Best Summary and Analysis The Great Gatsby

Best Summary and Analysis The Great Gatsby SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips Maybe you’ve just finished The Great Gatsby and need some guidance for unpacking its complex themes and symbols. Or maybe it’s been awhile since you last read this novel, so you need a refresher on its plot and characters. Or maybe you’re in the middle of reading it and want to double check that you’re not missing the important stuff. Whatever you need - we’ve got you covered with this comprehensive summary of one of the great American novels of all time! Not only does this complete The Great Gatsby summary provide a detailed synopsis of the plot, but it’ll also give you: capsule descriptions for the book’s major characters, short explanations of most important themes, as well as links to in-depth articles about these and other topics. (Image: Molasz / Wikimedia Commons) Quick Note on Our Citations Our citation format in this guide is (chapter.paragraph). We're using this system since there are many editions of Gatsby, so using page numbers would only work for students with our copy of the book. To find a quotation we cite via chapter and paragraph in your book, you can either eyeball it (Paragraph 1-50: beginning of chapter; 50-100: middle of chapter; 100-on: end of chapter), or use the search function if you're using an online or eReader version of the text. The Great GatsbySummary: The Full Plot Our narrator, Nick Carraway, moves to the East Coast to work as a bond trader in Manhattan. He rents a small house in West Egg, a nouveau riche town in Long Island. In East Egg, the next town over, where old money people live, Nick reconnects with his cousin Daisy Buchanan, her husband Tom, and meets their friend Jordan Baker. Tom takes Nick to meet his mistress, Myrtle Wilson. Myrtle is married to George Wilson, who runs a gas station in a gross and dirty neighborhood in Queens. Tom, Nick, and Myrtle go to Manhattan, where she hosts a small party that ends with Tom punching her in the face. Nick meets his next-door neighbor, Jay Gatsby, a very rich man who lives in a giant mansion and throws wildly extravagant parties every weekend, and who is a mysterious person no one knows much about. Gatsby takes Nick to lunch and introduces him to his business partner - a gangster named Meyer Wolfshiem. Nick starts a relationship with Jordan. Through her, Nick finds out that Gatsby and Daisy were in love five years ago, and that Gatsby would like to see her again. Nick arranges for Daisy to come over to his house so that Gatsby can â€Å"accidentally† drop by. Daisy and Gatsby start having an affair. Tom and Daisy come to one of Gatsby’s parties. Daisy is disgusted by the ostentatiously vulgar display of wealth, and Tom immediately sees that Gatsby’s money most likely comes from crime. We learn that Gatsby was born intoa poor farming family as James Gatz. He has always been extremely ambitious, creating the Jay Gatsby persona as a way of transforming himself into a successful self-made man - the ideal of the American Dream. Nick, Gatsby, Daisy, Tom, and Jordan get together for lunch. At this lunch, Daisy and Gatsby are planning to tell Tom that she is leaving him. Gatsby suddenly feels uncomfortable doing this in Tom’s house, and Daisy suggests going to Manhattan instead. In Manhattan, the five of them get a suite at the Plaza Hotel where many secrets come out. Gatsby reveals that Daisy is in love with him. Tom in turn reveals that Gatsby is a bootlegger, and is probably engaged in other criminal activities as well. Gatsby demands that Daisy renounce Tom entirely, and say that she has never loved him. Daisy can’t bring herself to say this because it isn’t true, crushing Gatsby’s dream and obsession. It’s clear that their relationship is over and that Daisy has chosen to stay with Tom. That evening, Daisy and Gatsby drive home in his car, with Daisy behind the wheel. When they drive by the Wilson gas station, Myrtle runs out to the car because she thinks it’s Tom driving by. Daisy hits and kills her, driving off without stopping. Nick, Jordan, and Tom investigate the accident. Tom tells George Wilson that the car that struck Myrtle belongs to Gatsby, and George decides that Gatsby must also be Myrtle’s lover. That night, Gatsby decides to take the blame for the accident. He is still waiting for Daisy to change her mind and come back to him, but she and Tom skip town the next day. Nick breaks up with Jordan because she is completely unconcerned about Myrtle’s death. Gatsby tells Nick some more of his story. As an officer in the army, he met and fell in love with Daisy, but after a month had to ship out to fight in WWI. Two years later, before he could get home, she married Tom. Gatsby has been obsessed with getting Daisy back since he shipped out to fight five years earlier. The next day, George Wilson shoots and kills Gatsby, and then himself. The police leave the Buchanans and Myrtle’s affair out of the report on the murder-suicide. Nick tries to find people to come to Gatsby’s funeral, but everyone who pretended to be Gatsby’s friend and came to his parties now refuses to come. Even Gatsby’s partner Wolfshiem doesn’t want to go to the funeral. Wolfshiem explains that he first gave Gatsby a job after WWI and that they have been partners in many illegal activities together. Gatsby’s father comes to the funeral from Minnesota. He shows Nick a self-improvement plan that Gatsby had written for himself as a boy. Disillusioned with his time on the East coast, Nick decides to return to his home in the Midwest. Other Ways to Study the Plot of The Great Gatsby See what happens when in actual chronological order and without flashbacks in our Great Gatsby timeline. Read our individualThe Great Gatsby chapter summariesfor more in-depth details about plot, important quotes and character beats, and how the novel’s major themes get reflected: Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Learn the significance behind the novel’s title, itsbeginning, and its ending. List of the Major Characters in The Great Gatsby Click on each character's name to read an in-depth article analyzing their place in the novel. Nick Carraway - our narrator, but not the book’s main character. Coming East from the Midwest to learn the bond business, Nick is horrified by the materialism and superficiality he finds in Manhattan and Long Island. He ends up admiring Gatsby as a hopeful dreamer and despising the rest of the people he encounters. Jay Gatsby - a self-made man who is driven by his love for, and obsession with, Daisy Buchanan. Born a poor farmer, Gatsby becomes materially successful through crime and spends the novel trying to recreate the perfect love he and Daisy had five years before. When she cannot renounce her marriage, Gatsby’s dream is crushed. Daisy Buchanan - a very rich young woman who is trapped in a dysfunctional marriage and oppressed by her meaningless life. Daisy has an affair with Gatsby, but is ultimately unwilling to say that she has been as obsessed with him as he has with her, and goes back to her unsatisfying, but also less demanding, relationship with her husband, Tom. Tom Buchanan - Daisy’s very rich, adulterous, bullying, racist husband. Tom is having a physically abusiveaffair with Myrtle Wilson. He investigates Gatsby and reveals some measure of his criminal involvement, demonstrating to Daisy that Gatsby isn’t someone she should run off with. After Daisy runs over Myrtle Wilson, Tom makes up with Daisyand they skip town together. Jordan Baker - a professional golfer who has a relationship with Nick. At first, Jordan is attractive because of her jaded, cynical attitude, but then Nick slowly sees that her inveterate lying and her complete lack of concern for other people are deal breakers. Myrtle Wilson - the somewhat vulgar wife of a car mechanic who is unhappy in her marriage. Myrtle is having an affair with Tom, whom she likes for his rugged and brutal masculinity and for his money. Daisy runs Myrtle over, killing herin agruesome and shocking way. George Wilson - Myrtle’s browbeaten, weak, and working class husband. George is enraged when he finds out about Myrtle’s affair, and then that rage is transformed into unhinged madness when Myrtle is killed. George kills Gatsby and himself in the murder-suicide that seems to erase Gatsby and his lasting impact on the world entirely. Other Ways to Study Great Gatsby Characters Need a refresher on all the other people in this book? Check out our overview of the charactersor dive deeper with our detailed character analyses. Get some help for tackling the common assignment of comparing and contrasting the novel’s characters. Start gathering relevant character quotesto beef up your essay assignments with evidence from the text. List of the Major Themes in The Great Gatsby Get a broadoverview of the novel’s themes, or click on each theme to read a detailed individual analysis. Money and Materialism- the novel is fascinated by how people make their money, what they can and can’t buy with it, and how the pursuit of wealth shapes the decisions people make and the paths their lives follow. In the novel, is it possible to be happy without a lot of money? Is it possible to be happy with it? Society and Class- the novel can also be read as a clash between the old money set and the nouveau riche strivers and wannabes that are trying to either become them or replace them. If the novel ends with the strivers and the poor being killed off and the old money literally getting away with murder, who wins this class battle? The American Dream- does the novel endorse or mock the dream of the rags-to-riches success story, the ideal of the self-made man? Is Gatsby a successful example of what’s possible through hard work and dedication, or a sham whose crime and death demonstrate that the American Dream is a work of fiction? Love, Desire, and Relationships- most of the major characters are driven by either love or sexual desire, but none of these connections prove lasting or stable. Is the novel saying that these are destructive forces, or is just that these characters use and feel them in the wrong way? Death and Failure - a tone of sadness and elegy (an elegy is a song of sadness for the dead) suffuses the book, as Nick looks back at a summer that ended with three violent deaths and the defeat of one man’s delusional dream. Areambition and overreach doomed to this level of epic failure, orare theyexamples of the way we sweep the past under the rug when looking to the future? Morality and Ethics - despite the fact that most of the characters in this novel cheat on their significant others, one is an accidental killer, one is an actual criminal, and one a murderer, at the end of the novel no one is punished either by the law or by public censure. Is there a way to fix the lawless, amoral, Wild East that this book describes, or does the replacement of God with a figure from a billboard mean that this is a permanent state of affairs? The Mutability of Identity - the key to answering the title’s implied questions (What makes Gatsby great? Is Gatsby great?) is whether it is possible to change oneself for good, or whether past history and experiences leave their marks forever. Gatsby wants to have it both ways: to change himself from James Gatz into a glamorous figure, but also to recapitulate and preserve in amber a moment from his past with Daisy. Does he fail because it’s impossible to change? Because it’s impossible to repeat the past? Or both? Other Ways to Study Great Gatsby Themes Often, themes are represented by the a novel's symbols. Check out our overview of the main symbols in The Great Gatsby, or click on an individual symbol for a deeper exploration of its meaning and relevance: The green light at the end of Daisy's dock The eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg The valley of ashes Themes are also often reinforced by recurring motifs. Delve into a guide to the way motifs color and enrich this work. The Bottom Line Our guide toThe Great Gatsbyoffers a variety of ways to study the novel's: plot characters themes symbols motifs Use our analysis, gathered quotations, and description for help with homework assignments, tests, and essays on this novel. What’s Next? More Great Gatsby Analysis and Study Guides! Understand how the book is put together by looking at its genre, narrator, andsetting. Learn the background of and context for the novel in our explanations of the history of the composition of the bookand the biography of F. Scott Fitzgerald. Get a sense of how the novel has been adapted by reading about its many film versions. Hammer out the nitty gritty basics of the novel’s hardest vocab words. Want to improve your SAT score by 160 points or your ACT score by 4 points?We've written a guide for each test about the top 5 strategies you must be using to have a shot at improving your score. Download it for free now:

Artist vs. Artisan

Artist vs. Artisan Artist vs. Artisan Artist vs. Artisan By Mark Nichol What’s the difference between an artist and an artisan? This unnecessarily sensitive question is equivalent to the issue of what constitutes art and what is designated as craft. In both cases, the former word essentially refers to the making of tangible or intangible products as an expression of creativity and imagination for purely aesthetic reasons. An artisan, meanwhile, though spurred by the same impulses, produces crafts, which, though they may be acquired only for decoration, are designed to be practical. Therefore, though some tension between artist and artisan between producers of art and designers of crafts may exist because of a perceived differential in their relative cultural status, the technical definitions are just that: precise distinctions not in quality or artistic achievement but in function. The word for the creator of art is the gender-neutral term artist. (The French form of the word, artiste, came to apply more broadly to creative professionals, especially performers, though it also has a pejorative sense of â€Å"pretentious artist.†) By extension, one talented in any endeavor even a con artist may earn the term. By contrast, makers of crafts have gender-specific labels craftsman and craftswoman but though craftsperson is the natural neutral term, many such practitioners prefer to be called artisans. (The Latin ancestor of this term is artire, which means â€Å"to instruct in the arts.†) Other words that ultimately derive from the Latin word ars (â€Å"art†) include artifact, which comes from the Italian word artifatto and ultimately from the Latin terms arte and factum (meaning â€Å"thing made†), originally having primarily an archaeological sense but now referring to anything left behind or remaining, and artifice, which originally meant workmanship but, from a secondary sense of â€Å"cunning,† came to refer to deceit or trickery. (However, artificer remains a synonym for artisan, although it can also refer to one who contrives or makes things or ideas.) Artificial, the adjectival form of artifice, broadly refers to anything not produced in nature. Artful once referred exclusively to artistic skill but later primarily came to mean â€Å"dexterous, wily†; in that sense, the term is best known in the moniker of the Artful Dodger, an adroit young pickpocket in Charles Dickens’s novel Oliver Twist. The antonym, artless, likewise was originally a reference to a lack of talent but now usually refers to clumsiness in word or deed. Arty and artsy both describe artists, but the terms have developed a pejorative sense of pretension, and artsy is hyphenated in combination with craftsy and, worse, fartsy, to refer to someone with such airs, or a creation of theirs. Art is used in combination with other terms to denote subgenres with serious artistic ambitions (â€Å"art film,† â€Å"art rock†) as well as artistic movements, as in â€Å"art deco,† a truncation of the French phrase art dà ©coratif (â€Å"decorative art†), and art nouveau (â€Å"new art†); the first letter of each word in these phrases is often capitalized, especially when associated with other initial-capped designations. Another movement, named arts and crafts, is usually initial-capped to distinguish it from generic references. The liberal arts are the academic subjects also known as the humanities. The term liberal stems from the idea that knowledge of these subjects and the attendant skills are necessary for free people to know in order to be productive members of society. From the phrase â€Å"liberal arts† comes the designations for mastery of coursework known as the bachelor of arts and master of arts degrees (truncated, alternatively as â€Å"bachelor’s degree,† or bachelor’s, and â€Å"master’s degree,† or master’s). These terms have no specific relation to art itself, though study and/or practice of art may be a component of the coursework. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Misused Words category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:30 Religious Terms You Should KnowRunning Amok or Running Amuck?10 Humorous, Derisive, or Slang Synonyms for â€Å"Leader† or â€Å"Official†

Internal analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Internal analysis - Essay Example However, the IBIS report provides that the customers can be further--- categorized in terms of the products sought by them. The main categories of the restaurant customers catered to buy the industry include the retail POS software customers, the food service POS software customers, the hospitality POS software customer and other general POS software customers. The products provided by vendors in the industry are differentiated in terms of their use, the product’s price as well as their respective functionality. The Abacus Business Solutions is company that is privately owned and operated. The company has been operating since 1974. Its main objective is to provide POS solutions to players in the hospitality industry. The company has its headquarters in Fort Lauderdale in Florida, United States. The main product that is sold by the company is the Aloha POS software system. This system is sold by Abacus Business Solutions to the customers in the market through a proposition of multiple hardware platforms. The two main types of Aloha POS that are sold by the company in the market include the TableService POS that is based on the windows platform using touch screens, an open architecture, and the QuickService for the fast food customers in the hospitality industry. In addition to the product itself, the company provides value added services to its clients. For instance, the organization offers servicing and installation facility as well as support and training for the Aloha POS for its customer s in the market. The company highlights that its mission is to make the businesses of its customers more productive as well as profitable. The organization has set high standards for operation where it not only targets customer satisfaction but also seeks to provide business wide integrated POS solutions for any type of hospitality and restaurant business in the industry. The main customers of the company include the likes of Lime Fresh Mexican Grill, Green

The level of deficit spending by the federal government Personal Statement

The level of deficit spending by the federal government - Personal Statement Example I think the government should cut its spending for this to be achieved in a manner that everyone will be satisfied. In respecct of raising taxes, the wealthy have come out strongly in opposition. They argue that they already are overtaxed. According to Porter (12), it is true that the high income earners in the States pay a lot of tax. They are said to be account for the biggest share of the tax burden. It is noted that the deficit in the federal government has been an extraordinarily contentious issue in the political scene over the last few years. It is stated that the current deficit stands at about $15 trillion dollars. It is expected that if every thing holds constant; the figure will rise significantly in the next couple of years (Jeffrey par 2). Some politicians and economists argue that the national income levels are not on the dangerous levels yet. They say that the government should increase its expenses in order to avoid another downturn. The current deficit is said to be a result of high spending on soldiers, grants to support the public schools, road construction, infrastructural projects, and Medicare for seniors (Hubpages par 4). Another factor that has also brought about the deficit relates to government revenue as previously indicated. Revenue is the amount of money collected by the government. They are generally gotten from tax, custom duties, and sale of government property among other sources (Porter 12). For the government to be able to reduce the deficit, it should first be able to reduce the amount of money that it spends on government-sponsored programs or increase the amount of money it takes from tax. Jeffrey (par 2) suggests that, not only does the government raise more revenue when it raises tax paid by the rich Americans but it could achieve this without slowing down economic growth of the country. Porter (12) states that

International Organizations in Question of Global Climate Research Paper - 1

International Organizations in Question of Global Climate - Research Paper Example It devastated parts of the Caribbean, Eastern Canada, Northeast of the United States and Mid- Atlantic. It has been termed as the second most costly hurricane of Atlantic after Hurricane Katrina. Losses that have arisen due to Hurricane Sandy have been estimated to be about 50 billion US dollars. In the seven countries that fell in the path of the storm, it was found out that at least 209 people were killed. As a result of such occurrences, the regional and global, international organizations, which are involved in both the political and economic aspects of life, should be able to arrange a global response that is effective (Weiss, Forsythe, Coate, & Pease, 2009, p. 19). So far, very little has been done as these effects of global climate change are so rampant and occur frequently compared to previous centuries. These international organizations face a number of weaknesses that hinder them from effectively dealing with problems such as global climatic change, civil wars, poverty, and disease. As most organizations, the international organization has two major kinds of stakeholders. These include the stakeholders who act as the core of the organization, with members who control it formally. The second type of the stakeholders are those persons who are external to the organization and do not have any form of authority concerning the decisions made, though they are affected directly by any actions or decisions of the organization. International organizations have a lot of responsibilities in the countries which are elements of their membership. Unfortunately, there is little room for citizens in each of these countries to make their contribution in concerning decision making. It is had also been found out that of all nations that are in membership with international organizations, darned few nations participate in the making of decisions.  

