Presentation of War in Literature | The Man He Killed and Dulce Er Decorum Est

Presentation of War in Literature | The Man He Killed and Dulce Er Decorum Est The Man He Killed by Thomas Hardy (1840-1928), and Dulce et Decorum est, by Wilfred Owen explore the theme of war, they both take similar views on life during and after the treacherous times that war created, and its lasting effects. However, the poets choose to display these feelings through their poetry in different ways. In Hardys poem, the poet adopts the person of a war veteran in the Boer war. The poem is about his actions in this war and their lasting effects. In Dulce Decorum est, the poet prefers to take a step back, he is not as directly involved as Hardy, yet he continues to get his message across very effectively by describing the horrors he witnessed. Though the poems were written in different wars the messages they portray are very similar as the poems do not divulge into the actual wars they were based on, but, instead on the inner dynamics of war on a whole. Wilfred Owen is known as being one of the most famous poets of the First World War. He wrote Dulce et Decorum Est while he served as a soldier in the appalling conditions of the trenches. Dulce et Decorum Est gives a distressing account of the futility of war, generated from his own personal experiences. It was composed during the summer of 1917 when Owen wrote a series of poems about the war. The preface to this collection was My subject is War, and the pity of War. This shows Owens view to war and his purpose for writing the poems was to show the disgusting horror that war created to an ill-informed and uneducated audience back at home in England. Though the war made Owen famous it ultimately led to his demise a year later. The Man He Killed by Thomas Hardy was written to express Hardys beliefs. Hardy felt that war was inhuman, he despised the heartlessness atrocity between men. The poem is specifically addressed to the Boer War, which Hardy was passionately against. The poem may seem very simple at first but in fact it is a very skilful one, it is hampered with irony and Hardy makes interesting use of colloquialism (writing in a conversational style). Hardy titled the poem The Man He Killed, in the third person. However, the poem is narrated in the first person. The person in the poem, the he in the title and I in the poem, is clearly a soldier of the Boer war attempting to explain and perhaps clarify the reasons to kill another man in battle. The short lines, simple rhyme scheme, and colloquial language make the poem almost like pleasant nursery rhyme as it is so simple and easy to read, however, this is an ironic contrast to its less than pleasant subject. In Dulce et decorum est, Owen is showing how the press and public at home were comforting themselves in the belief that all the young men dying in the war were dying noble, heroic deaths. Owen on the other hand, shows how the reality was quite different; the young men were dieing horrible and obscene deaths in the trenches. I believe that Owen wanted to open the eyes of the reader to what was really going on in the war to illustrate how vile and inhumane war really is. The first line sets the tone for the rest of the poem Bent double, like old beggars under sacks. He uses the simile like old beggars to show how the average soldier was not being treated nobly or with respect but like someone the lowest class (a beggar). It also shows how the young, vibrant boys who signed up had the life taken out of them by the war and were becoming old well before it was their time. This put the reader in the right frame of mind about the war, it casts out any false pretences they had about the war and opens their eyes to the inhumane truth war created. He uses bitter imagery like coughing like hags and But limped on, blood shod. All went lame; all blind; Drunk with fatigue to show how these apparent youthful and strong men had been broken by the war and become prematurely old and weakened. Owen takes pity on these tired and weary soldiers as he describes them in the most unglamorous, inglorious manner. Similarly, in The Man He Killed, Hardy also banishes a common misconception about war, that killing a man was a dignified and noble thing to do. In the first stanza Hardy establishes that things could have been different in more favourable circumstances between him and his foe: Had he and I but met they could have had a drink together By some old ancient inn. However, in the second stanza, Hardy shows the true circumstances in which they did meet, which is in stark contrast to the first stanza. Ranged as infantry Hardy once again reemphasises the point that the men are not natural foes but have been ranged, which means that they have been set against each other by someone elses decision. The phrase as he at me indicates they are both in similar situations. This tells the reader how your foe may have been your friend in indifferent circumstances but because someone higher has said they are your enemy means you must kill them, in essence you must banish your own moral and personal view s on the person you are about to kill because someone has told you, falsely, it is your duty to kill them. Like Owen, Hardy takes pity on the soldiers, as it is not their fault, as he shows it is