Monday, September 23, 2019
How the Arab spring affects the economy in the countries facing extrem changes Egypt , Yemen , Tunisia , Syria Libya - Scholarship Essay Example hus in Egypt risks related to external financing have shot up significantly, with dwindling direct foreign investment and negativity of net portfolio flows. The resuscitation interventions initiated by the Egyptian Central Bank to rescue the Egyptian pound from the increasing inflation and capital outflows have resulted in shocking decline in net international reserves. Libya, on the other hand, appears to be the worst hit as the escalation of the conflict grounded all the principal economic activities such as oil sales. It has been estimated that total costs in regard to the fiscal balance have been in excess of $6.5 billion. A sharp decrease in oil production, decline in local consumption as well as decrease in buying power have led to decline in the economy (Long-Term Ratings On Egypt Lowered To B On Weaker Sovereign Policy Flexibility; Outlook Negative, 10 February 2012). According to the Arab Spring Economic Report (October 24th, 2011), in Syria the economic situation is expected to be worse as protests are still going on in the face of brutal crackdown. It is expected that the GDP of the country will fall nose dive by two percent as a result of foreign direct investments, decline in tourism, dwindling public investment as well as effects of trade embargos. Looking at the economic situation in Yemen, the picture is not rosy as people living below the poverty index are expected to hit the 15 percent mark. This is due to devaluation of the currency and increase in prices of essential commodities. It is also projected that public expenditure will also drop by about $600 million as a result of weak and poor governance. The Tunisian revolution has also hit the economy of the country very hard as the most important sectors of the economy are barely surviving, thus mining; tourism and fishing are not bringing
Sunday, September 22, 2019
Definition of Literature Essay Literature is an outlet of escape from reality. At the end of the day, I open a book and allow the story to take me to a world where my own fades into a distant memory. With every turn of a page, my imagination is free to reinvent a narrative that is better than the reality I live. Literature can be non-fiction and based on facts surrounding real events, people, and places. Examples include history books, memoirs, biographies, newspapers, self-help, devotionals, and textbooks. Literature can also be writings based not on truth, but on the imagination and creativity of the author. This includes fiction novels and children story books. A lot of times authors of fiction will get their idea from a real life event and then they allow their imagination to recreate the characters and plot. Aside from being fiction or non-fiction, literature can also fall into different categories according to the genre, purpose, and style. Some genres include romance, science fiction, Christian, suspense, and western. The authors purpose for writing will likely determine what style and genre they will use. Poetry and drama are forms of literature that are stylistically different from other writings. Every writer wants to engage their audience and capture their attention in order to convey a message. The meaning of the text may hold differing messages within the audience, but it is the goal of the author to captivate the reader and keep them wanting to read more. John Smith wrote historical accounts of life while he was living. His writings brought insight and hope regarding English settlement during the early 1600s. The General History of Virginia is difficult to comprehend in areas because I am unfamiliar with his use and style of language, but nonetheless it is a beautifully written piece of literature. John SmithÃ¢â¬â¢s targeted audience was most likely the people of his time, with the goal of informing them of recent events. I appreciate the way he portrays the struggles of daily life realistically and in a way that inspires and intrigues. William Bradford was not formally educauted, yet he was a wise and well-read man. His writings spread throughout the world and have been studied and quoted by many. As with most of the literature from his time period, BradfordÃ¢â¬â¢s style is simple, but he writes with such conviction that demands the attention and respect of the reader. Bradford was a man of faith and often expressed this in his writing. In Of Plymouth Plantation he often refers to GodÃ¢â¬â¢s providence and makes continuous references to God. Bradford may refer to God more than any other author in this colonial unit. Anne Bradstreet was a powerful force in literature during the 1960s because she was one of the first recognized women poets. Centuries later she is a revered writer and her poetry remains enchanting. Ã¢â¬Å"Thou ill-formed