History of Artist Expression in Comic Books

History of Artist Expression in Comic Books Comic books, like many art forms, have been co-opted by a hungry consumer capitalist economy which makes a Faustian bargain with its artistic meals: give me your subversive art forms and ideas, this economy says, and I will communicate them to a mass audience beyond your wildest dreams; however, in exchange, your art forms and ideas will often simultaneously be stripped of their dignity and uniqueness by becoming products of no less ubiquity and no more value than toothpaste – mere tools to sell, sell, sell, and make more, more, more money for gigantic multinational corporations. This phenomenology is the ultimate in postmodern recontextualization, the stripping of an objects original meaning and significance, and its endowment with a new purpose either heretofore considered or deemed ethically, morally, or artistically acceptable. We shall explore the unique nature and popularity of comic books, and the themes presented in their narratives and characters, as a quasi-underground phenomenon whose ever-increasing popularity from the 1940s to the 1980s left them perfectly positioned to be gobbled and turned into movies and merchandise by giant corporations eager to both exploit the devotees of comic books and expand their numbers. What has been the big deal, historically, about comic books? Though they are primarily a postmodern phenomenon localized in the latter half of the 20th century through to the present, their roots go as far back as the 17th century, when the English mass-produced woodcuts depicting ghastly public executions. Comics first reached mass popularity in the United States in the 1930s in the form of newspaper comics; then, the comic book as a separate, thriving, and sophisticated art form began to evolve from there. â€Å"The comic book has been one of our most familiar, yet least appreciated, popular art forms. As vehemently criticized as it is passionately defended†¦ [it is] a graphically sophisticated and culturally revealing medium.† (Sabin, 1996, p.1). After roughly a decade of occupying a comfortable place in the American pop culture mainstream, comics, and then comic books, began to take to reflect a less sanguine view of American society. Violent crime comics began to appear, and the more squeaky-clean comics of the 1930s and during World War II absorbed some of these same themes. In the so-called Silver Age of Comic Books, the 1950s through the 1970s, most characters and narratives began to take on a darker and more complex tone, mostly in response to plummeting sales after World War II that reflected an unsettled cultural undercurrent brewing in America. In this initial countercultural heyday of the 1950s and 1960s, comic books were sometimes dismissed, much like rock-and-roll music, as the juvenile, unsophisticated, and pulpy fantasies of hormone-addled adolescents. Sometimes, however, comic books were labeled as cultural filth that was an ongoing threat, destructive to teenage minds. In 1954, right-wing American psychiatrist Dr. Frederic Wertham published a book called Seduction of the Innocent, which was an all-out assault on the ostensible delinquency-inducing content of comic books, and which singled out Batman for special criticism, claiming â€Å"a subtle atmosphere of homoeroticism.† (Wertham, 1954, p. 189). Werthams criticism of comic book content led to the establishment of a censor organization known as the Comic Code Authority that same year, whose heavy-handed influence forced comic book writers and artists to go somewhat underground with their subversive themes. However, Batman (and Robin, whatever his relationship with Batman may or may not have been) has far outlived both Dr. Wertham and the chilling effect of his book, and in fact, the longevity and deceptively complex content of comic books have proven them to be much more powerful than anyone ever dreamed. They have for decades embodied striking artistic expressions of artists and authors, who collectively spoke for countless millions of young people who did not quite fit in to the mainstream of society. These millions were given voice by comic books such as The X-Men, The Incredible Hulk, The Amazing Spider-Man, from the Marvel Comics Company, and Batman and Superman from the DC Comics Company. Each of the aforementioned titles tells an extended set of stories about a character or characters who are misfits of some kind, whether it be physical, psychological, or emotional, and who take on a variety of preternatural and/or superhuman characteristics which allow them to not only address their own personal struggles with their differences from others in society, but to aid society itself in coming to better accept those who are different; or, alternately, the characters are either born with or afflicted by a condition which makes them a misfit and therefore different from others in society, and must adapt to life as such. These comic book stories generally involve a variety of morality plays, ranging from simple good vs. evil, to the exploration of antiheros, that enable the characters to attempt to effect positive change in the world, and provide both catharsis and inspiration for the readers. The X-Men, for example, were created by legendary comic book author Stan Lee and artist Jack Kirby in 1963. They were /are a group of teenagers born with genetic mutations that have endowed them with a variety of superhuman characteristics, not all of which are necessarily constructive. In the Lee/Kirby universe, the X-Men are widely ostracized and discriminated against not only because they are different, but because non-mutant humans fear the X-Men are the next logical, superior step in human evolution and therefore could render normal humans obsolete. The teenagers stories often involved them attempting to come to terms with their powers and how to fit into the so-called normal human society. The X-Men were comprised of such characters as Iceman, a young man who could freeze objects at will; Wolverine, a foul-tempered young man whose skeleton is laced with a nearly indestructible metal alloy, including metal knives which he could extend and retract from his hands at will, albeit with considerable pain; Storm, a young black female who could control the weather, including the ability to summon storms at will; Nightcrawler, a young male born with blue fur who could become virtually invisible at night and teleport short distances; Cyclops, who could shoot beams of pure solar energy from his eyes, but not always control this power; Rogue, a young female possessing the hyper-empathic ability the feelings, memories, and abilities of other beings she touches —unfortunately, however, prolonged contact with others can weaken or kill them; Magneto, an older male survivor of the Nazi death camps who can manipulate magnetic forces, but whose psyche was so twisted by his experience at the hands of the Nazis that he has become an arch-nemesis of the X-Men; and Professor Xavier, an older male paraplegic with amazing telepathic abilities and a world-class intellect, who has dedicated his life to mentoring other mutants and defending them from themselves, unsympathetic humans, and the perennial machinations of Magneto. The X-Men and their stories were unabashedly allegorical and subversive in nature, content, and theme. Professor Xavier was modeled after civil rights activist Martin Luther King, Jr. and Sir Francis Xavier, Catholic missionary and founder of the Jesuit order. The sense of loneliness and isolation experienced by Rogue was a reflection of the near-universal teenage experience. The bigotry and intolerance of homosexuals is another allegorical component featured with the X-Men narratives, particularly in the film adaptations directed by openly gay Bryan Singer. In X-Men 2, the character of Bobby Drake characters comes out of the closet as a mutant to his parents, prompting them to ask if he has tried not being a mutant, parodying the oft-heard question of parents directed their gay children. Anti-Semitism, personal alienation, anti-Communist paranoia, and racism are also allegorical themes that X-Men comic narratives have explored in detail. And like The X-Men, Batman, Spiderman (also a Stan Lee creation), The Incredible Hulk and Superman all were dependent upon and explored the themes of what it meant for a person to be forced to hide or to be ashamed of a component of his or her true self, or to lead a dual existence – one private and personal, one public. Superman (created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster), known by millions as a mild-mannered reporter, socially maladroit nerd, and bearer of an unrequited love for Lois Lane, who happens to be a near-omnipotent superhero when called upon in extraordinary circumstances, is the perfect embodiment of both teenage reality and teenage wish fulfillment. The Incredible Hulk (another Stan Lee creation) gets angry like all of us, but has real power – scary power, often – to do something about it thanks to hi s green steroidal transformation. Batman (created by Bob Kane and fleshed out by Bill Finger and Jerry Robinson) lives a quiet, dark life of solitude contrasted with public works of enviable nobility and good. These feelings of powerlessness and awkwardness, combined with empowerment fantasies, were and continue to be direct reflections of the collective concerns of millions of young people, and perhaps many adults, as well – how to fit into a society that demanded conformity without losing the uniqueness that embodies ones individuality. Ironically, the collective popularity of all of these comic book titles has historically been so striking in terms of sales that it would not be an unfair question to wonder if it fact the teenage misfits who bought them were in fact the majority, not the minority in society. Comic book sales peaked in 1993 at a staggering $850 million (U.S. dollars) and are still very healthy, though currently, the popularity of comic book characters is as likely to be manifest in movie ticket and DVD sales of film adaptations of comic books as it is in comic book purchases. More on this later. The character archetypes and narrative themes of most of these original and ongoing comic book series were produced in the crucible of the fairly conformist sociocultural pressures of the modernist era in the United States. The teenagers of each successive decade, beginning with the 1950s and continuing to the present, have been characterized by isolation, disaffection, rebellion, disillusionment, all combined with the pressure to adapt without question to the relatively monolithic mores of the generation which preceded them, a generation for whom belonging to a larger social group, for whom the values of unquestioning self-sacrifice and acceptance of authority figures and establishment power structures were the norm. Men were called to duty, whether in World War II or in the burgeoning post-war corporate universe; many made the ultimate sacrifice – their lives, or worse, their souls. Women, too, had their duty – to support their men in discreet, subservient lives of quiet domestic efficiency. But as American young people began to question the assumptions behind the Cold War, and question the rational and wisdom behind the interminably bloody Vietnam War, their uncertainty on these issues led to a greater wholesale questioning of the mechanisms and assumptions of societys very foundations. (Even Batman, whose creation in 1940 arguably predates postmodernism, eventually took on countercultural subject matter and themes, to say nothing of the suggestion of a taboo homoeroticism in the relationship between Batman and Robin.) This rebellion was met with heavy disapproval and disappointment by parents, representing the previous generation. The ongoing schism between these two generations has caused huge cultural, social, and political conflicts that continue to be played out even in 2005. These conflicts have been vividly reflected in the artistic expressions of the times – literature, music, and films. From the standpoint of the older generations, comic books were perhaps never adequately understood, respected, or even recognized for the potent and unusual artistic and cultural forces that they have always represented certainly as potent as more conventional and commonplace means of artistic expression, high art and classical music, just to name two ossified examples. (And, incidentally, these generational clashes were not limited to the United States in terms of understanding the rise of the superhero comic books. The country of Japan, tiny as it is, has become its own powerhouse in terms of churning out groundbreaking styles of comics, such as Katsuhiro Otomo of Akira fame, reflecting generational struggles unique to the Japanese youth culture.) The artistic expressions that arose out of the clash between generations also represented an evolution in classifications and mechanisms of art itself – the evolution from modern art forms to postmodern art forms. Modern art, reflective of the cultures from which it sprung, was generally conformist, and adhered to classic rules of form, function, and design, and either explicitly or implicitly supported the symbols of establishment paradigms by exploiting binary oppositions of us vs. them (i.e., Americans vs. Communists). Postmodern art rejected the methodology of modern art on every level, deconstructing it to such an extent as to even question the basic psychological definitions of symbolism in human art forms. The discarding and combination of genres and forms, the pastiche of styles, the toying with unorthodox symbolism, and an active interest in subversion and smashing of establishment systems – rebellion itself are all manifestations of art evolving to postmodern form. And instead of existing to analyze, but ultimately reinforce the paradigms of patriarchal establishments, postmodern art analyzed and often sought to undermine these establishments and their conventions, if not destroy them altogether. As noted by postmodernism scholar Andreas Huyssen, â€Å"†¦contemporary postmodernism operates in a field of tension between tradition and innovation, conservation and renewal, mass culture and high art, in which the second terms are no longer automatically privileged over the first.