kill or be killed in war. In The Man He Killed, Hardy also exhibits the dark side of man, especially his capacity for violence and cruelty. He does this in the last stanza where concludes with a repetition of the contrast between his treatment of the man he killed and how he might have shared hospitality with him in other circumstances, Youd treat, if met where any bar is, or even been ready to extend charity to him Or help to half a crown. Before this he says that war is quaint and curious, as if to say war was is bit of a harmless puzzle. This may give the impression that war is undamaging and acceptable, but as the reader now knows from the events described in the poem and the knowledge he already has of war, make it clear that Hardy applies this phrase quaint and curious with great irony, knowing full well that this statement is far from the truth. It forces the reader, through Hardys irony, to divulge deeper into the ethics behind war and the brutality and inhumanity it creates, and to consider how human s are often victims of sheer circumstance and fate, which has lead them to take another persons life. Hardy has very cleverly through colloquial language and simple statements, made the reader think as though they have made a judgment of whether war is right or wrong on their own, when really Hardy has inconspicuously made that decision for them. Furthermore, Owen also shows how war has changed man into a killing beast. He concentrates on the use of mustard gas, a new devastating weapon used in the First World war. If inhaled without the protection of a mask, the gas quickly burns away the lining of the respiratory system. Owen shows this as he compares the soldier who has breathed in the toxic fumes with a man consumed in fire or lime. When you have breathed in the fumes, it is of often compared with drowning, as mustard gas effectively drowns people in the blood from their own lung tissues. Owen then skilfully uses a metaphor to tie into the drowning theme as he says As under a green sea, I saw him drowning. This was because Mustard gas had a green colour, he calls it a sea to show how it was impossible to get away from. Owen continues this aquatic theme as he views this floundring man as if through an underwater mask, Dim through the misty panes. This gives the impression that Owen was unable to fully access the situation through his gas mask, there is also a helplessness felt by Owen as there is nothing he can do, which adds to the surreal and nightmarish atmosphere of the poem, in all my dreams, before my helpless sight. This dream then becomes a harsh reality as the guttering, choking soldier plunges at the helpless speaker, seeking help, in an effort to escape his inevitable death, Owen uses triple emphasis to engrave this astringent image in the readers head. Owen can do nothing for the man; there is still a feeling of responsibility and guilt. This vivid imagery creates a bleak image in the readers mind, Owen is trying to make them question whether the suffering and torture created by war is really worth it. His despair at war and the loss of morals it results in are shown in phrase sores on innocent tongues, as Owen realizes that this soldier, though he is fighting in a war, is innocent and there was no reason for him to die in this way. Owen then uses alliteration to further emphasize the inh umanities man does to man by describing the soldiers slow death, he repeats initial consonant sounds in closely related words wagon, watch, white, writhing. Owen then continues to use bitter imagery combined with similes such as, Like a devils sick of sin to describe the soldiers dying face. This exceptionally dramatic imagery creates a lasting and distressing impression on the reader, as Owen reveals the true horrors that go on during times of war. In The Man He Killed, Hardy illustrates that the reason for killing a man because they are your foe is not good enough. This is shown in the third stanza. The colloquial style Hardy uses enables him to repeat the word because, when he is trying to justify the reason for killing the man, implying hesitation, and therefore doubt as he doesnt know why he killed him. He uses repetition of my foe and the of course this also shows that there is an element of doubt as the speaker tries to convince himself of his justification for the killing. Hardy has already made it clear that the men fighting each other because of an artificial hostility created by others. He adds at the end of the stanza Thats clear enough which is obviously ironic, as the reason for killing is far from clear to the reader because of the reasons above. The last word of the stanza although ultimately destroys the whole entire believability of the reason he has just given. I believe the main point of this poem is to show that there is never a good enough reason to kill another man. Hardy shows this through illustrating how these men would have been friends if they had met under different circumstances yet because someone has said they were there enemy this was a good enough reason to take the other persons life, thus showing how war is a pointless and frivolous act. On the other hand, in Dulce et Decorum est, Owen in not against the reasons why soldiers are killing each other but the fact that these young, innocent and possibly