offspring of my feeble brainÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ is the opening line to her poem The Author of Her Book and illustrates just how feeble her brain is not. She has the unique capacity to use words to express herself so creatively and with so much emotion. To My Dear and Loving Husband is a great romantic poem that I admire. BradstreetÃ¢â¬â¢s style reminds me slightly of my own. However I need more experience and practice to become nearly as talented as she. Upon the Burning of Our House reminds of my own experience of a house fire and has inspired me to attempt to capture my experience through poetry. Through all Anne BradstreetÃ¢â¬â¢s work, she inspires others to recognize the beauty and power in writing. Edward Taylor was a highly educated, well respected, and devout religious man who used poetry as a private expression of his faith. He did not seek fame or recognition for his writing, rather just the pleasure it brought him. Taylor writes of God beautifully and is a master of creating moving and emotional works of art without intending to. As with most poets, Taylor and Bradstreet used metaphors and had a personal style unique from others. There is also an overflowing of emotion from both Taylor and Bradstreet within all their writings. William Byrd was a very accomplished man of his time. He was well educated, respected, and prosperous. His most famous writings are the journals that he wrote to describe day to day life. In The History of the Dividing Line I was able to pick up on the humor that has lead Byrd to be one of the first distinct comedic writers. The humor is not Ã¢â¬Å"pee your pants funnyÃ¢â¬ rather it is more light-hearted humor that makes the reader smile. It is evident in his writing that Byrd was indeed well-read. A writer is capable of learning a great deal about language, word usage, and style through reading. ByrdÃ¢â¬â¢s style is simple, yet he articulates his message very well and although he wrote for himself, he managed to write in a way that would capture an audienceÃ¢â¬â¢s attention. Jonathan Edwards was an intelligent man of God who served as a preacher. As an author, he wrote popular sermons and other serious works on religion, metaphysics, and philosophy. EdwardsÃ¢â¬â¢ style of writing is quite different from other authors in this unit because unlike the others he gives the reader an array of possible positions for the topic he is presenting. In the sermon Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, Edwards develops his view on destruction and punishment from verses in Deuteronomy. Not only does he explain how he interprets the scripture, he also gives other possible views. St. Jean De Crevecoeur wrote about religion but he did not profess or maintain that he believed in God. He was a well-educated humanitarian who served his people and country. I found Letters from an American Farmer difficult to get through because his style of writing is unexciting. I was also turned off by the way he wrote about certain topics particularly African American issues. Crevecoeur was not a racist man, but he lacked some sensitivity in discussing his unique view on negroes and parenting. He believed that negroes should not continue having children because if they did misery would undeniably result for themselves and their offspring. I understand that he is referring to slaves and perhaps even slaves may have wished to not have children in order to save future generations from being forced into slavery. Crevecoeur surprised me with the boldness in his writing. The progression of writing from Smith to Crevecoeur is interesting to track and there are noticeable changes in language and word usage. As defined earlier, literature to me is written art that engages my imagination and takes my mind away from reality. Not every piece of literature will bring me the pleasure of leaving my own world for a moment and that does not mean the author has failed. Genre plays an important role in this element of the definition. For example the writings from the colonies unit are primarily non-fiction history writings that are meant to inform more than entertain. Anne Bradstreet is an exception. As the writer of poetry, her style is most obviously different from the more serious and constructed essays of the other writers. Every writer has a style that is unique, however one similarity in the colonial writings is the purpose of the authorÃ¢â¬â¢s writing. Many of the writers were writing for the sake of recording daily life and making historical accounts of slavery, war, and developing colony life. Centuries later, authors such as Smith, Bradford, Bradstreet, Taylor, Edwards, and Crevecoeur are recognized as masters in the field of writing. Writers during the establishment of the colonies wrote simple, yet serious and powerful pieces of art. They have a style of writing and voice that still captures the hearts of readers.
