Speech Analysis Paper Essay Example for Free

Speech Analysis Paper Essay The first speech I watched was â€Å"Falling Slowly† winning Best Original Song Oscar. From the beginning you could tell that Glen Hansard was very pleased and very sincere about the award and you could tell that it meant a lot to him throughout his speech. The speech was very brief and he was very thankful. I liked how he expressed how they put the movie together and how he never thought they would be standing there receiving an Oscar because it just shows that it doesn’t take a lot to achieve your dreams. The only thing I wish he would have done was name the people he wanted to thank instead of generalizing it because then it doesn’t seem personal. The next speech I watched was â€Å"Tom Hanks winning an Oscar for â€Å"Forrest Gump†Ã¢â‚¬ . I loved how Tom Hanks acknowledged the other nominees and said that the others deserved the award as much as he did. I thought that was sincere and respectful of the others who were nominated for the Oscar. I liked the way he acknowledged those who were a part of making the film and what he said was very meaningful and you could tell it meant a lot to him because of the emotional appeal he gave off. It just showed how much he enjoyed working with the other actors in making the film and how it impacted his life and his ability as an actor. When he thanked his wife he did it in a very sincere and loving way and I thought that was very nice. I thought the metaphor he used to describe how he felt in the moment was a good way to stray away from his emotions a little bit because you could tell that he was trying to fight his emotions throughout the speech. What he said at the end made his entire speech so grasping because he was so grateful and thankful to have received that award. I couldn’t tell if his speech was manuscript or impromptu, but either way I think his speech was great. It was brief and I think he expressed his emotions in a way where it was evident that it was truly a blessing to have received that award. See more: how to write an analysis paper The next speech I watched was â€Å"Adele-54 Grammy’s on CBS: Album of the Year†. When she started to thank everyone who was a part of making that award possible for her I liked how she acknowledged them and then explained specific ways they have helped her to improve and become the artist she is. In my opinion it seemed like she was rambling a little bit when she was talking about the inspiration for her album only because she switched  subjects from thank yous to her album and then thank yous again so I think she just got lost in what she was saying at that point. However, I think it was appropriate to share what the inspiration of her album was because of the award she received. The interruption of the snot was funny and that kind of gave off her personality so it made her personable. Her speech was brief, relatable, and sincere. Next I watched was â€Å"Anne Hathaway winning Best Supporting Actress†. For starters, Christopher Plummer did an excellent job in presenting this award. I like how he acknowledged the fact that all of the women who were nominated had been acting since they were little and they have persevered throughout the years to be where they are today. Anne Hathaway seemed nervous when she did her speech, but maybe it was excitement. I liked the fact that she thanked everyone individually because it made it very personal to each individual she thanked, but as her speech progressed she acknowledged every single person in every group she recognized and I think it became too much although it was a nice thing to do. The reference to the movie at the end of her speech I felt was a good way to close her speech. It gave credit to the movie she played in and gave a sense of her character in the movie which is what she received the award for. Overall her speech was brief, sincere, and she accepted the award graciously. The final speech I watched was â€Å"Meryl Streep winning Best Actress†. In the beginning of the speech she seemed a little cocky because of what she said. I feel like acknowledging or implying the fact that you have won many times is inappropriate and disrespectful to others who were nominated and that just showed the kind of person she comes off as and it wasn’t a good impression. When she started thanking people I was annoyed of how much information she gave about their relationships. It was like she was telling her life stories with them and it was too much information. Aside from that the rest of her speech was very sincere and loving because of the emotion she had when she began to talk about the friendships she made and the experiences she’s had with making movies with different people.

Analysing The Effectiveness Of The Kyoto Protocol Politics Essay

Analysing The Effectiveness Of The Kyoto Protocol Politics Essay Environmental issues become global issues because the effect of the environmental problem goes beyond national boundaries. Thus, environmental issues are common concerns and every country has a responsibility to tackle the problem. One of the environmental problems is global warming. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was adopted in 1992 in order to mitigate the impact of greenhouse gas that can endanger human life. Principally, the Convention attempted to reduce the emissions that can trigger the gradual warming of the atmosphere. In 1997, the Kyoto Protocol was adopted in the Third Conference of the Parties as a legally binding treaty. In the Kyoto Protocol, the ratified countries have to commit to a target to reduce their emissions. By countries to reducing emissions in concert, it is expected that the issue of climate change and its impact on the earth can be addressed. After more than a decade, the effectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol as a global environmental regime to address climate change is still questioned. This essay argues that the Kyoto Protocol is not effective enough to tackle global warming. The argument will be based on the examination of two issues in the Kyoto Protocol. Firstly, the issue of participation will be discussed, especially the principle of common but differentiated responsibility (CDR). Secondly, the issue of participation will be linked to the compliance issue in the Kyoto Protocol. In this section, this essay will look at the effectiveness of three mechanisms in the Kyoto Protocol: emission trading, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), and Joint Implementation (JI). The Kyoto Protocol Environmental damage caused by pollution does not recognize national boundaries and has to be addressed by combined action of multiple states. