to, this was the reason why he was determined to succeed where his own father had failed before him. It is important to note that Randolph Churchill had despised and detested his son, and he probably saw him as a show off and a good for nothing individual. In his own words, writing to his mother the Duchess of Marlborough, he criticized his son heavily, and said that his son lacked â€Å"cleverness, knowledge and any capacity for settled work. He has a great talent for show-off, exaggeration and make-believe†¦Ã¢â‚¬  However, although his father’s comments must have hurt the young Churchill, he sought to react by trying to venerate his father’s memory. This in itself shows his strength of character, wherein the young man, instead of falling prey to petty vindictiveness and nastiness and spite, sought to restore his father’s lost honor in the British parliament. In the year 1935 Winston Churchill knew enough of world affairs to warn the House of Commons of the importance of â€Å"self-preservation and also of the human and the world cause of the preservation of free governments and of Western civilization against the ever advancing sources of authority and despotism.† It must be stated that Winston Churchill was a natural born leader, who managed to accomplish a great many things during his lifetime. Take for example the time when he managed to escape imprisonment immediately after he was captured during the Boer War: he became an acknowledged and accepted national hero in his country after this fact, and at the time when Edward III was abdicated, Winston Churchill opted to show his deep support for the deposed leader, despite the government’s complete disapproval, and against popular advice. The great man chose to believe in what he felt must be done, and he bravely managed to carry this out, despite all odds. Another accomplishment was that Winston Churchill managed to lead his beloved country through the Second World War, and he also made sure that he made his opposition to Hitler and his atrocities publicly known. This was the reason why Churchill refused to make peace with Germany while Hitler was in power, and instead, he chose to consult with American President Roosevelt and with Soviet Stalin, to create and plan a victory over Germany in the immediate future. This great leader was not an individual who would bow to anyone; he would follow his instincts and act accordingly. Using his insight and intuition, he warned his country of the expansive tendencies being exhibited by the Soviet Union, and he even coined a specific term for this phenomenon: ‘Iron Curtain’. As mentioned earlier, Winston Churchill proved to be an excellent and charismatic leader when he led his country during the Second World War. Experts often state that almost the whole of Churchill’s career had been a sort of training and preparation for this event: that of leading his country during war. It would help to remember that Churchill was an intense patriot, and he loved his country more than anything else in the world. This individual was also a great believer in the greatness and immensity of his country, and he was constantly aware of the historic role that England had played in Europe, in the Empire, and also in the world in general. Churchill was an individual who thrived on challenges, and he would always rise to the occasion in any sort of crisis that his country was facing. Since he was extremely fond of politics, and the workings of his country based on the political happenings happening within his country, he became a veritable master of politics, and it had often been felt that Winston Churchill was nursing all his many faculties, and reining in his inexhaustible sense of energy for the time when he would be able to lead his country in the World war II. This was the time when the brilliant leader could showcase Britain’s values for the entire world, and he grabbed the opportunity to do just this. In was on September 3 1939 that Britain happened to finally declare war on Germany, and at the same time, the then Prime Minister of England, Chamberlain appointed Winston Churchill as the chief in charge of the Admiralty. On the fleet, there was much rejoicing and celebration: â€Å"Winston is back!† went the saying back and forth. The US President Franklin Roosevelt sent a congratulatory letter to Churchill over the appointment, and thus began a long term and memorable correspondence between the two world leaders. It is often stated that it was Winston Churchill’s leadership as the Prime Minister during the Second World War that served to help Britain, until then an isolated power, survive successfully the Battle of Britain, which ultimately led Britain to gain a tremendous victory over Nazi Germany. It is also stated that his form of generous leadership was desperately needed by his country at the time, and perhaps too, it was the man’s obstinacy and stubbornness to enter into any sort of negotiation with Germany, and the will power to adhere to his stand, no matter what, that brought victory to his country, Britain. (Del Testa; Lemoine; Strickland, 2001) In reality, Churchill’s achievements have been at times so much exaggerated that the leader has become a fictional character in several novels that deal with the World War and incidents related to the war across the world. In Winston Churchill’s own words, he led his beloved