† (Huyssen, 1986, p. 267). As such, any art form that has enjoyed longevity has internalized and incorporated this revolutionary and evolutionary process, or been discarded or fossilized. Comic books are no exception to this rule, and their staying power has manifested itself in the last 20 or so years by their translation to and eventual dominance of the genre of film. In fact, comic books in their Silver Age forms were arguably inherently post-modern in nature, as they combined complex and detailed visual artistry with complex and serialized narratives, an intermixing pastiche of separate genres which had never before been combined in such a unique form. Books had, of course, often featured illustrations in the past, but they were only to provide occasional support and dimensionalization of the narrative, as opposed to being as important a component of the medium as the narrative itself. The fantastical and stylized nature of many of the illustrations featured in comic books were often postmodern artistic explorations in their own right, seeking to push the boundaries of conventional illustrations. Their explorations of anti-heroes helped deconstruct the notion of simple constructs of good and evil. American consumer capitalism, which is inherently (though not necessarily benignly) postmodern in its relentless desire to commodify anything and everything, particularly that which can be packaged as new, hip, and edgy – and thus desirable – has hungrily devoured comic books and the films which come from them. In doing so, the artistic and societal merit of comic books, in particular their subversive characteristics, have become themselves subverted by the deity of consumer capitalist commodification. The ultimate dream, for example, of fans of the X-Men comic books, that their beloved misfit characters would reach movie theatres and therefore a larger audience for their collective angst, has come true but that dream has also become a nightmare for some fans, as these same subversive misfit X-Men have also become action figures, clothing lines, cartoons on the side of fast food lunch bags and boxes all mass marketed to mass audiences in order to maximize profits for corporations that are more interested in shareholder earnings than they are the artistic merit of airing the collective voices of disaffected teen angst. If the phenomenology of disaffected teen angst can be appropriated to make a profit from teenagers, then corporations will be chasing the teens and their money incessantly. However, corporate interest in teenagers as a demographic generally has little to do with sociocultural altruism. In fact, cultural observers should take heed – â€Å"ventilation of genuinely alternative social visions collide directly with the underpinnings of power in the economy at large. (Schiller, 1986, p. 152) The trade-off is as follows: as long as such ventilation of alternative social visions makes a profit, it will be tolerated. But in the consumer capitalist corporate universe of today, art for arts sake, particularly if the art does not reinforce the machinery of consumer capitalism, will never generate much more than limited enthusiasm, and is more likely to meet with insidious hostility. The primary perpetrators in this arena are the behemoth corporate conglomerates that own the media, and the acquisitive way in which they manage their film and television divisions. In the 1960s and 1970s, film studios and television networks existed as independent business entities whose sole focus was the creation of films and television shows – nothing more, nothing less. While these companies were undisputedly interested in profits, the process was far more artist-centered and quality-driven than they are today. The presumption was that quality films would result in box-office successes, though the expectations of profit were relatively modest compared to todays standards. Then, in 1977, a watershed moment in film history arrived in the form of the blockbuster Star Wars, a comic-bookish story in its own right despite being an original creation of writer/director George Lucas. The film was not only the most financially successful phenomenon in movie history, but it alerted movie studios to a whole new economic model, centered around the notion of ancillary profits. Most notably in the case of Star Wars, the ancillary profits came in the form of merchandising. Inexplicably, before the films release, executives at 20th Century Fox, the films distributor, were convinced the film would be a flop, and in contract negotiations with Lucas, acceded to his unusual request to receive 100% of profits derived from sales of merchandise inspired and/or derived from the film, for example action figures and lunchboxes. The Fox executives surely rued the day they signed over these rights to Mr. Lucas, as Star Wars merchandise generated $1 billion in profits for the shrewd filmmaker. Another lesson learned by Fox, and other studios hungry to recreate the fiscal orgy of Star Wars, was that films targeted directly at children could be extremely lucrative at the box office, beyond profit margins to which they had become accustomed. Movies were no longer mostly the artistic or escapist purview of an audience comprised largely of adults. Their children came to be seen as a previously under-exploited source of bonanza profits. Lastly, movie studios began to rethink their conventional economic model, which was to produce modestly-budgeted films and reliably make modest profits. What Star Wars ignited was a phenomenon known as the blockbuster mentality, a hunger for epic profits from so-called event films, on which the studios became willing to gamble heretofore-unprecedented sums of money in hopes of hitting the proverbial jackpot. George Lucas, who began his career as a subversive filmmaker of eccentric tastes with critically acclaimed films such as THX-1138 and American Graffiti, unwittingly created a perfect storm that turned the film industry on its head. Star Wars was no fluke, as it turned out, and it was not long before the greedy capitalistic corporate culture of the 1980s began entertaining, no pun intended, the notion that film studio and television networks could be glamorous cash cows. In short order, huge companies whose core business usually had nothing to do with the entertainment industry were battling it out to see who could get into show business the fastest. Coca-Cola acquired movie studio Columbia/Tri-Star, which was later sold to Japanese electronics giant Sony; General Electric acquired the NBC television network; Capital Cities acquired the ABC Television network, and News Corporation acquired 20th Century Fox and the Fox Broadcasting Company; Gulf + Western acquired Paramount Pictures, etc. The unfortunate side effect of these mergers was the infusion of bottom-line, short-term profit-hungry thinking, as well as corporate models of branding and marketing products. These large corporations viewed films and television shows, and the intellectual properties that underlied them, as products, pure and simple, no different from mouthwash, shoes, soda drinks, or cosmetics. They expected their new acquisitions to transition from being art-focused and letting profits flow from quality, to simply making whatever sold the most tickets and had the most lucrative ancillary market potential. There was no single identifiable point, such a historical date or a press conference, when the critical link between art and commerce was separated, or the historical deference of profit to art was inverted (themselves postmodern phenomena, incidentally), but the entrà ©e of comic books into the world of film and television, which has become a powerful, dominating presence of comic books in film and television, followed and was directly related to this paradigm shift in the economics of the entertainment industry. The adaptation of comic books into film and television properties has been an exercise in creative cannibalism in some sense. Increasingly, film and television studios have taken on the risk-averse mentality of their corporate masters, and one of the effects of this has been to seek out intellectual property that might guarantee the fiscal success of a film or television show adaptation of said property. To the extent that a wildly successful book was often adapted for films geared towards adults, wildly successful comic book series were seen as a surefire way to guarantee a teen audience and the disposable income purchasing power of them and their parents. Movie executives sought to acquire the rights to comic book characters and stories which they could exploit – actual film industry terminology – and build into franchises – also actual film industry terminology, particularly creepy given the obvious parallels to McDonalds or Gap store franchise business models. For the most part, these franchises have been wildly successful from a financial point of view, though perhaps not from an artistic standpoint. There have been six Batman films made by Warner Brothers movie studio (owned by corporate behemoth AOL Time Warner, who not coincidentally own DC Comics, the original home of the Batman characters and comic books): 1989s Batman, 1992s Batman Returns, 1995s Batman Forever, 1997s Batman and Robin, 2004s Catwoman, and 2005s Batman Begins. Each film sported star casting of the highest caliber; however, perhaps with the exception of the first film, were special effects showcases first and artistically ambitious second, if at all. Nor were they particularly true to the time-honored complexities and lingering darkness of the comic books. Iconic film critic Roger Ebert (a devoted fan of the Batman comic books), in his review of Batman and Robin, took a forlorn swipe at each of the films to date: †¦ my delight began to fade at about the 30-minute mark when it became clear that this new movie, like its predecessors, was not *really* going to explore the bizarre world of its heroes, but would settle down safely into a special effects extravaganza. Batman Robin, like the first three films in the series, is wonderful to look at, and has nothing authentic at its core†¦ Watching it, I realized why it makes absolutely no difference who plays Batman: Theres nobody at home†¦ Give the foreground to the characters, not the special effects. And ask the hard questions about Bruce Wayne. (Ebert, 1997) Eberts last line refers to the perennial rumors that perennial bachelor Bruce Wayne might actually be a homosexual, or failing that, possess some unusual sexual fetishes that might not comprise the sort of fare that young children should be seeing at the movie theatre or on DVD. But this topic, as well as any serious exploration of Bruce Waynes psyche, was not been considered particularly lucrative by the marketing machines at Warner Brothers until the franchise was on the verge of death after the box office mediocrity of Batman and Robin and the outright box office disaster of Catwoman, which cost $85 million (U.S.) to produce and only made $40 million (U.S.) at the box office. 2005s Batman Begins was an unapologetically dark and complex film. Roger Eberts review may well have spoken for many Batman fans who ached for more substance and less pure style: The character resonates more deeply with me than the other comic superheroes, perhaps because when I discovered him as a child, he seemed darker and more grown-up than the cheerful Superman. He has secrets. As Alfred muses: Strange injuries and a nonexistent social life. These things beg the question, what does Bruce Wayne do with his time? (Ebert, 2005) Apparently, the moviegoing audiences agreed with Mr. Ebert, rewarding Warner Brothers with $205 million (U.S.) in box office receipts in the United States alone, and a similar – and still increasing – tally worldwide. The lesson here is that while an artistically unambitious and shallow film like Batman and Robin, which is more childish cartoon and marketing machine than serious filmmaking, can certainly turn a modest profit, it is entirely possible to be artistically ambitious and make plenty of money at the same time. One wonders why the latter is more often the exception rather than the rule, to the detriment of the integrity of comic books and their rich characters. In theory, the adaptation of comic books to the film and television arenas could have been a boon to not only the comic book industry, but a force for cultural good in the sense of spreading the subversive word to a larger audience. While there is no question that American and Western teenagers are far more aware of Batman and The X-Men than they were 30 years ago, the expansion of the audience has come at a price. First of all, the structures of film and television do not generally lend themselves well to the sort of narrative complexity that is a hallmark of comic books ongoing multi-character storylines. While the two X-Men films to date were generally well-received by fans of the comic books, many fans vociferously complained that many characters were either simply not included in the storylines, or they were altered to suit Hollywood norms in order to maximize audience appeal. While a third X-Men film is in the works, the simple truth is that 20th Century Fox, the movie studio that produced the films, simply cannot make any more than one X-Men film every two to three years and the complicated narrative history of over a dozen characters unspoiled over the course of 40 years of storytelling simply cannot be done adequate justice by a two-hour movies – as good as they may be – which get released only periodically. Secondly, for many young people, seeing an X-Men or Batman film may be their very first exposure to these universes, and depending on their reaction to the quality of the films and their natural consumer predilections, it is not certain that these teenagers are going to seek out the more dimensionalized, rich, and complex narrative universes to be found within the comic book series. In fact, given the immense popularity of video games among teenagers, who as a general rule spend as much, if not more time transfixed by their Playstations and Xboxes than they do reading, it is more likely that teenagers who see X-Men films will buy the video game adaptations of the X-Men comic books instead of investing in the comic books themselves. The statistics bear this out: in 2004, sales of comic books in the U.S. totaled $300 million – a considerable sum of money, but a far cry from the $850 million sum reached ten years earlier. Comic book money had, for better or for worse, flowed away from the comic books themselves and into the reinventions of the comic books – the movies, the video games. It is unfair, perhaps, to dismiss video games as worthless, but also difficult to avoid the conclusion that the X-Men video game, which is simply a violent combat simulation featuring the various mutant characters, carries more artistic and social worth than the comic books to which the video game owes its digital existence. Lastly, the value of ancillary X-Men merchandise, such as T-shirts, lunchboxes, and plastic soda cups from Burger King adorned with X-Men characters, is fleeting and thus fairly dubious in comparison to the lasting collectors item value of the comic books themselves, to say nothing of the inherent worth of the content of the books, and the visual and narrative artistry contained within them. Ultimately, and sadly, the postmodern machinery of consumer capitalism has appropriated comic book visuals and narratives and separated them from their inherent artistic value in order to make them both more appealing to a mainstream audience, usually children and younger teens, and more exploitable in terms of ancillary markets such as merchandising. The positive side of this equation is that the subversive art and storytelling found in comic books was brought to a larger audience, but may well have been eviscerated of its soul in the process. Films like Batman Begins, with its dark exploration of the recesses of Bruce Waynes psychology, and X-Men 2, with its unapologetic homosexual allegories, do their source material adequate justice and make their corporate masters a lot of money in the process. What can be hoped for the future is that movie studios see fit to release more films such as these and less of the vapid, lowest-common denominator special effects orgies that tend to predominate the box office landscape. Hellraiser and Constantine were met with outright hostility by fans of their comic book source material and performed poorly at the box office. It is no longer enough to simply adapt a comic book to guarantee success. Many audience members have grown more shrewd and sophisticated, and demand quality in storytelling. In the words of Nightcrawler in the film X-Men 2, â€Å"Most people will never know anything beyond what they see with their own two eyes.