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported the scientific findings about the actual threat to the earth were caused by the increase of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG). GHG will cover the atmosphere and eventually block solar radiation. This will cause an increase of the earths temperature and result in climate change, such as unpredictable and extreme weather, floods, and storms. The scientific findings recommend to maintain the increase of temperature below 20C by limiting the concentration of CO2 on the atmosphere below 550 ppm (Baylis et al. 2008: 361). Notwithstanding keeping the increase of temperature below 20C, scientists believe that the climate change would still bring mostly negative effects to human life (Scott 2004: 271). These scientific findings force all nations to cooperate to mitigate climate change. The UNFCCC was established at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 as an international action to address climate change. The UNFCCC was non-binding agreement to encourage state parties to cut their gas emission. Then, the Third Conference of the Parties on December 11, 1997, successfully negotiated the Kyoto Protocol as the first binding international agreement to mitigate global warming by targeting emission reduction of states (Scott 2004: 273). The Kyoto Protocol was signed by most states, but the process of ratification was not easy. Article 24(1) of the Kyoto Protocol stated that the Protocol was opened for signature from 16 March 1998 to 15 March 1999. According to Article 25(1) of the Kyoto Protocol, the Protocol shall enter into force on the ninetieth day after the date on which not less than 55 Parties to the Convention, incorporating Parties included in Annex I which accounted in total for at least 55 per cent of the total carbon dioxide emissions for 1990 of the Parties included in Annex I, have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. (Scott 2006: 637-638) The United States represents 36.1 per cent of Annex I emissions, Russia represents 17.4 per cent, and Japan, Australia, Canada and the rest of Annex I countries represent below 10 per cent. With that composition, the United States and the Russian Federation ratification became significant for the Kyoto Protocol to be enforced. Although the United States signed the Protocol it is opposed to bringing the Kyoto Protocol to the Senate for ratification. Consequently, the ratification of the Russian Federation became crucial to fulfil at least 55 per cent of the total emission of Annex I countries as stated in the article 25(1) (Doelle 2005: xv). The Russian Federation did ratify the Protocol and it was enforced on February 16, 2005. According to UNFCCC, there are 191 parties in the Kyoto Protocol and the total percentage of Annex I parties emissions is 63.7 per cent (UNFCCC). Participation The climate change issue is not only about emission reduction. The issue involves many other aspects, such as transportation, agriculture, and energy security. Thus, addressing climate change will eventually point to the structural inequalities in wealth, income and power between the North and the South (Gupta in Hisschemà ¶ller and Gupta 1999: 154). Encouraging participation from all developed and developing countries is one difficulty in creating an effective climate change regime. The basis for implementing the principle of common but differentiated responsibility (CDR) is to encourage the cooperation of all states to promote effective action on global issue, such as climate change (Cullet 2003: 16). However, the application of the CDR principle has its own obstacles. As stated above, the reluctance of the United States to ratify the Kyoto Protocol refers to the minimum role of developing countries to the reduction of GHG emissions, particularly regarding the principle of CDR. Developing countries recognize two principles in environmental law: the common heritage of mankind (CHM) and the common but differentiated responsibility (CDR) between nations. CHM is the first principle used by developing countries to assert justice on resource exploitation. However, the CHM principle is less significant (Duff in Okereke 2008: 8) than the CDR principle in negotiating environmental law. Thus, this essay only discusses the CDR principle in the climate change regime. Common is to recognize that all states have the same environmental risks to face, but the responsibility to address the problems is differentiated among countries, particularly between developed and developing countries (Stone 2004: 277). According to Okereke, from the perspective of international law, the CDR principle has culpability and capability dimensions. The first dimension refers to history and emphasizes that most of the current environmental problems were caused by the development of the North, particularly in the era of industrialization. That dimension is closely related to the dimension of capability. Because of that development, developed countries are now more capable than developing countries, in term of technology and financial resources (Okereke 2008: 32). Thus, article 4 of the UNFCCC adopts the CDR principle to acknowledge that developed countries have more responsibilities and should take the lead in dealing with climate change. Making the environmental issue a global priority would distract developing countries from their development which could make them reluctant to join the Kyoto Protocol. The CDR principle resolves this issue because it bridges the notions of environmental protection and the need of development by the South, or developing countries (Najam 2005: 308). Therefore, the CDR principle has two implications in the Kyoto Protocol. Firstly, the Annex I countries in the Kyoto Protocol have commitments in reducing emissions while the developing countries are excused from the effort to reduce their emissions. Secondly, the developed countries are expected to provide technological and financial assistance to developing countries in order to meet the recommended amount of emission reduction and also to reduce the possible social and economic impacts on developing countries when they are fulfilling their voluntary commitment (Cullet 2003: 70-71). The implications of the CDR principle are demonstrated b y the provision of financial and technological assistance under the Kyoto Protocol. The application of the CDR principle into policy instruments of the Kyoto Protocol is challenging. The United States as the largest emitter in the world rejects those two implications of the CDR principle as stated above. This opposition is based on the view that although developed countries are the largest producers of GHG, new emerging economies, such as China, India, and Brazil, that also produce large amount of GHG emissions, should not be ignored. China, which is included in the grouping of developing countries, is the second largest which produce of GHG emissions (Harris 1999: 31). Therefore, the United States is of the view that the large developing countries should give the similar contributions as the Annex I countries to prevent the high increases of GHS emissions in the next decades (Scholtz 2008: 127). The unwillingness of the United States as the largest producer of GHG emissions, to ratify the Kyoto Protocol results in the