Friday, September 20, 2019
Analysis of The Sykes-Picot Agreement Christopher Mike White The current actions of the Islamic State (ISIS) in Syria and Iraq are a result of religious and political conditions which exist due to irresponsible foreign diplomacy and the imperialistic tendencies of both Great Britain and France over one hundred years in the past. In a viral video declaring the establishment of their Islamic Caliphate early in the summer of 2014, the Islamic militants of ISIS expressed their goal to reverse the territorial lines established by the Sykes-Picot agreement.1 By the end of 2014, the groups advances in Northern Iraq and at the Turkish-Syrian border had, in fact, destabilized the existing borders drawn in the Sykes-Picot agreement.2 The Sykes-Picot Agreement was a deal negotiated between the Entente Allies, minus America, in anticipation of the fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War One. The agreement split the Middle East, which had been under Ottoman Rule for nearly four hundred years, between the three Western nations. Britain would maintain control over what is modern day Iraq, France the region of what is now Syria and Lebanon, and Russia initially partitioned a small section of land north of Iraq. The Russian zone was removed with the rise of the Bolsheviks in 1917 and subsequent collapse of the Russian Imperial State. The boundaries drawn in the Sykes-Picot agreement would be used post-war as the basis for the formation of the mandate system in the Middle East under the League of Nations, giving Great Britain and France their mandates to develop their respective regions.3 The Sykes-Picot agreement ultimately failed for several reasons. First, they used a negotiator who was centered on imperial interests and refused to listen to those who had experience with the people and history of the region. Second, they sought to use King Hussein as a political tool and negotiated in bad faith to make sure that things went in their favor. These mistakes showed a flawed understanding of the people and culture of the region, an error that haunts the American military today as they too refuse to learn the history of the area and use errors of past Empires to their advantage. The first problem the British encountered in the agreement was made before the deal even being signed. The British used a negotiator who was not objective enough to realize what would be necessary for a lasting peace and control, a negotiator who was focused on imperial interests and expansion. Mark Sykes was the representative of the British Empire in the negotiations. Sykes was an imperialist member of the Tory Party who, to his credit, possessed a broad personal experience in the region. Sykes was atypically tolerant of different religions but still suffered from the typical racial and cultural prejudices of the time. These biases would affect his decision-making process during negotiations.4 Sykes was convinced the Arabs were incapable of self-rule, not being as capable and civilized as the British, a common feeling in the Empire at the time. Due to these arrogant Imperialist ideals, Sykes sought to help them prosper through continuing advancement of the British Empire and its beneficial, benevolent influence in the Middle East. Sykes lack of understanding of the local population and his Britain-centric ideals of Empire made him a poor choice to negotiate the fate of the Middle East due to his lack of proper analysis or to use any of resources available to him. Sykes negotiations ignored the proposals made by a group of scholars known as the British Arabists who were very familiar with the issues of the region. These men and women were members of the British foreign service, a branch of British Government similar to the U.S. State Department, who worked almost exclusively in the Middle East. The unique experiences of this group led them to develop a deeper understanding of the local population than that of most close minded imperialist subjects. Their deeper understanding led them to develop ideologies about the local culture and people based on self-determination of the indigenous peoples vice outside rule and interference. The most famous and easily recognized of the Arabists were T.E. Lawrence and Gertrude Bell. Lawrence and Bell both petitioned the British Empire to move forward with a policy supporting independence in the Middle East to avoid future conflict in the region due to the Governments complete lack of understanding of local c ultures. Despite their considerable knowledge and experience, both Lawrence and Bell were marginalized by the bureaucracy of British political intrigue. The borders drawn by the Sykes-Picot agreement were recognized during the San Remo Conference of 1922 through the League of Nations mandate system.5 Had the British government looked at, analyzed and understood any of the Arabists policies, the post-war borders drawn for the Middle East would have considered the myriad differences in culture and religion, differences that still complicate regional politics. By ignoring the Arabists, the Sykes-Picot Agreement altered the development of Middle Eastern society and politics in the twentieth century from its natural tribal based system into a Western, nation system with definite borders that did not consider religious and cultural differences. This modified system contributed to several unintended consequences. It motivates militant groups such as ISIS. Additionally, perhaps, more importantly, it grants them a level of legitimacy with the local population that makes them a larger threat. The militant groups have developed into an idea to be eliminated not just insurgents to be killed. The second issue in the agreement was the faithless negotiations they conducted with King Hussein. In early 1914 the British initiated discussions with the ruler of Mecca, Emir Hussein, the King of Hejaz, who claimed to be a direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammad. Because they were direct descendants of the Prophet Muhammad, Hussein, and his sons would be a powerful and symbolic tool to unite the