† If this is true in a world where what is put before the eyes of teenagers is predominated by movies and video games, it is imperative that the content not merely reflect the status quo desired by consumer capitalism, but the thought-provoking stories and characters, daring and subversive thoughts, first brought to us decades ago in the best comic books. BIBLIOGRAPHY Sabin, Roger. Comics, Comix Graphic Novels A History of Comic Art. Phaidon Press, 1996. Robinson, Jerry. The Comics: An Illustrated History of Comic Strip Art. Putnam Publishers, 1974. Wertham, Fredric. Seduction of the Innocent. Amerion Publishers, 1954 (Reprint 1996). Tuzi, Marino. â€Å"Individualism and Marginality: From Comic Book to Film: Marvel Comics Superheroes† College Quarterly, Spring 2005 Volume 8 Number 2. Taken from: htt History of Artist Expression in Comic Books History of Artist Expression in Comic Books Comic books, like many art forms, have been co-opted by a hungry consumer capitalist economy which makes a Faustian bargain with its artistic meals: give me your subversive art forms and ideas, this economy says, and I will communicate them to a mass audience beyond your wildest dreams; however, in exchange, your art forms and ideas will often simultaneously be stripped of their dignity and uniqueness by becoming products of no less ubiquity and no more value than toothpaste – mere tools to sell, sell, sell, and make more, more, more money for gigantic multinational corporations. This phenomenology is the ultimate in postmodern recontextualization, the stripping of an objects original meaning and significance, and its endowment with a new purpose either heretofore considered or deemed ethically, morally, or artistically acceptable. We shall explore the unique nature and popularity of comic books, and the themes presented in their narratives and characters, as a quasi-underground phenomenon whose ever-increasing popularity from the 1940s to the 1980s left them perfectly positioned to be gobbled and turned into movies and merchandise by giant corporations eager to both exploit the devotees of comic books and expand their numbers. What has been the big deal, historically, about comic books? Though they are primarily a postmodern phenomenon localized in the latter half of the 20th century through to the present, their roots go as far back as the 17th century, when the English mass-produced woodcuts depicting ghastly public executions. Comics first reached mass popularity in the United States in the 1930s in the form of newspaper comics; then, the comic book as a separate, thriving, and sophisticated art form began to evolve from there. â€Å"The comic book has been one of our most familiar, yet least appreciated, popular art forms. As vehemently criticized as it is passionately defended†¦ [it is] a graphically sophisticated and culturally revealing medium.† (Sabin, 1996, p.1). After roughly a decade of occupying a comfortable place in the American pop culture mainstream, comics, and then comic books, began to take to reflect a less sanguine view of American society. Violent crime comics began to appear, and the more squeaky-clean comics of the 1930s and during World War II absorbed some of these same themes. In the so-called Silver Age of Comic Books, the 1950s through the 1970s, most characters and narratives began to take on a darker and more complex tone, mostly in response to plummeting sales after World War II that reflected an unsettled cultural undercurrent brewing in America. In this initial countercultural heyday of the 1950s and 1960s, comic books were sometimes dismissed, much like rock-and-roll music, as the juvenile, unsophisticated, and pulpy fantasies of hormone-addled adolescents. Sometimes, however, comic books were labeled as cultural filth that was an ongoing threat, destructive to teenage minds. In 1954, right-wing American psychiatrist Dr. Frederic Wertham published a book called Seduction of the Innocent, which was an all-out assault on the ostensible delinquency-inducing content of comic books, and which singled out Batman for special criticism, claiming â€Å"a subtle atmosphere of homoeroticism.† (Wertham, 1954, p. 189). Werthams criticism of comic book content led to the establishment of a censor organization known as the Comic Code Authority that same year, whose heavy-handed influence forced comic book writers and artists to go somewhat underground with their subversive themes. However, Batman (and Robin, whatever his relationship with Batman may or may not have been) has far outlived both Dr. Wertham and the chilling effect of his book, and in fact, the longevity and deceptively complex content of comic books have proven them to be much more powerful than anyone ever dreamed. They have for decades embodied striking artistic expressions of artists and authors, who collectively spoke for countless millions of young people who did not quite fit in to the mainstream of society. These millions were given voice by comic books such as The X-Men, The Incredible Hulk, The Amazing Spider-Man, from the Marvel Comics Company, and Batman and Superman from the DC Comics Company. Each of the aforementioned titles tells an extended set of stories about a character or characters who are misfits of some kind, whether it be physical, psychological, or emotional, and who take on a variety of preternatural and/or superhuman characteristics which allow them to not only address their own personal struggles with their differences from others in society, but to aid society itself in coming to better accept those who are different; or, alternately, the characters are either born with or afflicted by a condition which makes them a misfit and therefore different from others in society, and must adapt to life as such. These comic book stories generally involve a variety of morality plays, ranging from simple good vs. evil, to the exploration of antiheros, that enable the characters to attempt to effect positive change in the world, and provide both catharsis and inspiration for the readers. The X-Men, for example, were created by legendary comic book author Stan Lee and artist Jack Kirby in 1963. They were /are a group of teenagers born with genetic mutations that have endowed them with a variety of superhuman characteristics, not all of which are necessarily constructive. In the Lee/Kirby universe, the X-Men are widely ostracized and discriminated against not only because they are different, but because non-mutant humans fear the X-Men are the next logical, superior step in human evolution and therefore could render normal humans obsolete. The teenagers stories often involved them attempting to come to terms with their powers and how to fit into the so-called normal human society. The X-Men were comprised of such characters as Iceman, a young man who could freeze objects at will; Wolverine, a foul-tempered young man whose skeleton is laced with a nearly indestructible metal alloy, including metal knives which he could extend and retract from his hands at will, albeit with considerable pain; Storm, a young black female who could control the weather, including the ability to summon storms at will; Nightcrawler, a young male born with blue fur who could become virtually invisible at night and teleport short distances; Cyclops, who could shoot beams of pure solar energy from his eyes, but not always control this power; Rogue, a young female possessing the hyper-empathic ability the feelings, memories, and abilities of other beings she touches —unfortunately, however, prolonged contact with others can weaken or kill them; Magneto, an older male survivor of the Nazi death camps who can manipulate magnetic forces, but whose psyche was so twisted by his experience at the hands of the Nazis that he has become an arch-nemesis of the X-Men; and Professor Xavier, an older male paraplegic with amazing telepathic abilities and a world-class intellect, who has dedicated his life to mentoring other mutants and defending them from themselves, unsympathetic humans, and the perennial machinations of Magneto. The X-Men and their stories were unabashedly allegorical and subversive in nature, content, and theme. Professor Xavier was modeled after civil rights activist Martin Luther King, Jr. and Sir Francis Xavier, Catholic missionary and founder of the Jesuit order. The sense of loneliness and isolation experienced by Rogue was a reflection of the near-universal teenage experience. The bigotry and intolerance of homosexuals is another allegorical component featured with the X-Men narratives, particularly in the film adaptations directed by openly gay Bryan Singer. In X-Men 2, the character of Bobby Drake characters comes out of the closet as a mutant to his parents, prompting them to ask if he has tried not being a mutant, parodying the oft-heard question of parents directed their gay children. Anti-Semitism, personal alienation, anti-Communist paranoia, and racism are also allegorical themes that X-Men comic narratives have explored in detail. And like The X-Men, Batman, Spiderman (also a Stan Lee creation), The Incredible Hulk and Superman all were dependent upon and explored the themes of what it meant for a person to be forced to hide or to be ashamed of a component of his or her true self, or to lead a dual existence – one private and personal, one public. Superman (created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster), known by millions as a mild-mannered reporter, socially maladroit nerd, and bearer of an unrequited love for Lois Lane, who happens to be a near-omnipotent superhero when called upon in extraordinary circumstances, is the perfect embodiment of both teenage reality and teenage wish fulfillment. The Incredible Hulk (another Stan Lee creation) gets angry like all of us, but has real power – scary power, often – to do something about it thanks to hi s green steroidal transformation. Batman (created by Bob Kane and fleshed out by Bill Finger and Jerry Robinson) lives a quiet, dark life of solitude contrasted with public works of enviable nobility and good. These feelings of powerlessness and awkwardness, combined with empowerment fantasies, were and continue to be direct reflections of the collective concerns of millions of young people, and perhaps many adults, as well – how to fit into a society that demanded conformity without losing the uniqueness that embodies ones individuality. Ironically, the collective popularity of all of these comic book titles has historically been so striking in terms of sales that it would not be an unfair question to wonder if it fact the teenage misfits who bought them were in fact the majority, not the minority in society. Comic book sales peaked in 1993 at a staggering $850 million (U.S. dollars) and are still very healthy, though currently, the popularity of comic book characters is as likely to be manifest in movie ticket and DVD sales of film adaptations of comic books as it is in comic book purchases. More on this later. The character archetypes and narrative themes of most of these original and ongoing comic book series were produced in the crucible of the fairly conformist sociocultural pressures of the modernist era in the United States. The teenagers of each successive decade, beginning with the 1950s and continuing to the present, have been characterized by isolation, disaffection, rebellion, disillusionment, all combined with the pressure to adapt without question to the relatively monolithic mores of the generation which preceded them, a generation for whom belonging to a larger social group, for whom the values of unquestioning self-sacrifice and acceptance of authority figures and establishment power structures were the norm. Men were called to duty, whether in World War II or in the burgeoning post-war corporate universe; many made the ultimate sacrifice – their lives, or worse, their souls. Women, too, had their duty – to support their men in discreet, subservient lives of quiet domestic efficiency. But as American young people began to question the assumptions behind the Cold War, and question the rational and wisdom behind the interminably bloody Vietnam War, their uncertainty on these issues led to a greater wholesale questioning of the mechanisms and assumptions of societys very foundations. (Even Batman, whose creation in 1940 arguably predates postmodernism, eventually took on countercultural subject matter and themes, to say nothing of the suggestion of a taboo homoeroticism in the relationship between Batman and Robin.) This rebellion was met with heavy disapproval and disappointment by parents, representing the previous generation. The ongoing schism between these two generations has caused huge cultural, social, and political conflicts that continue to be played out even in 2005. These conflicts have been vividly reflected in the artistic expressions of the times – literature, music, and films. From the standpoint of the older generations, comic books were perhaps never adequately understood, respected, or even recognized for the potent and unusual artistic and cultural forces that they have always represented certainly as potent as more conventional and commonplace means of artistic expression, high art and classical music, just to name two ossified examples. (And, incidentally, these generational clashes were not limited to the United States in terms of understanding the rise of the superhero comic books. The country of Japan, tiny as it is, has become its own powerhouse in terms of churning out groundbreaking styles of comics, such as Katsuhiro Otomo of Akira fame, reflecting generational struggles unique to the Japanese youth culture.) The artistic expressions that arose out of the clash between generations also represented an evolution in classifications and mechanisms of art itself – the evolution from modern art forms to postmodern art forms. Modern art, reflective of the cultures from which it sprung, was generally conformist, and adhered to classic rules of form, function, and design, and either explicitly or implicitly supported the symbols of establishment paradigms by exploiting binary oppositions of us vs. them (i.e., Americans vs. Communists). Postmodern art rejected the methodology of modern art on every level, deconstructing it to such an extent as to even question the basic psychological definitions of symbolism in human art forms. The discarding and combination of genres and forms, the pastiche of styles, the toying with unorthodox symbolism, and an active interest in subversion and smashing of establishment systems – rebellion itself are all manifestations of art evolving to postmodern form. And instead of existing to analyze, but ultimately reinforce the paradigms of patriarchal establishments, postmodern art analyzed and often sought to undermine these establishments and their conventions, if not destroy them altogether. As noted by postmodernism scholar Andreas Huyssen, â€Å"†¦contemporary postmodernism operates in a field of tension between tradition and innovation, conservation and renewal, mass culture and high art, in which the second terms are no longer automatically privileged over the first.