Protocols lack of legitimacy. This is worsened by the reluctance of the developing countries to reduce their emissions before the developed countries show progress (Harris 1999: 33-34). Thus, the Kyoto Protocol will only be effective if all parties are willing to participate. This means the United States must agree to have a binding commitment for reducing its emissions and the developing countries should agree to have a voluntarily commitment to cut their increasing emissions (Scholtz 2008: 128). According to Downs, determinants for the regimes legitimacy are democratic decision-making, high consensus standard, and the degree of distributive fairness embodied in standards (Downs 2000: 27). The debate between developed and developing countries over the CDR principle shows that the climate change regime lacks consensus. In this case, it shows that developing cou ntries are distrustful of the Kyoto Protocol by believing that it is only aimed for the developed countries benefit (Downs 2000: 27). The lack of consensus will influence the issue of participation and compliance and at the end, the Kyoto Protocol will become ineffective as a binding treaty to solve global environmental problems. Compliance The issue of participation is closely related to the issue of compliance and both will influence the effectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol. When the highest sovereignty is the state, it is difficult to enforce international law. Scott argues that the lack of an international police force to enforce compliance makes international law is only politically effective (Scott 2004: 7). If the compliance mechanism in international law is effective, then on the one hand many countries will be willing to participate in the treaty. On the other hand, they would rather not participate in the treaty than breach their obligations (Vezirgiannidou 2009: 42). Becoming a non-compliant state will risk its image in the international community. In environmental law, particularly under the climate change regime, this essay would argue that lack of capacity and the idea of a free rider are the reasons for the issue of non-compliance in the Kyoto Protocol. Firstly, one possibility is that the states, mostly developing countries, intend to comply with the treaty, but they do not have enough resources and the capacity to fulfil the requirements. In this case of non-compliance, assistance would be needed rather than penalty to increase their compliance with the treaty (Young in Vezirgiannidou 2009: 43). Another possibility is that the states would prefer to spend their resources for other priorities, such as their basic needs, than for climate mitigation (Doelle 2005: 116). Thus, the principle of assistance is to support the fulfilment of basic needs and to open the chance for countries to get involved with international commitment to address climate change. Secondly, the free rider in climate change is also considered as a form of non-compliance. Free riding is when states are able to enjoy the benefits without contributing to the cost. Grundig et al. describe that in the climate context, a state could free ride by not reducing its GHG emissions, while others do so. That state still could enjoy the benefit from the decreased danger of climate change achieved by others efforts (Grundig et al. in Vezirgiannidou 2009: 49). Neo-liberal theorists view the free riding problem as important in enforcing international law. In this case, non-participation in the treaty is also included as free riding. The issue of free riding can be solved with the strong mechanism of the compliance process, such as effective and transparent review and reporting mechanisms. Unfortunately, the current punishment mechanism in the Kyoto Protocol is not strong enough to make the state parties comply with their obligations. The issue of compliance provided in article 3(1) of the Kyoto Protocol is the Parties included in Annex I shall, individually or jointly, ensure that their aggregate anthropogenic carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of the greenhouse gases listed in Annex A do not exceed their assigned amounts, calculated pursuant to their quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments inscribed in Annex B and in accordance with the provisions of this Article, with a view to reducing their overall emissions of such gases by at least 5 per cent below 1990 levels in the commitment period 2008 to 2012. (Scott 2006: 622) This article describes the obligation of Annex I countries to meet the emissions reduction. Countries could reduce emissions through several mechanisms, such as through national efforts or other mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol. According to UNFCCC, the mechanisms provided under the Kyoto Protocol are aimed to stimulate sustainable development through technology transfer and investment, help countries with Kyoto commitments to meet their targets by reducing emissions or removing carbon from the atmosphere in other countries in a cost-effective way, and encourage the private sector and developing countries to contribute to emission reduction efforts. (UNFCCC) The obligation of emissions reduction should be done through national measures. Emissions reduction is closely related to other policies, such as transportation, energy security, agriculture, economic activities, and also education and culture. There should be policy changes in those areas to assist reduction of climate change, but these should be applied carefully in order not to affect the economic growth and development of the states. The limitation in the use of fossil fuels energy has its own dilemmas. On the one hand, states should limit the use of fossil fuels to support the notion of environmental protection. On the other hand, the reduction in the consumption of fossil fuels will impact on supply and price. When developed countries limit themselves in their consumption of fossil fuels, the supply will increase and the price will decrease. This condition will trigger developing countries to consume fossil fuels. Here, environmental problems are not solved rather they are tran sferred from Annex I to non-Annex I countries (Baylis et al. 2008). Thus, this again reasserts the idea that environmental problems cannot be solved only by developed countries themselves without the participations of developing countries. To accelerate the progress in dealing with environmental problems and also to give flexibility to the state parties to fulfil their commitments, the Kyoto Protocol provides three mechanisms: emissions trading, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), and Joint Implementation (JI). The first mechanism, emission trading, allows one Annex I country to sell its amount of permitted GHG emissions to another Annex I country that has emissions below the target in the Kyoto Protocol. Although the overall amount of emissions can be reduced, the trading itself still cannot be ensured to be transparent, low-cost, and