Crucible Essays (499 words) - Salem Witch Trials, Arthur Miller

Crucible Arthur Miller, the son of a wealthy father who lost all of his money in the crash of 1929, quit school as a young child to support his family by holding several different odd jobs. From these jobs, Miller learned about the life of a simple man of America who became the highlight of many of his works (View from the Bridge, The Misfits). After working all of these odd jobs he finally discovered the value of literature. He convinced the University of Michigan to accept Miller as a student, even though he did have a full high school education. Miller paid his way through college by writing for a newspaper, and winning prize money from his writings. The book The Crucible was written with the average person in mind. This is because Arthur Miller had alot of interest in the common man. Because he worked many odd jobs trying to support his family, he could identify with the common man and the problems they were faced with. You can see Miller's concern for the common man in almost all of his plays. "Miller had associated himself with the common man so much that people thought that there might be the possibility of Miller being a communist" said Denis M. Calandra. You can also tell that Miller was gearing his style towards the common man by him actually telling you what he changed and the accuracy of the play, he also tells you what is going on through out the whole book. The book The Crucible was not a translation, compilation, or a revised edition. The book The Crucible was first published in the United States of America by the Viking Press in 1953, and then in 1964. The other dates that Viking Press published The Crucible are 1965 (twice), 1966, 1967, 1968 three times, 1969 (twice), 1970 (twice), 1971 (twice), 1972 (twice), 1973, 1974, 1975, and 1976. Then, in 1976 Penguin Books started publishing the book till 1986. The copyright dates on The Crucible are 1952, 1953, 1954, and the last copyright date was in 1981. Miller's style of writing, again, refers back to when he was a child and the way he grew up. His writing style is easy to understand due to the fact that he tried to focus on the common man and the fact that most of his life he was dealing with the common man. His writing was not pre-school reading level nor was it Harvard College reading level, it was right there in the middle. Miller was not your average writer, he was far more superior due to the fact that he understood the average man which makes him have a great writing style. Arthur Miller, the author of the book The Crucible, if you did not know yet was a prejudice writer. He is a prejudice writer due to the fact that he was always trying to support the average person no matter what. If there was a good rich person and a bad poor person Miller would probably be supporting the poor person or the lower middle class person because he once was poor or lower middle class.