various religious sects in a revolt.6 As Britain was drawn into the War with the Ottoman Empire, Husseins son Abdullah reached out to the British to garner support for an Arab revolt in Hejaz.7 Discussions in support of this revolt continued over the next two years with both sides specifying demands.8 These negotiations were primarily carried out through a series of letters between Hussein and Henry McMahon, the British High Commissioner in Egypt. Husseins desired an independent Arab state in the Middle East in return for his cooperation in defeating the Ottoman Empire, conversely, while the British badly needed the local Arab support they would not abandon their imperial ambitions in the region. by October 1915, with negotiations having stalled on this point, Hussein had become increasingly angered by Britains unwillingness to agree to his terms. To move past the negotiations stalemate, Hussein gave the British an ultimatum of thirty days in which to concede to Arab independence following the war in return for his suppo rt. If the British declined, Hussein informed them that he would sign an agreement with the Turks who were willing to consent to his demands in return for his allegiance to the Axis powers at this point of the war.9 Britain now had an important decision to make. They could grant Hussein his wishes, gaining crucial support in what had become a long and costly war, but in doing so give up any hope of acquiring any new post-war provinces in the Middle East. Alternatively, they could decline his offer turning potential allies into yet another enemy to contend with, making gains in the Middle East more costly and endangering vital territories already held such as the Suez Canal. Given these choices, and in the grand fashion of Brittania waving the rules as she sees fit, McMahon combined the choices into a less than optimal choice. McMahon informed Hussein of his consent to Husseins conditions in return for aid in defeating the Turks, consent which of course came with stipulations in favor of the British. The most significant demand by the British was that certain regions of Mesopotamia, those rich in oil, be placed under special administrative arrangements.10 McMahon also specified that such conditions could only be enforced with the approval of Britains ally, France. McMahon and his advisors knew of the French desire to acquire more territory in the Middle East and the potential trouble which would be caused by overtly opposing them following an Allied victory.11 By making these requirements including the stipulations on France, the British had virtually made Hussein a promise which they would not and could not keep. The French ambassadors discussed their determination to take hold of the entire region but the British having special administrative arrangements now had the upper hand. Now British diplomats wer e willing to negotiate in regards to Syria, however, they were absolutely unwilling and had no reason to relinquish any claim to the area that is now modern day Iraq. With this impasse, France and Britain set out to negotiate an agreement which would split the Middle East between them following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire instead of honoring any agreement they had with Hussein. By May 1916 British representative Mark Sykes finished his meetings with Georges-Picot of France, mainly in the pub over a few pints per Professor Kohnen, and had drawn a map which would ultimately determine the boundaries of the modern day Middle East.12 Looking at the map of the modern Middle East and the ongoing conflict involving ISIS in Syria and Iraq today you can see the geographical connections to the negotiations between McMahon and Hussein which centered around Husseins desire for an independent Arab state in the Middle East. At the height of its power the Islamic State had established territories under their control stretching over parts of Syria and Iraq up to the border of Turkey. The Areas that ISIS has reclaimed were the areas originally promised to Hussein for Arab independence by McMahon in his correspondence. This rapid rise and success of ISIS has come about due the direct results and the inadequacies of the Sykes-Picot Agreement and British Imperialism as well as the dispute between Sykes and the Arabists. ISIS seeks to create the promised independent Arab State envisioned by Hussein, though this time based on Islam, promised in the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence and Sykes-Picot agreement one hundred years prior. T he problem now is that they have a desire to expand beyond what was promised and turn it into a worldwide caliphate in revenge for the past.13 The Peshmerga, Kurdish fighters from Turkey and Iraq, are in opposition to ISIS and its policy of ethnic cleansing. The Peshmerga are fighting for an autonomous Kurdish state in competition with the Arab state desire of ISIS. At least these two opposing forces in the Middle East and its current conflict are motivated by ethnic and religious differences exacerbated Sykes-Picot and the arbitrary lines it drew in the sand without considering culture and religion. Because of the imperial ambitions of Sykes and the desire of France to control Syria and the disregard of input by the Arabists and the individual Arab groups affected by the agreement, the borders of the Middle East were artificially created by Sykes and Picot. These artificially created countries have populations who fundamentally oppose each other ethnically and religiously. Had the Arabists and affected Arab ethnic groups been involved in creating the new Middle East map instead of just the Governments of France and Britain focusing on imperial aspirations, many of todays problems could have been avoided. If the British Government had acted in good faith in the negotiations with King Hussein, they would have been regarded more as allies than enemies whose word could not be trusted. The locals of the Middle East have a strict code of ethics and honesty is important. With the British being the visible representative of the West to the local population, McMahon has managed