efficient (Cameron 2002: 12). The second mechanism is the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) that is provided under the article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol. CDM is aimed to assist parties not included in Annex I to reduce GHG emissions and attempt to achieve the objectives of the Kyoto Protocol. By assisting the project, including transferring technology, to non-Annex I countries, Annex I countries will gain GHG credits or Certified Emissions Reductions (CERs). The CERs will raise the assigned amount stated in article 3 of the Kyoto Protocol. The developing countries will also get the benefit from project assistance or the transfer of technology (Cameron 2002: 11). The last mechanism in the Kyoto Protocol is Joint Implementation (JI). The CDM and JI mechanisms have the same principles. JI mechanism allows developed countries to gain CERs by financing projects in another developed country or an Annex I party. This happens when the same amount of money could give a greater result in emissions reduction in other develop ed countries that have more efficient power plants or projects, rather than spending the money in own country (Baylis et al. 2008: 362). There are some critical questions on the implementation of the CDM. The CDM will surely need the participation from developing countries in the Kyoto Protocol to receive financial and technological assistance. Domestic politics in developing countries mostly place the agenda of climate change lower than other issues, such as economic development and health policies. Moreover, the effective implementation of the CDM depends on the recipient countries. Problems such as poverty and minimal health care, weak institutions, and the transparency of aid might influence the success of the project. Thus, assistance could be effective only within certain conditions. From a long-term perspective, this essay argues that the bigger problem is that the CDM might only relocate industries from developed countries to developing countries in order to avoid restrictions by the Annex I countries (Cameron 2002: 13-14). Therefore, those mechanisms might be attractive for all parties to participate and work hard to implement the Kyoto Protocol, but the environmental problems will not eventually be solved and the objective of climate change will not be achieved. Conclusion The Kyoto Protocol aims to address gradual warming and to protect the environment for the future generations. Climate change is a common problem and needs participation from all countries. This essay examines the effectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol from two elements: participation and compliance. The issue of participation is examined by discussing the principle of common but differentiated responsibility (CDR). The principle of CDR is meant to bridge the notions of environmental protection and development. By applying the principle of CDR in the Kyoto Protocol, the developing countries are willing to join in this climate change regime because this principle gives more attention to the developing countries. Firstly, the current environmental problems are related to the history of the era of industrialization which resulted in the developed countries. Secondly, the developing countries should be differentiated because they might not have the same capacity as developed countries, in te rms of finance and technology, to address the issue of climate change. However, in order to legitimize the Kyoto Protocol as a binding treaty, the new emerging economies, such as China, India, and Brazil, should be given more significant roles than other developing countries. This will also resolve the reluctance of the United States to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. The issue of participation in order to make the Kyoto Protocol more effective are closely related to the issue of compliance. A state will not join a treaty if it will breach the treaty. The non-compliance of states in environmental law is mostly because of the lack of capacity to fulfil the commitments and the issue of free riding. The issue of free riding could be solved by implementing a stronger compliance mechanism in the treaty. The Kyoto Protocol provides three mechanisms to help a state to comply with the obligations, through its own national measures. Those three mechanisms are emission trading, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), and Joint Implementation (JI). Although those mechanisms provide flexibility to fulfil the commitments among the Annex I countries or between developed and developing countries, the negative impacts for the long-term still need to be addressed in order to make the Kyoto Protocol an effective environmental treaty. (3219 words)

Drama coursework: response portfolio Scaramouche Jones :: essays research papers

Drama coursework: response portfolio Scaramouche Jones This year in year 10 G.C.S.E. drama we have been studying Justin Butchers play â€Å"Scaramouche Jones†. We read, discussed, developed and preformed certain parts of the play and using some of the explorative strategies of drama we gained a deeper understanding and appreciation of the play text that was explored. Before we began to read the play text we were put into groups of 2 and we were made to perform a one minute piece of a clown show. This sketch was based completely on our own interpretations of a clown act. This helped us to get into the character of a clown for what might have been our first time. For this piece I was put into a group with Stephanie Gorsach. We preformed a classic slap stick comedy clown act e.g. throwing imaginary pies and hitting each other. After we did this piece we began to read the play text for the first time. My first impression of the play was that it was very odd and was going to be incredibly boring. I was wrong! The first section of the play we explored was he opening scene. In the first section of the play we first meet Scaramouche Jones. We find out that he is a clown as he comes in from one of his many performances. Our first piece of performance was a 2 man show. It was the first scene of the play. For this piece I was put into a pair with Tashan Baptist. This piece was surprisingly hard for a first major piece as we had what I thought was a short time of 2 weeks to perform the piece. This was made even harder by the expectations of our teachers and the amount of pressure. This was our first introduction to the character of Scaramouche Jones. This piece helped me to experience the character for myself and after doing the slap stick clown act with Stephanie I could just about imagine how tired he would be at 100 years old. The next piece of development that we did was the thought tracking process. For this piece we were put into small groups and asked to act out what we thought Scaramouche would be feeling at that moment in time. Unfortunately I missed this lesson but I asked one of my class mates to help me by going over this with me.