country Britain through her â€Å"walk with destiny†, and this, a destiny for which the leader had been preparing all his political life, as mentioned earlier. Churchill’s qualities of far-sightedness, his sturdiness, tenacity, stubbornness, his obstinacy in the face of much opposition, his great valor and courage and the will to win and conquer despite the odds were all the characteristics of a great world leader, and it was these qualities that helped the man garner enormous support both at home and also abroad. Furthermore, Winston Churchill was an accomplished speaker, a great politician, and he loved his country. He was also a journalist, and he knew what words would inspire and what would not. In later stages, the very sight of Churchill, with his trademark cigar perched at the corner of his mouth, his fingers raised in his characteristic ‘V’ sign for Victory would serve to inflame the masses, and at the time, the people would do anything for him, and follow him anywhere he would choose to lead them. He became known as ‘John Bull’, a British mythical character, and a symbol of victory for the common people of his country, and Churchill believed strongly that his very destiny lay in great service to his country. When he was chosen to be the Prime Minister of his country, Churchill said these immortal words, â€Å"I felt as if I were walking with destiny, and that all my past life had been in preparation for this hour and this trial†, and this was how this great individual and appointed leader of his country led Britain through one of the toughest wars of history. Take this fierce oratory, for example, an awe inspiring speech that inflamed the people of his country and kept them from losing heart delivered on June 4, 1940, at the time when it appeared as if all of Europe might fall soon: â€Å"†¦we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end we shall fight in the seas and oceans we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills, we shall never surrender† When his people listened to this speech, they felt inspired enough to think of never ever giving up, even though it appeared as if they may fail eventually. This was the courage and determination that Churchill displayed at every turn. In 1939, immediately after Winston Churchill was recalled to duty as the First Lord of the Admiralty, the first wave of German military power had already managed to overwhelm Poland, and immediately afterward, threatened to topple Northwestern Europe, and also to make France fall. In 1940, at the time when France had already fallen, Churchill was called to power and responsibility by a spontaneous revolt in his country carried out by the best elements in all the parties, and it was a well accepted and recognized fact that he alone, among all the other political leaders, had had no part to play in the disaster of the 1930’s, and that he was blameless. This meant that he had been chosen by the very will of the entire nation, and that he enjoyed his people’s support at every turn. It would be during the next five years, as the Prime Minister of England, and the leader who would lead and head his country in the ongoing World War that Winston Churchill’s career became almost one with that of his nation, and closely linked with its survival. It must be remembered that until the year 1941, Britain had fought all alone in the World War II. At this time, Churchill took it upon himself to inspire resistance at any cost, and to oppose Nazi Germany no matter what happened. H felt reasonably sure that Britain would be able to resist Nazi Germany eventually and that England would not fall prey to Germany any time in the near future. Churchill also started to organize the defense of his country, so that it would stand as a bastion when it would be returned to the continent of Europe. It was this charismatic and appealing leader that managed to bathe in a new life into the government, and into his beloved country and her people. In his own words, when addressing the House of Commons upon being appointed as the Prime Minister of England, he said, â€Å"I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat: You ask, what is our policy? I will say: It is to wage war, by sea, land, and air, with all our might. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory.† The ultimate aim was for Churchill an undisputed ‘Victory’ for his country and his people. How exactly did Winston Churchill lead his country during the Second World War? What were his actions? How did he inspire such great confidence in his abilities and performance as a leader of his country? The historian George Best describes how Winston Churchill went about protecting and defending his beloved country. As mentioned earlier, the reputation that the great leader had at this time was that of a gifted politician, who had already changed his party twice, and who could be quite an impulsive type of individual, who could at different times be susceptible to impractical enthusiasms and interests. He was also recognized as the person who felt confident enough to state boldly and in the open his real feelings about the then Prime Minister of England Neville Chamberlain, and his foreign policies. Six years later, after he had led his country successfully through the World War II, Winston Churchill became renowned throughout the world as a enigmatic person