† (Huyssen, 1986, p. 267). As such, any art form that has enjoyed longevity has internalized and incorporated this revolutionary and evolutionary process, or been discarded or fossilized. Comic books are no exception to this rule, and their staying power has manifested itself in the last 20 or so years by their translation to and eventual dominance of the genre of film. In fact, comic books in their Silver Age forms were arguably inherently post-modern in nature, as they combined complex and detailed visual artistry with complex and serialized narratives, an intermixing pastiche of separate genres which had never before been combined in such a unique form. Books had, of course, often featured illustrations in the past, but they were only to provide occasional support and dimensionalization of the narrative, as opposed to being as important a component of the medium as the narrative itself. The fantastical and stylized nature of many of the illustrations featured in comic books were often postmodern artistic explorations in their own right, seeking to push the boundaries of conventional illustrations. Their explorations of anti-heroes helped deconstruct the notion of simple constructs of good and evil. American consumer capitalism, which is inherently (though not necessarily benignly) postmodern in its relentless desire to commodify anything and everything, particularly that which can be packaged as new, hip, and edgy – and thus desirable – has hungrily devoured comic books and the films which come from them. In doing so, the artistic and societal merit of comic books, in particular their subversive characteristics, have become themselves subverted by the deity of consumer capitalist commodification. The ultimate dream, for example, of fans of the X-Men comic books, that their beloved misfit characters would reach movie theatres and therefore a larger audience for their collective angst, has come true but that dream has also become a nightmare for some fans, as these same subversive misfit X-Men have also become action figures, clothing lines, cartoons on the side of fast food lunch bags and boxes all mass marketed to mass audiences in order to maximize profits for corporations that are more interested in shareholder earnings than they are the artistic merit of airing the collective voices of disaffected teen angst. If the phenomenology of disaffected teen angst can be appropriated to make a profit from teenagers, then corporations will be chasing the teens and their money incessantly. However, corporate interest in teenagers as a demographic generally has little to do with sociocultural altruism. In fact, cultural observers should take heed – â€Å"ventilation of genuinely alternative social visions collide directly with the underpinnings of power in the economy at large. (Schiller, 1986, p. 152) The trade-off is as follows: as long as such ventilation of alternative social visions makes a profit, it will be tolerated. But in the consumer capitalist corporate universe of today, art for arts sake, particularly if the art does not reinforce the machinery of consumer capitalism, will never generate much more than limited enthusiasm, and is more likely to meet with insidious hostility. The primary perpetrators in this arena are the behemoth corporate conglomerates that own the media, and the acquisitive way in which they manage their film and television divisions. In the 1960s and 1970s, film studios and television networks existed as independent business entities whose sole focus was the creation of films and television shows – nothing more, nothing less. While these companies were undisputedly interested in profits, the process was far more artist-centered and quality-driven than they are today. The presumption was that quality films would result in box-office successes, though the expectations of profit were relatively modest compared to todays standards. Then, in 1977, a watershed moment in film history arrived in the form of the blockbuster Star Wars, a comic-bookish story in its own right despite being an original creation of writer/director George Lucas. The film was not only the most financially successful phenomenon in movie history, but it alerted movie studios to a whole new economic model, centered around the notion of ancillary profits. Most notably in the case of Star Wars, the ancillary profits came in the form of merchandising. Inexplicably, before the films release, executives at 20th Century Fox, the films distributor, were convinced the film would be a flop, and in contract negotiations with Lucas, acceded to his unusual request to receive 100% of profits derived from sales of merchandise inspired and/or derived from the film, for example action figures and lunchboxes. The Fox executives surely rued the day they signed over these rights to Mr. Lucas, as Star Wars merchandise generated $1 billion in profits for the shrewd filmmaker. Another lesson learned by Fox, and other studios hungry to recreate the fiscal orgy of Star Wars, was that films targeted directly at children could be extremely lucrative at the box office, beyond profit margins to which they had become accustomed. Movies were no longer mostly the artistic or escapist purview of an audience comprised largely of adults. Their children came to be seen as a previously under-exploited source of bonanza profits. Lastly, movie studios began to rethink their conventional economic model, which was to produce modestly-budgeted films and reliably make modest profits. What Star Wars ignited was a phenomenon known as the blockbuster mentality, a hunger for epic profits from so-called event films, on which the studios became willing to gamble heretofore-unprecedented sums of money in hopes of hitting the proverbial jackpot. George Lucas, who began his career as a subversive filmmaker of eccentric tastes with critically acclaimed films such as THX-1138 and American Graffiti, unwittingly created a perfect storm that turned the film industry on its head. Star Wars was no fluke, as it turned out, and it was not long before the greedy capitalistic corporate culture of the 1980s began entertaining, no pun intended, the notion that film studio and television networks could be glamorous cash cows. In short order, huge companies whose core business usually had nothing to do with the entertainment industry were battling it out to see who could get into show business the fastest. Coca-Cola acquired movie studio Columbia/Tri-Star, which was later sold to Japanese electronics giant Sony; General Electric acquired the NBC television network; Capital Cities acquired the ABC Television network, and News Corporation acquired 20th Century Fox and the Fox Broadcasting Company; Gulf + Western acquired Paramount Pictures, etc. The unfortunate side effect of these mergers was the infusion of bottom-line, short-term profit-hungry thinking, as well as corporate models of branding and marketing products. These large corporations viewed films and television shows, and the intellectual properties that underlied them, as products, pure and simple, no different from mouthwash, shoes, soda drinks, or cosmetics. They expected their new acquisitions to transition from being art-focused and letting profits flow from quality, to simply making whatever sold the most tickets and had the most lucrative ancillary market potential. There was no single identifiable point, such a historical date or a press conference, when the critical link between art and commerce was separated, or the historical deference of profit to art was inverted (themselves postmodern phenomena, incidentally), but the entrà ©e of comic books into the world of film and television, which has become a powerful, dominating presence of comic books in film and television, followed and was directly related to this paradigm shift in the economics of the entertainment industry. The adaptation of comic books into film and television properties has been an exercise in creative cannibalism in some sense. Increasingly, film and television studios have taken on the risk-averse mentality of their corporate masters, and one of the effects of this has been to seek out intellectual property that might guarantee the fiscal success of a film or television show adaptation of said property. To the extent that a wildly successful book was often adapted for films geared towards adults, wildly successful comic book series were seen as a surefire way to guarantee a teen audience and the disposable income purchasing power of them and their parents. Movie executives sought to acquire the rights to comic book characters and stories which they could exploit – actual film industry terminology – and build into franchises – also actual film industry terminology, particularly creepy given the obvious parallels to McDonalds or Gap store franchise business models. For the most part, these franchises have been wildly successful from a financial point of view, though perhaps not from an artistic standpoint. There have been six Batman films made by Warner Brothers movie studio (owned by corporate behemoth AOL Time Warner, who not coincidentally own DC Comics, the original home of the Batman characters and comic books): 1989s Batman, 1992s Batman Returns, 1995s Batman Forever, 1997s Batman and Robin, 2004s Catwoman, and 2005s Batman Begins. Each film sported star casting of the highest caliber; however, perhaps with the exception of the first film, were special effects showcases first and artistically ambitious second, if at all. Nor were they particularly true to the time-honored complexities and lingering darkness of the comic books. Iconic film critic Roger Ebert (a devoted fan of the Batman comic books), in his review of Batman and Robin, took a forlorn swipe at each of the films to date: †¦ my delight began to fade at about the 30-minute mark when it became clear that this new movie, like its predecessors, was not *really* going to explore the bizarre world of its heroes, but would settle down safely into a special effects extravaganza. Batman Robin, like the first three films in the series, is wonderful to look at, and has nothing authentic at its core†¦ Watching it, I realized why it makes absolutely no difference who plays Batman: Theres nobody at home†¦ Give the foreground to the characters, not the special effects. And ask the hard questions about Bruce Wayne. (Ebert, 1997) Eberts last line refers to the perennial rumors that perennial bachelor Bruce Wayne might actually be a homosexual, or failing that, possess some unusual sexual fetishes that might not comprise the sort of fare that young children should be seeing at the movie theatre or on DVD. But this topic, as well as any serious exploration of Bruce Waynes psyche, was not been considered particularly lucrative by the marketing machines at Warner Brothers until the franchise was on the verge of death after the box office mediocrity of Batman and Robin and the outright box office disaster of Catwoman, which cost $85 million (U.S.) to produce and only made $40 million (U.S.) at the box office. 2005s Batman Begins was an unapologetically dark and complex film. Roger Eberts review may well have spoken for many Batman fans who ached for more substance and less pure style: The character resonates more deeply with me than the other comic superheroes, perhaps because when I discovered him as a child, he seemed darker and more grown-up than the cheerful Superman. He has secrets. As Alfred muses: Strange injuries and a nonexistent social life. These things beg the question, what does Bruce Wayne do with his time? (Ebert, 2005) Apparently, the moviegoing audiences agreed with Mr. Ebert, rewarding Warner Brothers with $205 million (U.S.) in box office receipts in the United States alone, and a similar – and still increasing – tally worldwide. The lesson here is that while an artistically unambitious and shallow film like Batman and Robin, which is more childish cartoon and marketing machine than serious filmmaking, can certainly turn a modest profit, it is entirely possible to be artistically ambitious and make plenty of money at the same time. One wonders why the latter is more often the exception rather than the rule, to the detriment of the integrity of comic books and their rich characters. In theory, the adaptation of comic books to the film and television arenas could have been a boon to not only the comic book industry, but a force for cultural good in the sense of spreading the subversive word to a larger audience. While there is no question that American and Western teenagers are far more aware of Batman and The X-Men than they were 30 years ago, the expansion of the audience has come at a price. First of all, the structures of film and television do not generally lend themselves well to the sort of narrative complexity that is a hallmark of comic books ongoing multi-character storylines. While the two X-Men films to date were generally well-received by fans of the comic books, many fans vociferously complained that many characters were either simply not included in the storylines, or they were altered to suit Hollywood norms in order to maximize audience appeal. While a third X-Men film is in the works, the simple truth is that 20th Century Fox, the movie studio that produced the films, simply cannot make any more than one X-Men film every two to three years and the complicated narrative history of over a dozen characters unspoiled over the course of 40 years of storytelling simply cannot be done adequate justice by a two-hour movies – as good as they may be – which get released only periodically. Secondly, for many young people, seeing an X-Men or Batman film may be their very first exposure to these universes, and depending on their reaction to the quality of the films and their natural consumer predilections, it is not certain that these teenagers are going to seek out the more dimensionalized, rich, and complex narrative universes to be found within the comic book series. In fact, given the immense popularity of video games among teenagers, who as a general rule spend as much, if not more time transfixed by their Playstations and Xboxes than they do reading, it is more likely that teenagers who see X-Men films will buy the video game adaptations of the X-Men comic books instead of investing in the comic books themselves. The statistics bear this out: in 2004, sales of comic books in the U.S. totaled $300 million – a considerable sum of money, but a far cry from the $850 million sum reached ten years earlier. Comic book money had, for better or for worse, flowed away from the comic books themselves and into the reinventions of the comic books – the movies, the video games. It is unfair, perhaps, to dismiss video games as worthless, but also difficult to avoid the conclusion that the X-Men video game, which is simply a violent combat simulation featuring the various mutant characters, carries more artistic and social worth than the comic books to which the video game owes its digital existence. Lastly, the value of ancillary X-Men merchandise, such as T-shirts, lunchboxes, and plastic soda cups from Burger King adorned with X-Men characters, is fleeting and thus fairly dubious in comparison to the lasting collectors item value of the comic books themselves, to say nothing of the inherent worth of the content of the books, and the visual and narrative artistry contained within them. Ultimately, and sadly, the postmodern machinery of consumer capitalism has appropriated comic book visuals and narratives and separated them from their inherent artistic value in order to make them both more appealing to a mainstream audience, usually children and younger teens, and more exploitable in terms of ancillary markets such as merchandising. The positive side of this equation is that the subversive art and storytelling found in comic books was brought to a larger audience, but may well have been eviscerated of its soul in the process. Films like Batman Begins, with its dark exploration of the recesses of Bruce Waynes psychology, and X-Men 2, with its unapologetic homosexual allegories, do their source material adequate justice and make their corporate masters a lot of money in the process. What can be hoped for the future is that movie studios see fit to release more films such as these and less of the vapid, lowest-common denominator special effects orgies that tend to predominate the box office landscape. Hellraiser and Constantine were met with outright hostility by fans of their comic book source material and performed poorly at the box office. It is no longer enough to simply adapt a comic book to guarantee success. Many audience members have grown more shrewd and sophisticated, and demand quality in storytelling. In the words of Nightcrawler in the film X-Men 2, â€Å"Most people will never know anything beyond what they see with their own two eyes.† If this is true in a world where what is put before the eyes of teenagers is predominated by movies and video games, it is imperative that the content not merely reflect the status quo desired by consumer capitalism, but the thought-provoking stories and characters, daring and subversive thoughts, first brought to us decades ago in the best comic books. BIBLIOGRAPHY Sabin, Roger. Comics, Comix Graphic Novels A History of Comic Art. Phaidon Press, 1996. Robinson, Jerry. The Comics: An Illustrated History of Comic Strip Art. Putnam Publishers, 1974. Wertham, Fredric. Seduction of the Innocent. Amerion Publishers, 1954 (Reprint 1996). Tuzi, Marino. â€Å"Individualism and Marginality: From Comic Book to Film: Marvel Comics Superheroes† College Quarterly, Spring 2005 Volume 8 Number 2. Taken from: htt