Essay --

Almost everyone seems to believe that we live in a world with objective norms; norms about we should and shouldn’t do, norms about what is good and what is bad, what is right and what is wrong. We are always interested in discussing what is morally right or objectively valued but do we ask whether anything is anyhow valued? The error theory already asked whether norms exist at all and what we may mistake as an objective value. Error theory rejects the idea that there are objective moral norms, values, and rights that are independent of us. Moral claims are generally understood to be objective and controlling. An objective claim is a claim about the way the world is, it is the truth of the world out there, independent of what people think about the world. If it is a norm says that killing is wrong, then killing would remain wrong even in civilizations that permit it or force it. To say that a claim is objective is to say that it exists objectively and does not claim anything about us. What we mistake to be an objective claim is only a personal demand but enclosed in a mistaken normative language. If we say: ‘Don’t allow abortion’, this is what we demand. But if we say ‘Abortion is wrong’, we are saying that there is some independent fact, an objective norm created not by us or by anyone. It just exists objectively. But moral claims only arise when people demand and recommend, and demands could never be objective. But what is really going on when people make moral judgments? The moral judgments we make are things we think are true, things that we think we are doing, what we intend to do. A group of persons, or even every person on earth can be mistaken about some accepted beliefs, but it makes no sense to say that all of them are... ...nk that if we are not guided by norms, we will be guided by selfish or cruel motives. We are instinctively influenced by self-interest and anger, but thanks to centuries of preparation of civilizations to respect other people, we have developed sensitive and friendly personalities. As we begin our day we normally follow laws, and we rarely think about consequences or about what norm require us to act. Our daily decisions are made of our instincts, desires, habits, feelings, and beliefs. Selfishness and normative beliefs play a small role in this world of decisions but what we end up doing is the product of countless and often imperceptible reasons. The moral error theory is not widely believed, but the error theory is closer to our common sense because it does not require us to hold on to false and doubtful claims, or to waste time arguing about our own projections. Essay -- Almost everyone seems to believe that we live in a world with objective norms; norms about we should and shouldn’t do, norms about what is good and what is bad, what is right and what is wrong. We are always interested in discussing what is morally right or objectively valued but do we ask whether anything is anyhow valued? The error theory already asked whether norms exist at all and what we may mistake as an objective value. Error theory rejects the idea that there are objective moral norms, values, and rights that are independent of us. Moral claims are generally understood to be objective and controlling. An objective claim is a claim about the way the world is, it is the truth of the world out there, independent of what people think about the world. If it is a norm says that killing is wrong, then killing would remain wrong even in civilizations that permit it or force it. To say that a claim is objective is to say that it exists objectively and does not claim anything about us. What we mistake to be an objective claim is only a personal demand but enclosed in a mistaken normative language. If we say: ‘Don’t allow abortion’, this is what we demand. But if we say ‘Abortion is wrong’, we are saying that there is some independent fact, an objective norm created not by us or by anyone. It just exists objectively. But moral claims only arise when people demand and recommend, and demands could never be objective. But what is really going on when people make moral judgments? The moral judgments we make are things we think are true, things that we think we are doing, what we intend to do. A group of persons, or even every person on earth can be mistaken about some accepted beliefs, but it makes no sense to say that all of them are... ...nk that if we are not guided by norms, we will be guided by selfish or cruel motives. We are instinctively influenced by self-interest and anger, but thanks to centuries of preparation of civilizations to respect other people, we have developed sensitive and friendly personalities. As we begin our day we normally follow laws, and we rarely think about consequences or about what norm require us to act. Our daily decisions are made of our instincts, desires, habits, feelings, and beliefs. Selfishness and normative beliefs play a small role in this world of decisions but what we end up doing is the product of countless and often imperceptible reasons. The moral error theory is not widely believed, but the error theory is closer to our common sense because it does not require us to hold on to false and doubtful claims, or to waste time arguing about our own projections.

Every School Should Require Uniforms :: Public Education

Every School Should Require Uniforms I am a student that has attended 3 schools and has never worn a uniform in my life. Although, I have never experienced any issues with school uniforms, I have noticed a few issues that can be prevented from the use of a uniform. Uniforms, not only had they been proven to be helpful at school, but they are also helpful at home. Parents spent couple hundred dollars per year on clothing just to make their son(s) or daughter(s) meet the latest fashion. An average shop favoured by many teenagers, such as International, sells a piece of clothing for around $40 each! Parents can really find this money useful while paying bills. Uniforms are cheap, after my brother when my RH King, my parents had a lot of excess money to spend on me! A typical gang fad is to have a gang name, gang color, and other characteristics, that make them diverse. There is a possibility of violence due to an article of clothing. If a student is dressed up similar to a member of a gang, another student who is not in favour of that gang might plan an attack towards that person. In this case uniforms can protect the safety of another. I believe if you compare a uniform school with a non-uniform school, you’ll see that violence is much popular in the non-uniform school. As stated above clothing can be quite expensive, how would one feel if their garment has been misplaced or stolen? A lot of students love to brag about their shoes, especially basketball shoes, when they first buy it. Basketball shoes are worth $120 on average, and not everybody in your school is positive. Envision you replacing your new shoe, with your old one for gym class. You return to the change room, and it has disappeared. That shoe had cost you a lot of bills, and now it’s gone! This would have never happened if your school requires a uniform. Instead of bring your fancy shoe you would have brought your leather shoes, that matches your uniform. Uniform decreases the amount of theft on school property. Uniforms make it harder for strangers to sneak in the school, because for sure they’ll be the center of everyone’s attention. Every parent would like their children to be as safe as possible during school, with uniforms their children will be safe and secure at school.