and a great statesman who was the champion of freedom and democracy and independence for his country, and who was victorious in his endeavors to guide and lead his country during the war. However, it must be noted that it was not until nine months after his appointment that there were some results. On the 10th of May 1940, the challenge that was facing the country looked very formidable indeed, but things looked even worse about six short weeks later. The British Army was almost captured at Dunkirk, but managed to escape. Although the escape was a victory in itself, it was, in military terms, a shocking setback to the ongoing campaign, and soon enough, Britain was facing an unforeseen threat, that of invasion, something that she had not faced since the year 1805! It was Churchill’s able leadership that managed to save his country from such humiliation, and it was Churchill who managed to persuade the cabinet and the parliament that Britain and its empire could survive, through his awe inspiring speeches at ever juncture. Churchill even went so far as to forbid and prohibit any type of defeatist talk within his hearing, and he also refused to be put on the defensive for any reason whatsoever. He remained firm and strong and capable, and his behavior proved to be extremely heartening to his people, who were almost on the verge of crumpling down in the face of opposition and the prospect of defeat and humiliation. This was how Winston Churchill managed to bring his people through the ‘Battle of Britain’, win the battle, and make sure that invasion was no longer imminent and looming down upon them, and teach Londoners how to survive what became known in later times as ‘the Blitz’. This victory carried him through the next battle, the Second World War, and he remained confident and positive through these difficult times, thereby leading his country through one of the biggest battles she had ever been involved in, in recent years. As mentioned earlier, Winston Churchill and President Roosevelt started to communicate with each other when Churchill was appointed as the Lord of the Admiralty by his Prime Minster. It must be mentioned here that it was this relationship of these two great leaders that managed to bridge the existing gaps between the two countries England and the United states of America, and which helped the leaders fight for their own causes, while also keeping in mind the others’, in a friendly manner. Take for example the letters that Churchill, being a journalist, wrote to Roosevelt, urging him to help the Allies in the ongoing war in Europe. It was in essence these letters that helped bridge the gap between the two countries, and which heralded the beginning of a diplomatic relationship that would help in the struggle to defeat Hitler and the Axis powers. Acting upon Churchill’s advice, Roosevelt proposed aid to Europe in the ‘Lend-Lease Act’, according to which the United States of America would supply financial and military aid to Great Britain and the Soviet Union. In return America would have a ninety nine-year lease in places that could be considered to be in threat at any time in the future. In the year 1941, the Congress approved of the Act, and this in essence could be said to have changed the very course of history, because Roosevelt’s generosity and Churchill’s grim determination to bring in a defeat to Hitler and his atrocities combined together into a potent combination, which brought an end to Hitler’s tyranny. In the words of Sir Isaiah Berlin, â€Å"Churchill’s political imagination has something of the same magical power to transform, it is a magic that belongs equally to demagogues and great democratic leaders: Franklin Roosevelt, who as much as any man altered his country’s inner image of itself, and of its character and its history, possessed it in a high degree†¦ Churchill stands at almost the opposite pole. He too does not fear the future, and no man has ever loved life more vehemently and infused so much of it into everyone and everything that he has touched. But whereas Roosevelt, like all great innovators, had a half-conscious premonitory awareness of the coming shape of a society, not wholly unlike that of an artist, Churchill, for all his extrovert air, looks within, and his strongest sense is the sense of the past.† These sentences give one a peek into the relationship that was shared by two great leaders, Churchill and Roosevelt, both of whom fought for a common cause, the welfare of their country and of her people. There are some researchers and reviewers and political analysts, however, who do feel that the relationship has been given too much importance and hype, and the truth may be quite exaggerated, and that the relationship was that of uneasy friendliness. Some others have felt that by forging such a relationship with an America President, Winston Churchill had in fact led his country into developing an unwanted alliance with America. The two leaders had different agendas, but they were united in one aspect, Hitler would have to go, and both the countries would try their very best to drive him out of power, and it was apparently Churchill’s strong hope that he would be able to utilize Roosevelt and his power to shore up the sagging British Empire. Winston Churchill, after having headed his country through turbulent and uneasy times of the Second World War, remained as the Prime Minister, and when he turned eighty in the year 1954, Anthony Eden, several members of parliament, and even his own wife urged him to give up the post, as he appeared to have aged rather rapidly over the past few years. In the year 1955, Winston Churchill resigned as the Prime Minister of England, and he held on to his post as a Member of Parliament. Writing had always been his strong point, and through his life, Churchill had penned several books and written for several journals and magazines, and had even own a Nobel Prize for his work. This served him in good stead at this time, and the great leader managed to complete his four volume work, ‘The History of the English Speaking Peoples.’ Some of the time he would spend visiting his old friends and the rest, on taking long cruises on yachts that belonged to his multi-billionaire friend Aristotle Onassis. His wife, however, did not seem to approve of this extravagant lifestyle, and this brought about a separation between the two. Soon afterwards, Winston Churchill started to suffer from symptoms of depression that he had been prone to earlier too, and he felt that his entire life had been a sheer waste. Although it was Winston Churchill who headed the country towards a victory in the war, the British Empire had in fact almost disappeared at this time, and almost half of Europe had come under the Communist regime. Churchill also feared that Socialism was threatening the England that he had loved with all his might, all his life. However, this able and wonderful leader had reached the fag end of his life, and he was tired and almost ready to give up his life. At the time, he engaged in bitter quarrels with all his children, Randolph, Mary, Diana and Sarah. He seemed to be waiting for death, and he would often remark to his daughter who would sit with him, â€Å"My life is ended, but it is not yet over†. (Hamilton, 2006) He still remained, however, a popular figure, especially within the United States of America, until in 1963, the Congress happened to vote to make him one of the first ‘honorary citizens’ of America, and life continued in the same vein. On his ninetieth birthday, Churchill was surrounded by his family: his wife, children and grandchildren. Well wishers had gathered outside his window, and a frail and weak Churchill struggled to get to the window to make his famous ‘V’ for Victory sign. Cheered by the crowds, Churchill was very happy indeed. That same evening, he suffered a stroke, and went into a coma. Two weeks later, Winston Churchill, the great leader, able administrator and excellent orator and politician, who had overcome many a handicap so that he could serve his country and his people better, breathed his last on January 24, 1965, which coincidentally, also happened to be the seventieth anniversary of his father’s death. He will always be remembered as the man, who led his country in the Second World War, and who ousted Hitler, thereby saving democracy for his country, and for the world. (Hamilton, 2006)

Hidden Meaning of Shakespeares Othello :: GCSE English Literature Coursework

The play Othello is a tale of jealousy, revenge, and deception. Iago, a disgruntled military officer, in a quest for revenge against Othello, lies, cheats, and bullys everyone around in order to get what he wants. He uses Roderigo, Brabantio, and just about every other character in the play to attain his goal of ruining Othello. This summary is what the play might seem like to the unseeing eye, but to the indepth and trained reader there is more to the story then first appears. To truly understand Othello, or any play for that matter, you have to think about what happened before the play that brought about the situations you read. You have to think about the relationships that existed betweeen all the characters. You have to imagine Roderigos passion for Desdemona, picture Brabantios contempt for Othello, envision the jealousy and distrust that existed between Desdemona and Othello before Iago arrived on the scene. All of those factors were there before Iago put his scheme into action, he didnÕt create the natural tension between all the players. He merely made all of those already dangerous relationships fatal. IÕm not saying that Iago was not at fault in Othello, IÕm just saying that he didnÕt create the scenario, he just ignited it. One of the main factors in Othello is Roderigo, Iagos half witted right hand man. Roderigo is the person who supplies Iago with money, and is also the person who at the end of the book tries to murder Cassio. The reason that he tries to murder Cassio is because Iago convinces him that Cassio is Desdemonas adulterous lover. The reason this angers Roderigo to the point of murder is because he is in love with Desdemona. His desperate and imagined passion for Othellos wife is what ultimately drives him to kill another human being. It may seem at first that Iago made him act how he acted, but his motivation was actually his love for Desdemona. Iago did not ceate Roderigos love for Desdemona, he merely channeled it. You learn of Roderigos love for Desdemona in the first act of the first scene, when Brabantio(Desdemonas father) sees Roderigo outside of his window. The worser welcome. I have charged thee not to haunt about my doors. In honest plainness thou hast heard me say My daughter is not for thee.