Mean Spirit :: Essays Papers

Mean Spirit Our story takes place on an oil-rich Native American town, called Watona, on a reservation in Oklahoma. The course of the story extends from 1918 to the mid-twenties. There is a multitude of characters that accompany this story. One of the most important characters is Nola Blanket, a young teenager who is a full-blooded Osage Indian. She is a very delicate girl but still very strong. Her mother, Grace Blanket, is a very beautiful, well-liked young woman who is very outgoing and fun-loving. Belle Graycloud is a feisty, strong-willed Indian woman. She is well respected and is the commanding grandmother of her household. Her family is very close to the Blankets, who are distant cousins. Belle’s daughter, Lettie, is a close friend of Grace. Lettie’s lover, Benoit, is an Osage man that is married to Grace’s crippled sister, Sara Blanket; but he is more like a brother and caretaker to her than he is a husband. Michael Horse is the fire keeper of the Osage tribe, but he also writes in his spare time. He is an old man who observes everything around him and writes it down in his journals. Stace Red Hawk is a Sioux Indian that works for the FBI. He became a federal agent in hopes of helping the Native Americans and protecting them from being taken advantage of. John Hale is a tall, lanky white rancher and oilman. He is trusted by the Indians, and seems to be a generous and helpful person. Watona was a small Indian town that prospered due to the rich rivers of oil flowing beneath it. As part of the Dawes Act, each Indian was allowed to choose an allotment of land not already claimed by white Americans. Although the 160 acres of land per Indian seemed generous, the land was barren and dry. The government did not know, however, that black oil seeped up out of the earth, and many Indians became very wealthy because of their â€Å"worthless† pieces of land. As a result of the Indians’ wealth, hundreds of white businessmen, fortune-hunters, traders, thieves, and swindlers swarmed to the reservation to make cash. When Grace Blanket is murdered by John Hale on a warm summer morning, it is made to look like a suicide and the local law enforcement passes it off as such.