An Inspector Calls 13

We don’t live alone. We are members of one body. We are responsible for each other. How does Priestly present this theme through the use of character, action and dramatic devices? ‘An Inspector Calls’ by ‘J. B Priestly’ is a post world war 2 drama set in 1912. The play is set in the industrial town of Brumley, the play is set in the front room of the Birling household. The play follows the classical unities rule where the play is set in one place, this allows future interpretations of the play to be less imaginative in where they set it, but it does mean that they can add more detail to the set as it never changes.The Birling family is a lower upper class family who have benefited from the industrial revolution. In the Birling family there are four members and one soon to be member of the Birling family; there is Mr Arthur Birling, Mrs Sybil Birling, Sheila Birling and Eric Birling. The soon to be family member is Gerald Croft. During act one they get a visit from Inspector Goole. Inspector Goole is a very secretive character who likes to keep his card close to his chest. The inspector is here to piece together events that led to a girl’s suicide; this girl is called Eva Smith.Pristley is socialist, he believes in equality between everybody; he uses the inspector as his mouthpiece for his socialist views. The Birling family have capitalist views, these are that not everyone is equal; you have to work and earn money to be successful. They are also quite a smug family, who only have interests for there own priorities. The Inspector wants to teach the Birlings about social responsibility; social responsibility is about looking after everyone is your community, not just your own interests.The play itself is set in 1912, but it was written in 1945 and first performed in 1946. This gives the audience hindsight into events that have happened in between that time. Mr Birling mentions the Titantic being ‘unsinkable, absolute ly unsinkable’, although the audience knows this isn’t true as the Titanic sank on its maiden voyage. The characters in ‘An Inspector Calls’ are very important, as they’re views and beliefs play a huge part in the story. Mr Birling is self-centred man, with only interests in money. He believes money is more important than people.He would rather sack someone instead of giving them a small pay rise, even if they were a very skilled worker, as in the case of Eva Smith. He is an avid believer in capitalism, he is a social climber, he started his business with nothing and climbed up the social ladder to where he his now. Mrs Birling is a very arrogant and snobby person; she chairs a charity called the ’Brumley Women’s Charity’. It was set up to help unprivileged women try get back on there feet if they are exceptionally poor. Although, Mrs Birling uses it as a social status to make her look like an individual that has social responsi bility.Mrs Birling is the complete opposite, she abuses her position as chair of the board, she has a big influence on the board, which she uses to turn down Eva Smiths application. She has the least respect for the Inspector of all the characters. She tries – unsuccessfully – to intimidate him and force him to leave, then lies to him when she claims that she does not recognise the photograph that he shows her. Gerald Croft is the fiance of Sheila. Gerald is the son of a very wealthy business man who is in a trade war with Mr Birling and his company.Gerald and Sheila coming together in marriage is seen as a huge gain towards a partnership between the two businesses. Gerald is in his fortys, he has views of both the older generation and the younger generation. The inspector is worried that Gerald will follow the views of the older generation. The inspector see’s the younger generation’s views as the way forward in life as the older generations views are ca pitalist and self-centred. The two younger characters in the play, Eric and Sheila Birling are seen by the inspector as a shining light of hope for the future of the family as there views are open to new ideas.Eric is seen by his parents as being venerable so they have kept him on a close watch. Eric seems  embarrassed and awkward right from the start. The fist mention of him in the script is  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Eric suddenly guffaws,†Ã‚  and then he is unable to explain his laughter, as if he is nervous about something. (It is not until the final act that we realise this must be because of his having stolen some money). Sheila is the fiancee of Gerald; she has views of the younger generation, but let her anger come over her when in the clothes shop Milwards in which Eva Smith worked in.Sheila used her famiy’s wealth to force the Milwards manager to sack Eva because Eva smirked; Sheila claimed that Eva was mocking her. Although she has probably never in her life before consider ed the conditions of the workers, she shows her  compassion immediately she hears of her father's treatment of Eva Smith:  Ã¢â‚¬Å"But these girls aren't cheap labour – they're people. † Within  the play  Ã¢â‚¬ËœAn Inspector Calls’, Priestly uses numerous dramatic devises to get across his message of moral, class and political influence.The first hints of his central themes are imposed when Priestly describes the scene and setting of the first act. An immediate perception is given off towards the audience of ‘heavily comfortable house. ’ With this being a place of constant setting, a reflection of real time and naturalism is released. The lighting prescribed for the scene also creates the mood of  the play. Priestly states within his stage directions the lighting should be ‘pink and intimate’ prior to the inspector arrives a shaded glow of rose tint then should grow ‘brighter and harder’.In context and example of th ese stage directions are as pursued. ‘The dining room of a fairly large suburban house, belonging to a prosperous manufacturer. It has good solid furniture of the period. At the moment they have all had a good dinner, are celebrating a special occasion, and are pleased with themselves’. Another devise used to enhance  the play  writer’s dramatic concepts is the use of dramatic irony. These are used when the knowledge of the audience exceeds those of the characters within  the play.This technique of