to show t he entirety of the West as untrustworthy to a populace with a very long memory. The United States has now inherited this problem and has a chance to use the history of the region and the agreements made here to help come to a more peaceful and lasting conclusion. Unfortunately, we are not using history and its lessons, instead reverting to mirror imaging the enemy and trying to win a war based on what we consider to be rationality without considering that the enemy gets a vote on the progression of hostilities. The training that we do to learn the culture of the area is a decent start, but it is only an overview and does not help in that it is out of context with the beliefs of the people. We are the same in the eyes of the locals as those who have oppressed and invaded their territories for hundreds of years with the only difference being a slightly different accent. If we are to be effective, we need to incorporate more history into the cultural training of the region so that our troops and Government leaders can begin to understand the root causes of the prob lems seen and then start to find solutions while avoiding further antagonization of the local people. Perhaps it would be a good choice to ensure a space for a historian on the major command staff so that these lessons wont have to be relearned. NOTES 1 The End of Sykes-Picot, (ISIS. 2014. Syria: Youtube, February 26th, 2015). 2 Sykes-Picot Agreement | 1916 | Britannica.com, accessed January 5, 2017, https://www.britannica.com/event/Sykes-Picot-Agreement. 3 Sykes-Picot Agreement | 1916 | Britannica.com, accessed January 5, 2017, https://www.britannica.com/event/Sykes-Picot-Agreement. 4 The Balfour Declaration Key Players and Events by Mary Grey | The Balfour Project, accessed January 9, 2017, http://www.balfourproject.org/the-balfour-declaration-key-players-and-events-by-mary-grey/. 5 The Origins of the Sykes-Picot Agreement | History | Smithsonian, accessed January 5, 2017, http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/sykes-picot-agreement-180957217/. 6 Lawrence of Arabia. King Hussein | PBS, accessed January 6, 2017, http://www.pbs.org/lawrenceofarabia/players/hussein.html. 7 Lost Islamic History | The Arab Revolt of World War One, accessed January 12, 2017, http://lostislamichistory.com/the-arab-revolt-of-world-war-one/. 8 Husayn-McMahon Correspondence | British-Palestinian History | Britannica.com, accessed January 15, 2017, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Husayn-McMahon-correspondence. 9 Husayn-McMahon Correspondence | British-Palestinian History | Britannica.com, accessed January 15, 2017, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Husayn-McMahon-correspondence. 10 Contradictory Promises, by Peter A Shambrook | The Balfour Project, accessed January 14, 2017, http://www.balfourproject.org/contradictory-promises/. 11 Contradictory Promises, by Peter A Shambrook | The Balfour Project, accessed January 14, 2017, http://www.balfourproject.org/contradictory-promises/. 12 Sykes-Picot Agreement | 1916 | Britannica.com, accessed February 7, 2017, https://www.britannica.com/event/Sykes-Picot-Agreement. 5 Sykes-Picot Agreement | 1916 | Britannica.com, accessed January 4, 2017, https://www.britannica.com/event/Sykes-Picot-Agreement. 13 The Sykes-Picot Agreement and the Making of the Modern Middle East, accessed February 4, 2017, http://theconversation.com/the-sykes-picot-agreement-and-the-making-of-the-modern-middle-east-58780.
Thursday, September 19, 2019
History has shaped every country and their people, in particular negative experiences like the Holocaust in Nazi-Germany or the Vietnam war, involving the United States in a grueling controversy from 1964 until 1975. The author Tim O'Brian confronts an American audience in his short stories "The Things They Carried" with the inhumane consequences of political and military power decisions by rewriting history from a subjective,individual point of view. Thus he forces the audience to take a stand, to ask questions, to get morally and ethically involved. The narrative structure of the "Sweetheart of the Song Tra Bong" and "How to Tell a True War Story" contains two levels, the first on being a discourse about the characters of Vietnam stories. The "I", the narrator, introduces 'Rat' Kiley as his source for the narrative that follows. He characterizes stories about war as "strange", "swirling back and forth across the border between trivia and bedlam, the mad and mundane". The stories have a life of their own, reality is not absolute, not final. With this image he describes the ambiguity of war itself, the normality that turns into insanity, he summarizes the narrative about Mary Ann Bell and her experiences with the war. The narrator clearly states the purposes of these stories, he is not interested in factual truths about the war, he openly questions the reliability of his source: "Rat had a reputation for exaggeration and overstatement". He wants the audience to "feel exactly what he felt", an emotional experience, a subjective app roach. The second narrative level tells the story about Mary Ann Bell, the "Sweetheart of the Song Tra Bong". The narrator, probably the author, retells Rat's story in his own words, so that t... ...ositive as well as its negative accomplishments. But how is this to be done, how do we deal with history personally and politically? Ths author Tim O'Brian gives us one answer in "How to Tell a True War Story" on page 69: "You can tell a true war story if it embarrasses you. It you don't care for obscenity, you don't care for the truth; if you don't care for the truth, watch how you vote. Send guys to war, they come home talking dirty". In other words if you don't want war watch how you vote. The connotation of this statement is far reaching, it naturally places responsibility on the American government for having participated in the war, but it foremost appeals to the american public to take responsibility and to use this history, this story to create a better future. Works Cited: O'Brien, Tim. The Things They Carried.New York: Penguin Books USA Inc., 1990.