Homo Erectus Essay -- Science Ancestry Science Essays

Homo Erectus In the quest to explain human origins it is necessary to find a species that bridges modern man (Homo sapiens) with the apes. To fill this gap evolutionists have set forth Homo erectus, who lived approximately 400,000 to 1.6 million years ago (Johanson and Shreeve1989). Although the distinctions are somewhat vague, below the neck, Homo sapiens and Homo erectus are practically Identical and Homo erectus was responsible for pioneering the use of standard tools (such as the hand axe), big-game hunting, and the use of fire (Johanson and Shreeve1989). You may know Homo erectus as "Java man" or "Peking man"( Johanson and Shreeve 1989). Erectus was low of brow, thick of bone, endowed with a brain larger than that of its ancestors but decidedly more simian than its descendants' (Washburn, McCown 1972). "Emerging in East Africa about a million and a half years ago, Homo erectus lived in the time Frame of 500,000 - 100,000 B.C. The geographical range in which Homo erectus lived in was Africa, Asia, Europe, and Oceania" (Johanson and Shreeve 1989). Homo erectus's brain, twice as large as that of Australopithecus, provided this new species with even more intelligence (Johanson and Shreeve1989). The climate during this time period varied greatly, with alternating periods of warm and cold and glaciers appearing during the cold eras(Johanson and Shreeve1989). The intelligence of erectus was helpful in survival, and Homo erectus had specific strategies for more efficient hunting. PHYSICAL FEATURES The most prominent difference between Homo erectus and previous species of hominids is the increase in cranial capacity (Washburn, McCown 1972). Over the course of Homo erectus' existence, the cranial capacity increased fr... ...mber 14, 1998 1998 Website: www.cruzio.com/~cscp/econ.htm, accessed November 14, 1998 1998 Website: www.emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/emhe.htm, accessed November 12, 1998 1998 Website: www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_erectus.html, accessed November 11, 1998 Johanson and Shreeve. 1989 Lucy's Child. Morrow. p. 221 Lieberman,-Leonard; Jackson,-Fatimah-Linda-C 1995 Race and Three Models of Human Origin p.231-242 Parker,-Sue-Taylor 1985 A Social-Technological Model for the Evolution of Language;Current-Anthropology. p 269 Washburn,-S.-L.; McCown,-E.-R. 1972Evolution of Human Behavior, p163-170. Feder,-Kenneth-L. 1990Piltdown, Paradigms, and the Paranormal, p 397-402 Zihlman,-Adrienne-L. 1978Women in Evolution, Part II; Subsistence and Social Organization among Early Hominids p 4-20.

Spas in Roman Times :: essays research papers

What is the â€Å"spa†? The word â€Å"spa† is rooted in the Latin language and means â€Å"salus per aquam.† For those of you who are not very polished on your Latin, that means â€Å"health from water.† â€Å"Spa† is also the name of a small village in Belgium where hot mineral springs were discovered by ancient Romans and used by soldiers to treat aching muscles and wounds from battle. When? It is unclear when the Romans used the first public bath, but during the reign of Caesar Augustus from 27 B.C. to 14 A.D., there were approximately 170 baths throughout Rome.At this time, citizens of Rome began to view baths as a way of providing rest, relaxation, and solace to all people, not just those weary of war. Spa in England In 70 A.D., the Romans built a spa and dedicated it, as a shrine consisting of a reservoir around the hot springs at Bath, in what is now England, a complex series of baths, and a temple, to the honor of the goddess Sulis Minerva. As the Roman Empire grew, so did the number of public baths. By the year 300 A.D., there were over 900 baths throughout the empire. The oldest Roman spa still in existence today is located in Merano, Italy, providing evidence of the idea that the Romans used natural springs in an organized manner to provide treatments. Types of Spa   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  After exercising, bathers entered the tepidarium, a room where they would prepare for their bath. The first step was to remove the oil from their body. Oil was used as a substitute for soap, which was reserved for only the very wealthy in ancient Rome, then scraped off with an implement known as a strigil, removing dirt and grime with it. Upon completing this step, bathers were ready to enter the caladarium. This room was very hot and filled with steam, created by sunken pools of hot water. Some baths also included a room that was very hot and dry, very much like our modern day saunas, called a laconicum. Visits to the hot rooms were followed by a visit to the frigidarium. As the name implies, this room was cold and served to close pores that were open from sweating in the hot rooms. This room also frequently contained either a small pool of cold water for washing away sweat or a large pool of cold water for swimming.

Marketing Plan for Maggie Essay

Promotions showcases which mode of promotion is most effective and how do consumers respond to various celebrity endorsements. Place focuses on efficiency of distribution network of Maggi Tomato Ketchup. We have also drawn out some inferences by applying various statistical tools like ‘SIGN TEST’. Towards the end we have suggested some recommendations as a group on how can we improve the marketing mix of the product. Nestle, which world knows as cautious and conservatory company is a Swiss originated 140 years old Multinational. The man at the helm is Swiss national Carlo Donati, an all inspiration and image of the company. His philosophy is ‘bottom line dictating top line’ based on delegation and decentralization. It resulted from a merger in 1905 between the Anglo-Swiss Milk Company for milk products established in 1866 by the Page Brothers in Cham, Switzerland and the Farine Lactee Henri Nestle Company set up in 1867 by Henri Nestle to provide an infant food product. The first Nestle factory to begin production in the United States was opened in Fulton, Oswego County, New York. Nestle India Ltd. (NIL), the Indian subsidiary of the global FMCG major, Nestle SA, introduced the Maggi brand in India in 1982, with its launch of Maggi 2 Minute Noodles, an instant noodles product. Nestle India’s business objective and that of its management and employees is to manufacture and market the Company’s products in such a way as to create value that can be sustained over the long term for consumers, shareholders, employees, business partners and the national economy. The product mix of Nestle India consists of milk products and baby products (42. %), beverages (29. 3 %), processed foods (14. 4 %), chocolate and confectionary (13. 8 %).