dramatic irony is in attendance when Mr Birling makes self-assured conjectures about the coming war and the ship Titanic being unsinkable. For example Priestley uses techniques to expose Birling’s naivety and generation gap. Tension is also secured throughout  the play  as each character holds significant connection with the suicide victim, Eva Smith, who represents the universal populace. By making Eva a representation rather than a real character the moral of  the play  is taken more literally. The contribution from each character also produces a deeper and more involved structure towards  the play’s plot.Timing which features as a critical decisive; with stage directions of speech, movement exits, entrances and sounds. A strategic illustration of this is the arrival of the Inspector instantaneously, subsequent to Mr Birling notifying Gerald about his imminent knighthood and regards of how ‘a man has to look after himself and his own. ’ The Inspector, the true mouth piece of Priestly adds a dramatic tone. The character is directed with the use of pace and tension and presents each idea and enquiry without conjunction, by observing and exposing each statement from an individual’s account.This method slowly throws light on the core of Eva’s life and the real effect of classes on a wider population. Inspector Goole is the eponymous character in An Inspector Calls' by Priestley who has many f unctions. Primarily, he is introduced to the play to interrogate the Birling  Family  and Gerald Croft, but Priestley also uses him to move the plot forward and as a device for the writer to voice his opinion, furthermore he controls movement on stage, encourage the characters and audience to learn from their mistakes and to create moments of tension and mystery.The Inspector creates moments of tension in the play, mainly at the end of Acts One and Two where something happens and the audience is waiting for someone to confess their relation to the death. Inspector holds up a hand. We hear the front door. They wait, looking towards the door. Eric enters, looking extremely pale and distressed. He meets their inquiring stares. Curtain falls quickly. At this moment, the audience would be on the edge of their seat and because the Three Acts are continuous, this act change is just in the right place for creating a cliff-hanger.This also happens at the very end of Act one where I have quoted above, and these moments aren't just at the end of the acts, they can also be in the middle caused by a passing comment. â€Å"Naturally I don't know anything about this girl† claims Mrs Birling. Inspector â€Å"well, we'll see, Mrs Birling†. This is just a very short sentence but it gives the audience a hint of what is to come next and that Mrs Birling has a connection to the death and they just want to find out what it is. I think the Inspector is very successful in putting Priestley's point across and that he captures the audiences' attention really well with his gripping speech.The Inspector is the creator of all of the drama, tension, intrigue and mystery in the play An Inspector Calls' and he is used incredibly well to capture the audience’s attention. I think that Priestley, as well as using him as the main character in terms of development in the storyline, has really just used him to echo his own views. This is to give a rather obvious moral to t his play saying that everybody's actions affect everyone else and no one should be selfish as it could influence someone's life greatly in a chain of events. Priestlys message is still relevant as the gap between the classes is ever increasing,

Zoe’s Tale PART I Chapter Five

There was a tap on my door, a rat-a-tat that I gave Hickory to use when I was nine, when I made it a secret member of my secret club. I made Dickory a secret member of an entirely different secret club. Same with Mom, Dad and Babar. I was all about the secret clubs when I was nine, apparently. I couldn't even tell you what the name of that secret club was now. But Hickory still used the knock whenever my bedroom door was closed. â€Å"Come in,† I said. I was standing by my bedroom window. Hickory came in. â€Å"It's dark in here,† it said. â€Å"That's what happens when it's late and the lights are out,† I said. â€Å"I heard you walking about,† Hickory said. â€Å"I came to see if you needed anything.† â€Å"Like a warm glass of milk?† I said. â€Å"I'm fine, Hickory. Thank you.† â€Å"Then I'll leave you,† Hickory said, backing out. â€Å"No,† I said. â€Å"Come here a minute. Look.† Hickory walked over to stand next to me at the window. He looked where I pointed, to two figures in the road in front of our house. Mom and Dad. â€Å"She has been out there for some time,† Hickory said. â€Å"Major Perry joined her a few minutes ago.† â€Å"I know,† I said. â€Å"I saw him walk out.† I heard her walk out, too, about an hour earlier; the squeaking of the springs on the screen door had gotten me out of bed. I hadn't been sleeping, anyway. Thinking about leaving Huckleberry and colonizing somewhere new was keeping my brain up, and then made me pace around. The idea of leaving was sinking in. It was making me twitchier than I thought it would. â€Å"You know about the new colony?† I asked Hickory. â€Å"We do,† Hickory said. â€Å"Lieutenant Sagan informed us earlier this evening. Dickory also filed a request to our government for more information.† â€Å"Why do you call them by their rank?† I asked Hickory. My brain was looking for tangents at the moment, it seemed, and this was a good one. â€Å"Mom and Dad. Why don't you call them ‘Jane' and ‘John' like everyone else?† â€Å"It's not appropriate,† Hickory said. â€Å"It's too familiar.† â€Å"You've lived with us for seven years,† I said. â€Å"You might be able to risk a little familiarity.† â€Å"If you wish us to call them ‘John' and ‘Jane,' then we will do so,† Hickory said. â€Å"Call them what you want,† I said. â€Å"I'm just saying that if you want to call them by their first names, you could.† â€Å"We will remember that,† Hickory said. I doubted there would be a change in protocol anytime soon. â€Å"You'll be coming with us, right?† I asked, changing the subject. â€Å"To the new colony.† I hadn't assumed that Hickory and Dickory would not be joining us, which when I thought about it might not have been a smart assumption. â€Å"Our treaty allows it,† Hickory said. â€Å"It will be up to you to decide.