Steroids In the past three decades, steroids has been becoming a serious problem more than ever in the athletic field. Steroids are anabolic drug "to build" growth hormones that include the androgens (male sex hormones) principally testosterone and estrogen and progestogens (female sex hormones). Steroids were first developed for medical purposes. They're used in controlling inflammation, strengthening weakened hearts, preventing conception, and alleviating symptoms of arthritis and asthma. Unfortunately research has shown that steroids have been abused in almost every kind of sport. Although steroids contribute to a muscular body, usage should remain illegal because they physically deteriorate and mentally destroy the body. Many people are fascinated about steroids because of their ability to build up the body. Whether taken by injection or the pill it increases strength and endurance. Steroids also help in the healing process of muscular tissue by first injuring them, then the muscles heal quicker adding more fiber increasing their bulk. Many athletes turn to steroids more often because they're cheaper then marijuana or cocaine. A ten week cycle of testosterone cypinate and methandrostone costs only about one hundred dollars. Steroids are also very hard to trace because of their water base composition. They can pass through the body within two days. All these benefits of steroids help an athletes become more competitive and increase their chance of being a winner. ...
Wednesday, September 18, 2019
Toward a Definition of Modernism Lawrence B. GamacheÃ¢â¬â¢s article Ã¢â¬Å"Toward a Definition of ModernismÃ¢â¬ encapsulates in its title the challenges critics meet in their attempts to formulate a coherent theoretical modernist model, though the quintessential modernist works Ã¢â¬âeven at the time of this 1987 article Ã¢â¬â are over sixty years old. Indeed, the sheer number of scholarly books and articles that discuss or contribute to the debate surrounding the definition of modernism indicates the extent to which modernism is a term whose only non-contentious consensus is that it its meaning is fraught with ambiguity. Susan Stanford FriedmanÃ¢â¬â¢s contribution to the debate summarizes the theoretical crises thus: As terms in an evolving scholarly discourse, modern, modernity, and modernism constitute a critical Tower of Babel, a cacophony of categories that become increasingly useless the more inconsistently they are used. We can regard them as a parody of critical discourse in which everyone keeps talking at the same time in a language without common meanings. When terms mean radically different or contradictory things to people, then their use appears to threaten the project of scholarship/teaching altogether. (497) Ã¢â¬Å"CacophonyÃ¢â¬ aside, because there are some artists, though disparate in style and genre, who persistently make it into the debate, and who are universally regarded as modernist, such as T.S. Eliot, James Joyce, Picasso, Schoenberg, Stravinsky, or Frank Lloyd Wright, there must be a unifying or underlying principle that is essentially modernist. Notably, however, the sister arts drama and opera are absent from the genres represented by the Ã¢â¬Å"quintessential modernist worksÃ¢â¬ of the artists above. (Although Picasso designed opera ... ... Tradition 2nd Ed. Ed. David Richter. Boston: Bedford, 1998. 1127-1141. Mathey, Francois. The Impressionists. Trans. Jean Steinberg. New York: Praeger, 1961. Puchner, Martin. Ã¢â¬Å"Modernism and Anti-theatricality: An Afterward.Ã¢â¬ Modern Drama 44.3 (2001): 355-361. Schonberg, Harold C. The Lives of the Great Composers. 1970. London: Futura, 1982. Stolba, K Marie. The Development of Western Music: A History 2nd Ed. Wisconsin: Brown and Benchmark, 1994. Trammell Skaggs, Carmen. Ã¢â¬Å"ModernityÃ¢â¬â¢s Revision of the Dancing Daughter: The Salome Narrative of Wilde and Strauss.Ã¢â¬ College Literature 29.3 (2002): 124-139. Yeats, William Butler. Ã¢â¬Å"My First Meeting with Oscar Wilde.Ã¢â¬ The Trembling of the Veil, in Autobiography. New York: Macmillan, 1916. 79-85. Rpt. in Oscar Wilde A Collection of Critical Essays. Ed. Richard Ellman. New Jersey: Prentice, 1969. 9-15.