naive men were signing up based on the belief that it is sweet and fitting to die for your country (which is Dulce et decorum est the title of the poem in Latin). At the end of the last stanza, Owen sums up the poem. Owen speaks directly to reader calling the reader my friend, this draws the reader into the poem. He says you would not tell with such high zest, to say directly to the reader that if they had witnessed the horror that he had witnessed then the readers attitude towards the war would change. Therefore, the reader would not repeat patriotic slogans to make people sign up, To children ardent for some desperate glory. The title of the poem Dulce et decorum est is used with a certain sense of irony as the poem is all about how it is not sweet and fitting to die for your country. However, Owen abandons this irony a nd just says The old Lie, showing how more soldiers will die in the circumstances of the fallen soldier in this poem, if the reader continues to spread that lie to young men who have been blinded by this sense of patriotic duty to their country. The final line brings about the full chilling effect of the poem Pro patria mori: to die for ones country. Owen shows how people are signing up to the war on lies like Dulce et decorum est, however, this is far from the truth as nobody deserves to suffer the fate of the fallen soldier in the poem for their country. Within Dulce et Decorum Est the poet utilises a variety of powerful poetic devices in order to depict death in war as a brutal and horrifying experience. It is through the use of this simile that the poet arouses the sympathy of the responder as they witness the grotesque nature of such a death. In Dulce et Decorum est Owen masterfully uses a variety of potent poetic devices to depict the horrifying nature of death in a war to stimulate a response from the reader. He uses metaphors and similes to provoke sympathy for the people who were dying in the war, as the reader witnesses the grotesque death of the soldier who died in the poem. By doing this Owen portrays his message in a very bold and tasteful way. In The Man He Killed Hardy uses a colloquial style of writing combined with an ABAB rhyme scheme, this makes the poem very easy to read and long lasting. Hardy uses slang to get the reader involved in the poem, this allows Hardy to make a strong point in highlighting the irony behind how war can turn friend into foe simply by association and sway the reader against war. Both poems are against war and the reasons and ethics behind them. Though Hardy uses a more direct approach to get his point across, both poems successfully complete the objective that the poets had for them , which was to open the readers eyes to the true reality of war.

Religion Versus Science in The Scopes Monkey Trial :: American America History

Religion Versus Science in The Scopes Monkey Trial   Ã‚  Ã‚   The stage was set in Dayton, Tennessee.   The leading actor in this show was a twenty five-year-old science teacher named John T. Scopes. Scopes was under the direction of advancing America.   The playbill read The Scopes â€Å"Monkey† Trial.   In 1925 John T. Scopes was encouraged to challenge the Butler Law.   This law had been passed by a small town in Dayton, Tennessee to prohibit teaching contra to those in the Bible. Teaching from an evolutionary text, Scopes broke the law and gained the attention of the National media.   The concentration of the media on the Scopes Trial effectively presented the contrasting ideas of a religious town and an evolving country.   Ã‚  Ã‚   The town in Dayton, Tennessee was both religious and stable.   People in this town were seen holding signs marked with the command to â€Å"Read Your Bible† (Ginger 93). The inhabitants here had adopted the teachings of the Bible in order to feel secure within a time of change.   â€Å"In rural areas, particularly in the South and Midwest, Americans turned to their faith for comfort and stability† (Scopes 12).   The town would hold on to what they knew.   People in Dayton had no desire to travel forward with the roaring twenties.   William Jennings Bryan was the leading defender of the Butler Law as well as heading the prosecution. Bryan was determined to defend as literally true every word of the Bible.   In the deepest sense, he had to defend it; he needed reassurance and certainty, and since childhood had learned to rely on the Bible as the source of reassurance and certainty.   (Ginger 41).   Bryan would be the leader to a people who held on to religion and the past.   Ã‚  Ã‚   In contrast to this small town were the advancing views of America.   The twenties continued to roar towards modernism.   â€Å"Breakthroughs in technology, the increase in material wealth, and the beginning of an empire seemingly heralded the upward march of civilization, with America on the forefront† (Dumenil 6).   In all directions, it was clear that America was moving forward.   Transportation was a prime example of this advancement.   Innovator Henry Ford introduced his â€Å" Ford Miracle† to the public (Dumenil 6).   Economies and the social values also began to advance.   â€Å"Dubious get-rich-quick schemes and fads†¦contributed to a tone of feverish frivolity† (Dumenil 7).   People began to lead fast paced lives with the desire to become rich, quickly.