On His Blindness – John Milton

On His Blindness (Sonnet XIX) is a petrarchan sonnet about how Milton comes to terms with his loss of sight. The sonnet talks about how he looks for help with his blindness in religion, Milton was a devout Puritan. This strongly influenced Milton’s thinking, his family were often involved in many political and religious controversies. A lot of Milton’s writing was influenced by the Bible and Greek writers such as Homer. Milton follows the typical Petrarchan sonnet form of fourteen lines all in one stanza.This stanza is internally split into an octet (eight lines) – this usually asks a question, here it is Milton complains about his blindness and how he thinks it’s unfair for it to happen to him. The sestet (six lines) – answers the question asked in the octet, here Milton talks about how patience is a virtue. In the sestet there is a quote from the ‘Parable of Talents’, this emphasises Milton’s strong religious beliefs. It has an Iambic pentameter, five stressed then unstressed syllables.Milton uses the contrast of light and dark to understand his affliction ‘My light is spent’ this implies that his time with sight had run out. Alliteration is used ‘dark world and wide’ this emphasises Milton’s struggle to come to terms with his blindness. This contrast helps give an understanding of his blindness. There is a strong link to the ‘Parable of Talents’ Milton uses the Parable to guide him and give him encouragement to come to terms with his blindness. The extended metaphor on lines three to five which implies that being blind is something that Milton is ashamed of and doesn’t want others to know.Milton writes in the past tense which implies that he’s moved on from his issues and he has comes to terms with his blindness. The use of pre-modifiers ‘fondly ask’ to emphasis his problem. Compound sentences show how deep and complex his argument about his blindness is. Enjambment shows that his thoughts on his issue are continuous and that he doesn’t stop thinking about it. However caesuras are used which implies that he swaps from one thought to another quickly. Milton’s rhyming pattern of ‘ABBAABBACDECDE’ follows the typical Petrarchan sonnet form.The audience for this poem would typically have been a society which was ‘God-fearing’. At this time the church and religion was very influential and everyone had to attend church services. Therefore Milton’s audience was universal as everyone would seek approval from God as the most people had a strong belief in heaven and hell and would want God to look down on them positively to send them to heaven. In conclusion Milton used imagery such as metaphors and connotations to help us understand what he’s going through and the struggle he’s facing coming to terms with his blindness.

The Significance of Monuments essays

The Significance of Monuments essays Throughout the centuries many artists have constructed works of art to illustrate significant events, important people and beliefs of cultures. The Littlefield Memorial Fountain and Martin Luther King sculpture were both erected to convey the significant events of their time period. The location of both the Littlefield Fountain and the MLK sculpture help emphasize their importance. The Littlefield Fountain lays directly between the two most recognizable and renowned buildings in Austin, the Capital and the Tower. As one stands to look at the Fountain they can look beyond it to see the Tower and then directly behind them lays the Capital. The MLK statue stands in the middle of the East Mall, making it difficult for spectators to ignore its presence. The open space around the statue and the sidewalks leading up to it emphasizes its importance. Location in both these works of art plays a vital role in how the viewers appreciate them. The non-bronze elements in both works of art help give more meaning and better depict the significance the statues hold. The MLK statue rests on top of four cement blocks, which constructs a larger than life image. The height which he is portrayed at allows for a stronger feeling of admiration when looked upon. The shrub border and water fountains around the Littlefield Memorial enhance the visual appearance of the statue. The water which cascades down both sides towards the Littlefield Memorial brings the spectator to look directly at the statue. Also, the countropasto of the horses draws the spectator in to try and understand what is going on. Both the MLK and Littlefield Memorial statues are freestanding, but the MLK has several two dimensional characteristics as well. Around the base of the statue are four relief pictures which illustrate the quotes above them. These reliefss and non-bronze materials add texture to the sculptures and allow their viewers to see more than...

John Ray - An Evolution Scientist

John Ray - An Evolution Scientist Early Life and Education: Born November 29, 1627 - Died January 17, 1705 John Ray was born on November 29, 1627 to a blacksmith father and an herbalist mother in the town of Black Notley, Essex, England. Growing up, John was said to have spent a lot of time at his mothers side as she collected plants and used them to heal the sick. Spending so much time in nature at an early age sent John on his path to become known as the Father of English Naturalists. John was a very good student at Braintree school and soon enrolled at Cambridge University at the age of 16 in 1644. Since he was from a poor family and could not afford the tuition for the prestigious college, he worked as a servant to the Trinity College staff to pay off his fees. In five short years, he was employed by the college as a fellow and then became a full-fledged lecturer in 1651. Personal Life: Most of John Rays young life was spent studying nature, lecturing, and working toward becoming a clergyman in the Anglican Church. In 1660, John became an ordained priest in the Church. This led him to reconsider his work at Cambridge University and he ended up leaving the college because of conflicting beliefs between his Church and the University. When he made the decision to leave the University, he was supporting himself and his now widowed mother. John had trouble making ends meet until a former student  of his asked Ray to join him in various research projects that the student funded. John ended up making many trips through Europe gathering specimens to study. He conducted some research on anatomy and physiology of humans, as well as studied plants, animals, and even rocks. This work afforded him the opportunity to join the prestigious Royal Society of London in 1667. John Ray finally married at the age of 44, just before the death of his research partner. However, Ray was able to continue the research he started thanks to a provision in his partners will that would continue to fund the research they had started together. He and his wife had four daughters together. Biography: Even though John Ray was a staunch believer in the hand of God in the changing of a species, his great contributions to the field of Biology were very influential in Charles Darwins initial Theory of Evolution through Natural Selection. John Ray was the first person to publish a widely accepted definition of the word species. His definition made it clear that any seed from the same plant was the same species, even if it had different traits. He was also a fierce opponent of spontaneous generation and often wrote on the subject about how it was an atheists made up nonsense. Some of his most famous books cataloged all of the plants he had been studying over the years. Many believe his works to be the beginnings of the taxonomic system later created by Carolus Linnaeus. John Ray did not believe that his faith and his science contradicted each other in any way. He wrote many works reconciling the two. He supported the idea that God created all living things and then changed them over time. There were no accidental changes in his view and all were guided by God. This is similar to the current idea of Intelligent Design. Ray continued his research until he died on January 17, 1705.

TYCO Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

TYCO - Essay Example Lack of plan will leave leaders and staffs clueless on where the company is headed and what strategies are best get there. In order to highlight these statements, this paper will take a deeper look at planning function of management in Tyco International (Tyco). The first section will be a brief introduction to the business organization in order to fully recognize the issues that it faces. Secondly, this paper will identify and analyze the legal issues, ethics and corporate responsibility which have a profound impact on its planning function. Lastly, it will analyze three factors which influence its tactical, operational, strategic, and contingency planning. Tyco International is "is a highly diversified global company that provides thousands of products and services vitally important to residential and commercial customers" (Tyco 2008). The business organization's product line is diverse which range from electronic security and alarm monitoring to fire-fighting equipment and breathing apparatus, and from water purification and flow control solutions to galvanized steel tubes and armored wire and cable. The company is organized into five business segments namely ADT Worldwide, Fire Protection Services, Safety Products, Flow Control, and Electrical and Metal Products (Tyco 2008). The operation planning function of management in Tyco has always been influenced by the legal issues that can surface from the decision that it makes. It should be noted that being a prominent and one of the largest companies in the world, Tyco faced the legal implications of its actions as it is always under the scrutiny of its stakeholders including the government, its stockholders, and its customers. With its quest in conquering the global business arena by opening up operations in countries all over the world, Tyco maintains its commitment in adhering to the laws and regulations implemented in the geographical regions where it operates. The company has always considered upholding its legal standards through its adherence to the financial reporting standards which is set by the governing bodies. It should be noted that while large companies like Enron and HealthSouth faced legal battles in 2001-2003, Tyco retains its credibility by emphasizing its commitment to report its activi ties utilizing the preset standards (Tyco International 2008). In this, it can be seen that Tyco's initial plan to be successful in its operation by being mindful to the various legal constraints becomes visible. Until now, the legality of the operation of the company and its different processes is a primary concern in its planning activities. Ethics have also been an important part of the culture of Tyco which also becomes a tenet in its long-term and short-term plans. Through its commitment of upholding moral excellence among its directors and leaders, the business organization have had taken actions in order to eliminate dishonesty and abuse of power. It should be noted that during 2002, Tyco filed federal suit against its former executive president Mark Swartz and corporate counsel Frank Walsh for