Tuesday, September 17, 2019
The Renaissance in Western Europe marked the end of the middle Ages and the start of EuropeÃ¢â¬â¢s rise as a global power. States in Western Europe became more centralized, and monarchs exercised more control over their subjects. Christopher ColumbusÃ¢â¬â¢s voyage to America and triumphant return signaled the beginning of a new era of exploration. Likewise, Prince Henry the NavigatorÃ¢â¬â¢s expeditions along the West African coast led to increased trade with Africa. Long isolated from the rest of the world, the Native AmericansÃ¢â¬â¢ lives were drastically changed by the presence of European explorers, and later, colonists.Some aspects of life, such as domination by the elite in Europe, trade in Africa, and Native American ways of life in the Americas, have remained the same through the period. New contacts among Western Europe, Africa, and the Americas, however, led to interaction that has only increased with time. New contacts and increased trade led to the rise of a middle class in Western Europe. Traditionally, and throughout the feudal period, nobles had controlled government and wealth. As trade with Africa and the Americas increased, however, a new merchant class rose.As the new class became wealthier, they began to agitate for political power, eventually leading to conflicts such as the 1789 French Revolution. In the Americas, social transformations were huge. Deadly diseases brought by the Europeans decimated local populations, who had no resistance to smallpox, measles, etc. In one notorious case, during Spaniard Hernan CortezÃ¢â¬â¢s conquest of the Aztecs, the Spanish intentionally gave the Aztecs disease-ridden blankets. Such tactics also led to the downfall of the Incas, who were conquered by Francisco Pizzaro.From residing in mighty cities and presiding over huge empires, the Native American people were reduced to serving as servants or slaves of the new conquerors. A similar trend occurred in North America. Unlike the Aztecs or Incas, N orth American natives were decentralized, and loosely organized by tribes. ColumbusÃ¢â¬â¢s initial subjugation of the Haitians, forcing them to mine gold, set a precedent for future domination. Africa was particularly affected by the slave trade. Large amounts of labor were needed on the Spanish and Portuguese sugarcane plantations, and Native American populations were often nable or unwilling to work as slaves. Especially after Bartolome de las CasasÃ¢â¬â¢s campaign against the subjugation of Native Americans, the Europeans needed another source of labor. Thus, the Atlantic slave trade began, ultimately resulting in the forced movement of 12 million slaves from Africa. The slave trade had both positive and negative effects on African society. While slavery was cruel and exploitative, the money some empires such as Benin acquired from working with the Europeans allowed them to build stronger empires.Despite massive change, some aspects of life stayed the same. In Western Europe, the gap between the poor and the rich remained; even though a middle class had developed, the power was still concentrated in the hands of a few. Every Western European country was a monarchy, and there was almost no popular representation. Even in Britain, by 1750 only about 2% of the population could vote, due to property ownership requirements and other standards. The period from 1492 to 1750 was still one of control.In the Americas, many tribes were still able to maintain their traditional way of life. Many tribes displaced by British settlers in North America moved west, and since the French had yet to settle the huge Louisiana Territory, they were free to continue with traditional methods. Africa was still, for the most part, free. Not until the 1880Ã¢â¬â¢s would the majority of Africa become colonized. Though less powerful than the Western Europeans, African nations remained independent and gained wealth through trade.In conclusion, the interaction between Western Europe, Africa, and the Americas has resulted in both change and continuity. One irreversible trend, however, was the growing interconnectedness of the global community. Columbus united the New World with the Old, creating a bridge that has never since been broken. Recent developments such as globalization and information technology have metaphorically shrunk the world. Interaction between 1492 and 1750 set a precedent for future actions.