The Importance of Promoting Equality, Diversity and Inclusion in Schools

Written Assessment #2 in Unit 204 (2. 3, 2. 4, 2. 5, 3. 1) The follow assessment will have a brief description of the importance of inclusion and inclusive practices in work with children and young people. And it also contains an exploration of how our own attitudes, values and behaviour may lead to that inclusive practice, how to challenge discrimination and how to promote some important anti-discriminatory and inclusive practices. First of all is important to define what is meant by inclusion and inclusive practice. Inclusive practice is a process of identifying, understanding and breaking down barriers that compromise the children participation in their educational process, in their feeling of belonging and in their wellbeing in the school. Inclusion is about ensuring that all children, with or without disability and no matter their background, are able to participate in all education aspects in school. As teaching assistants, we have the duty to ensure that, at all the time, we promote inclusion in all school settings. Therefore, we should encourage good practices that will help to achieve this main principle of inclusion. Our own attitudes, values and behaviour could be fundamental to achieve this goal. The policies and procedures are in schools to be taken and we should show them, not only on some notice boards, displays and posters or in casual activities such cultural annual events, but also, through the every day contact with groups of children and young people. Our day basis conduct is important to show and teach the children how to promote equality and inclusion, how to avoid prejudice, racist behaviour and discrimination and, how to be better person, respectful and tolerant with others. As role models we are, at all time, an example for them, so we should keep up a good conduct and a positive practice, demonstrating with our own attitudes, values and behaviour that we prize kindness, justice, equality and mutual respect. If we show the children a disrespectful example towards the others that are considered different or if we don’t have convenient practices, they will assimilate that, and that is not what is expected in a school and in a human being, in the first steps of their growing up stage and construction of personality. So is important that we, critically, self-assess our attitudes and values, to find out what is necessary to improve or to change, towards a better understanding of the school diversity, a better awareness of possible barriers and how to face them, in a way to promote inclusion on school environment. Not making suppositions about children and young people and have a wider knowledge about their backgrounds, interests, abilities, individual needs and positive attributes, will help us to provide more efficient, suitable and personalised support for them. Is also important, to take in to account, at all the time, the importance of that diversity and the ways to avoid discrimination. Schools (in their policies) and we, as component part of the school, have the duty to guarantee that, anti-discriminatory practice (and not discrimination), is promoted. We can promote anti-discriminatory practice by: being a good role model in everything we do; promoting children diversity and individuality; given equal opportunities to all; promoting children participation in the learning process; being aware that â€Å"every child matters† as an individual; having good expectations (and not prejudice or discrimination) of all children; supporting a positive ethos within the school; giving pupils the confidence and skills to challenge discrimination and, finally, evaluating the very same anti-discriminatory practices, so we keep up-dating the good practices. One of the good practices is to identify and challenge discrimination. Our duty is to support and protect children from discrimination. We should be aware when it happens and not ignore or excuse it. We should protect their rights. And by rights, we mean the right to be supported, comprehended and educated, towards what is expected, towards a good and fair conduct and towards a solid confidence, self-esteem and sense of mutual belonging. We should avoid situations where the child feels that is not supported, that is putted aside, that their needs are being ignored, that is inferior to others or is disappointed with our attitude. To be able to challenge discrimination we need to know well the school policy, procedures and practice. So, if we are confident about what is good practice, we’ll be able to deal better with discriminatory situations. Discrimination can be intentional or due to lack of understanding and knowledge. Therefore, we should challenge discrimination by, addressing a person, explaining what has been said that is discriminatory and