Edgar Linton has more right Essay

The word hero conjures an image in one’s head of a valiant, courageous, strong individual; one who puts the needs of others before their own, a being who defies evil with their handsome charm and fearless nature. However, this stereotypical image does not accurately depict the full extent to which the term hero covers, as there are many different types of hero including the Byronic Hero, Classic Hero, Medieval Hero, and Romantic Hero. Classic Heroes are those in Greek and Roman literature; they are often of royal birth or even like the Titan Prometheus; half mortal, half god. Although Edgar Linton is not of royal descent, he is from a family of the highest social class throughout the country which allows him to fall loosely into this category of noble birth. Heathcliff on the other hand, is from a discernible background and is brought into the household at Wuthering Heights as a ‘gipsy brat’ after Mr. Earnshaw saw, ‘it starving, and houseless, and as good as dumb in the streets of Liverpool.’ Another characteristic of a Classic Hero is that they perform extraordinary feats. Throughout the novel Edgar Linton displays no obvious signs of having done anything extraordinary; he is a calm, weak natured individual who avoids conflict and allows himself to be easily overpowered both by Heathcliff and his wife allowing the latter to mock him, ‘I wish Heathcliff may flog you sick, for daring to think an evil thought of me!’ In contrast to this, Heathcliff performs many extraordinary deeds however, few of which are in any way admirable and for the benefit of anyone but himself for example, after being degraded for years at the abusive hands of Hindley, Heathcliff disappeared for three years and that space of time turned himself into an outwardly respectable and wealthy man. In addition to the former points, a classical hero must be a perfectly ideal individual but for one fatal flaw. One’s opinion of Edgar Linton can be altered to allow him to fit into this category as he is a well-mannered character who is obviously fully devoted to both his wife and his daughter; Nelly Dean observes, ‘I don’t believe he ever did speak a harsh word to her.’ However, his gentle, spoiled upbringing may be his flaw as it has made him subservient character that lacks the confidence and passion Heathcliff possesses and thus lacks the ability to keep hold of Catherine and make her happy. Heathcliff again, does not fit the mould of the Classic Hero as he fails to meet this criterion; he is an abusive, evil, sadistic individual who shows no hint of remorse or of possessing any admirable qualities. Although neither Edgar nor Heathcliff perfectly fit the mould of a Classic hero, Edgar has more right to be called a Classic Hero than Heathcliff does. However, Heathcliff does fully reserve the right to be classed as the Byronic Hero within the novel as he possesses all the characteristics of one of these heroes while Edgar has none of them. These heroes are manipulative, violent and unrepentant. Heathcliff shows his manipulative nature when he allows Isabella Linton to fall in love with him, he tells Nelly, ‘she abandoned them under a delusion’, showing he was fully aware of her feelings and used them to his advantage, employing them as a tool in which he could gain control and ownership over both properties; Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange. His displays of violence are prominent throughout the novel, beginning as a young boy and developing into adulthood. As a young child he, ‘seized a tureen of apple sauce’ and threw it over Edgar Linton’s face. As an adult his violence worsens as, ‘he snatched a knife from the table and flung it at’ his wife, Isabella’s head. In addition to this, he comes close to murdering Hindley and even with Catherine, his true love he does not possess the capability to be gentle, ‘so inadequate was his stock of gentleness†¦ I saw four distinct impressions left blue in her colourless skin.’ Heathcliff’s unrepentant nature is evident via the lack of regard he holds toward his victims which stems from his arrogant personality. The height of his arrogance is seen when he tells Catherine in front of Edgar, ‘This lamb of yours threatens like a bull!†¦ It is in danger of splitting its skull against my knuckles. By God, Mr. Linton, I’m’ mortally sorry that you are not worth knocking down.’ Arrogance is also a common trait of Byronic Heroes. Despite the fact that both men can be called heroes in their own right to a certain extent, it is because of his amiability and good nature Edgar Linton has the right to claim the title of the respectable hero within the novel. However, in saying this looking at all the characters within the novel, it may be argued that neither man deserve the title but a woman does as the women in the novel are strong, independent and highly feministic characters.