† â€Å"Well, of course I want you to come,† I said. â€Å"We'd just as soon leave Babar behind than not take you two.† â€Å"I am happy to be in the same category as your dog,† Hickory said. â€Å"I think that came out wrong,† I said. Hickory held up a hand. â€Å"No,† it said. â€Å"I know you did not mean to imply Dickory and I are like pets. You meant to imply Babar is part of your household. You would not leave without him.† â€Å"He's not just part of the household,† I said. â€Å"He's family. Slobbery, sort of dim family. But family. You're family, too. Weird, alien, occasionally obtrusive family. But family.† â€Å"Thank you, Zoe,† Hickory said. â€Å"You're welcome,† I said, and suddenly felt shy. Conversations with Hickory were going weird places today. â€Å"That's why I asked about you calling my parents by rank, you know. It's not a usual family thing.† â€Å"If we are truly part of your family, then it is safe to say it's not a usual family,† Hickory said. â€Å"So it would be hard to say what would be usual for us.† This got a snort from me. â€Å"Well, that's true,† I said. I thought for a moment. â€Å"What is your name, Hickory?† I asked. â€Å"Hickory,† it said. â€Å"No, I mean, what was your name before you came to live with us,† I said. â€Å"You had to have been named something before I named you Hickory. And Dickory, too, before I named it that.† â€Å"No,† it said. â€Å"You forget. Before your biological father, Obin did not have consciousness. We did not have a sense of self, or the need to describe ourselves to ourselves or to others.† â€Å"That would make it hard to do anything with more than two of you,† I said. â€Å"Saying ‘hey, you' only goes so far.† â€Å"We had descriptors, to help us in our work,† Hickory said. â€Å"They were not the same as names. When you named Dickory and me, you gave us our true names. We became the first Obin to have names at all.† â€Å"I wish I had known that at the time,† I said, after I took this in. â€Å"I would have given you names that weren't from a nursery rhyme.† â€Å"I like my name,† Hickory said. â€Å"It's popular among other Obin as well. ‘Hickory' and ‘Dickory' both.† â€Å"There are other Obin Hickorys,† I said. â€Å"Oh, yes,† Hickory said. â€Å"Several million, now.† I had no possible intelligible response to that. I turned my attention back to my parents, who were still standing in the road, entwined. â€Å"They love each other,† Hickory said, following my gaze. I glanced back at it. â€Å"Not really where I was expecting the conversation to go, but okay,† I said. â€Å"It makes a difference,† Hickory said. â€Å"In how they speak to each other. How they communicate with each other.† â€Å"I suppose it does,† I said. Hickory's observation was an understatement, actually. John and Jane didn't just love each other. The two of them were nuts for each other, in exactly the sort of way that's both touching and embarrassing to a teenage daughter. Touching because who doesn't want their parents to love each other, right down to their toes? Embarrassing because, well. Parents. Not supposed to act like goofs about each other. They showed it in different ways. Dad was the most obvious about it, but I think Mom felt it more intensely than he did. Dad was married before; his first wife died back on Earth. Some part of his heart was still with her. No one else had any claim on Jane's heart, though. John had all of it, or all of it that was supposed to belong to your spouse. No matter how you sliced it, though, there's nothing either of them wouldn't do for each other. â€Å"That's why they're out here,† I said to Hickory. â€Å"In the road right now, I mean. Because they love each other.† â€Å"How so?† Hickory asked. â€Å"You said it yourself,† I said. â€Å"It makes a difference in how they communicate.† I pointed again to the two of them. â€Å"Dad wants to go and lead this colony,† I said. â€Å"If he didn't, he would have just said no. It's how he works. He's been moody and out of sorts all day because he wants it and he knows there are complications. Because Jane loves it here.† â€Å"More than you or Major Perry,† Hickory said. â€Å"Oh, yeah,† I said. â€Å"It's where she's been married. It's where she's had a family. Huckleberry is her homeworld. He'd say no if she doesn't give him permission to say yes. So that's what she's doing, out there.† Hickory peered out again at the silhouettes of my parents. â€Å"She could have said so in the house,† it said. I shook my head. â€Å"No,† I said. â€Å"Look how she's looking up. Before Dad came out, she was doing the same thing. Standing there and looking up at the stars. Looking for the star our new planet orbits, maybe. But what she's really doing is saying good-bye to Huckleberry. Dad needs to see her do it. Mom knows that. It's part of the reason she's out there. To let him know she's ready to let this planet go. She's ready to let it go because he's ready to let it go.† â€Å"You said it was part of the reason she's out there,† Hickory said. â€Å"What's the other part?† â€Å"The other part?† I asked. Hickory nodded. â€Å"Oh. Well. She needs to say good-bye for herself, too. She's not just doing it for Dad.† I watched Jane. â€Å"A lot of who she is, she became here. And we may never get back here. It's hard to leave your home. Hard for her. I think she's trying to find a way to let it go. And that starts by saying good-bye to it.† â€Å"And you?† Hickory said. â€Å"Do you need to say good-bye?† I thought about it for a minute. â€Å"I don't know,† I admitted. â€Å"It's funny. I've already lived on four planets. Well, three planets and a space station. I've been here longest, so I guess it's my home more than any of the rest of them. I know I'll miss some of the things about it. I know I'll miss some of my friends. But more than any of that†¦ I'm excited. I want to do this. Colonize a new world. I want to go. I'm excited and nervous and a little scared. You know?† Hickory didn't say anything to this. Outside the window, Mom had walked away a little from Dad, and he was turning to head back into the house. Then he stopped and turned back to Mom. She held out her hand to him. He came to her, took it. They began to walk down the road together. â€Å"Good-bye, Huckleberry,† I said, whispering the words. I turned away from the window and let my parents have their walk.