that this is not an acceptable behaviour, explaining what the causes of it are, and suggesting some ways to ensure anti-discriminatory practice, keeping, as far as possible, an assertiveness approach. In most cases, we should report to the authorities, such: a manager, supervisor or college tutor or even to the Local Authority (LA), when racist incidents occur. In conclusion, is important that we build up and practice good attitudes, values and behaviour in the school, because this will impact in the work with children and in the achievement of the school aims, values and policies. By promoting anti-discriminatory practice and doing an inclusive practice, we are promoting that every child: is not excluded, is valued, has a sense of belonging and have access to participation in the full educational program within a good school environment. As TA’s, is our responsibility to challenge discrimination and to avoid it. The school is the place where all students must have the same opportunities, but with different learning strategies, and by this we mean inclusive approach. An inclusive education encourages the children to be more tolerant, respectful (for our differences and equalities), more skilled, joyful and more independent, in school as pupils and in the society as citizens. I used the information in the follow PDF: http://www. google. co. uk/url? sa=t&rct=j&q=pdf%20how%20to%20challenge%20discrimination%20&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CEYQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww. pearsonschoolsandfecolleges. co. uk%2FFEAndVocational%2FChildcare%2FNVQSVQ%2FNVQSVQSupportingTeachingandLearning%2FSamples%2FLevel2STaLISsamplematerial%2FLevel2SupportingTeachingandLearninginSchoolsUnitTDA24sampl ematerial. pdf&ei=tUoFT9HPEomc8gP4yfCzAQ&usg=AFQjCNH7vnb_IgU2o_CZKzu5Ut2QubpREA

How to Prove De Morgans Laws

In mathematical statistics and probability it is important to be familiar with set theory. The elementary operations of set theory have connections with certain rules in the calculation of probabilities. The interactions of these elementary set operations of union, intersection and the complement are explain by two statements known as De Morgan’s Laws. After stating these laws, we will see how to prove them. Statement of De Morgan’s Laws De Morgan’s Laws relate to the interaction of the union, intersection and complement. Recall that: The intersection of the sets A and B consists of all elements that are common to both A and B. The intersection is denoted by A ∠© B.The union of the sets A and B consists of all elements that in either A or B, including the elements in both sets. The intersection is denoted by A U B.The complement of the set A consists of all elements that are not elements of A. This complement is denoted by AC. Now that we have recalled these elementary operations, we will see the statement of De Morgan’s Laws. For every pair of sets A and B (A  Ã¢Ë† © B)C AC U BC.(A U B)C AC  Ã¢Ë† © BC. Outline of Proof Strategy Before jumping into the proof we will think about how to prove the statements above. We are trying to demonstrate that two sets are equal to one another. The way that this is done in a mathematical proof is by the procedure of double inclusion. The outline of this method of proof is: Show that the set on the left side of our equals sign is a subset of the set on the right.Repeat the process in the opposite direction, showing that the set on the right is a subset of the set on the left.These two steps allow us to say that the sets are in fact equal to one another. They consist of all of the same elements. Proof of One of Laws We will see how to prove the first of De Morgan’s Laws above. We begin by showing that (A  Ã¢Ë† © B)C is a subset of AC U BC. First suppose that x is an element of (A  Ã¢Ë† © B)C.This means that x is not an element of (A  Ã¢Ë† © B).Since the intersection is the set of all elements common to both A and B, the previous step means that x cannot be an element of both A and B.This means that x is must be an element of at least one of the sets AC or BC.By definition this means that x is an element of AC U BCWe have shown the desired subset inclusion. Our proof is now halfway done. To complete it we show the opposite subset inclusion. More specifically we must show AC U BC is a subset of (A  Ã¢Ë† © B)C. We begin with an element x in the set AC U BC.This means that x is an element of AC or that x is an element of BC.Thus x is not an element of at least one of the sets A or B.So x cannot be an element of both A and B. This means that x is an element of (A  Ã¢Ë† © B)C.We have shown the desired subset inclusion. Proof of the Other Law The proof of the other statement is very similar to the proof that we have outlined above. All that must be done is to show a subset inclusion of sets on both sides of the equals sign.