Free sample - The Vulnerability of Innocence. translation missing

The Vulnerability of Innocence. The Vulnerability of InnocenceOne of the major themes depicted by Herman Melville is the vulnerability of innocence as well as how evil and innocence are contrasted and both of which are considered to be elemental human qualities. Naturally, Billy is presented as childlike; purely innocent who has no knowledge whatsoever concerning evil. On the other hand Claggart is a true replica of pure evil, which cannot be explained except only as blemished constituent of human nature. According to Melville, Claggart had â€Å"no power to annul the elemental evil in him, though readily enough he could hide it; apprehending the good, but powerless to be it; a nature . . . like the scorpion for which the Creator alone is responsible.† (Melville 16) Among the many queries raised in the narrative as to whether   true innocence can coexist among humanity or will it always be trampled by evil or driven to iniquity in the shape of aggravated response, such as Billy striking Claggart. By tolera ting innocence to be dreadfully overwhelmed in Billy Budd, Melville makes it apparent that evil still is still evident in the world and that innocence will forever have to fight against it (Parker 12). Captain Vere's is in a dilemma on whether to condemn Billy and have him hanged despite the fact that his logic that the young sailor is not guilty is caused by Vere's very nature. Captain Vere is exemplified throughout Billy Budd as a man who pays attention to his duty. Long before the appearance of Captain Vere, the complete depiction of the captain by Rights-of-Man minor character Captain Graveling predicts the more fundamental captain's problem. In his duty, the captain has always been faithful, to a point that the same duty had turned into an obligation. It is the "dryness" of duty that leads him to have a sense of detachment from feeling or perception. In the novel, duty is portrayed as a being intellectual rather than emotional. In addition, according to Wood Captain Vere is described as having "a marked leaning toward everything intellectual, and never tolerating an infraction of discipline." (Melville 11) He abides by the law and in return he expects his men to follow suit. Billy Budd does not characterize goodness as much as he does innocence, and the argument linking innocence and evil in this novel is diverse from the difference evident between good and evil. Through the narrator, we realize that Billy is not an idol in the conventional sense. Despite the fact that he has the appealing looks and casual outlook of the model Handsome Sailor, his significant characteristic is excessive gullibility, with no moral potency or audacity. Billy lacks a sufficient consciousness of good and evil to an aid him in choosing goodness willfully, leave alone champion it. For the reason that he is not able to identify evil when tackled by it, he eventually allows Claggart to drag him from being virtuous and into violence. Early in his life – as a handsome youthful popular sailor, Billy has the only wish of adjusting to the social life around him as well as being well liked. He assumes that no one has grounds to detest him. On the contrary, Claggart is full of deception, distrust, as well as wickedness, and he even infers Billy’s placidity as a treacherous pretense. Claggart seems to obliterate Billy on no particular grounds other than the latter’s innocence. Evil subsists to corrupt innocence, and even despite the fact that Billy kills Claggart; in a sense Claggart achieves a twofold victory over Billy in his own demise. It is Claggart’s actions that cause Billy to fall from both public and ethical grace by committing murder and Billy endure death as a consequence. Even though numerous characters in Billy Budd possess strong personal consciences; essentially, the individuals on the ship are not capable of trusting trust one another. Subsequently, life aboard the ship is administered by a stringent set of rules, and basically everybody trusts the rules and not the conscience honour of individual in order to ensure that law is maintained order. The distrust that the characters experience stems from the sagacity that evil is persistent and that Evil men such as Claggart seem to be lurking all over the place. Since it is not possible to know for sure whether people’s intents are good or evil, the evil men not only masquerade their own subtle designs, but they also ascribe evil intentions to others. Most conspicuously, Claggart misinterprets Billy’s intent in the soup-spilling occurrence and later plots his downfall (Wood 23). The Dansker realizes this sort of fraudulence all too well, and as a consequence, he acquires scepticism in his transactions with other people. The Dansker’s discretion may be construed in different ways, but one such conceivable interpretation is that he fails to take direct action against evil men because he fears the cost of facing up to evil directly, thus leaving other fine men like Billy to take care and protect themselves. He may signify people who occupy themselves with roles in order to fit into the social order, by no means totally standing-in on their own impulses and as well as creating a barrier between themselves and the outside world. In this particular reading, Dansker confront an impasse comparable to Vere’s. Initially the Dansker grows fond of Billy and even tries to help him, but he eventually gives up Billy to the paranoid, claustrophobic world of the ship, where men are detached from their own principles. In Billy Budd, men who deal with the law and men who face up to evil experience comparable consequences, signifying the dark vision that evil and the law are strongly connected (Levine 32). Melville is extremely fascinated in the ways in which culture forces citizens to restrain or limit their personality. When the warship Bellipotent hauls out the humble Billy from his previous ship, the Rights-of-Man, the metaphor is realistically explicit: society is supreme, it induces men into chipping in war, and in so doing it can readily allot with the rights of the personality. Captain Vere’s dilemma when dealing with Billy illustrated how culture requires the partition of one’s inner belief from one’s social commitment. In indicting Billy, Vere make a decision to follow the correspondence of the law, in spite of his own logic that Billy personifies decency and virtue. Feeling the strain of his position as a person in charge as well as with a responsibility to witness as the men obey the Mutiny Act, Vere forces himself to pay no attention to his own feelings about Billy’s condition and even goes a step ahead to urge the other jurors in the case to follow suit (34). The narrator’s aim seems to be that the desires of individuals are in general good and advantageous the whole society. Nevertheless, the result of the narrator’s story is more portentous. Even though the British war machine significantly benefits from the person eagerness and partisanship of its sailors, the more dominant the navy becomes, the further it is capable to smother individualism. Indeed, the harsh legislation of the Mutiny Act is passed to contain any additional murmurings of rebels. Melville seems to advocate that eventually, the individual’s effort to declare himself in the face of society will bear out futile.

An area of personal interest involving regulations and the air Research Paper - 1

An area of personal interest involving regulations and the air transportation industry - Research Paper Example Another point is that the United States air carrier should perform a safety audit of its foreign airline code-sharing to ensure they conform to international standards. The foreign carrier security program is checked to make sure the code-sharing flights will be conducted in accordance with the U.S. security measures (Larsen et al., 2012). The commercial airline has suffered mistakes from the past and learned from them so as to avoid repetition of the same mistakes and come up with sound aviation policy to correct them (Dempsey, & Gesell, 2013). According to Abeyratne (2011), the growing commercial changes in air transportation where more than two airlines are involved and use code sharing could require more regulations by the concerned state to ensure safety is not affected. Due to the complex nature of code sharing arrangements, the responsibility and safety of the flights may not be reliable. In some cases, airlines are allowed to use the name or take the public face of another airline that leads to regulation of security to safeguard the reputation of the airline in the form of services and safety quality. The other worry brought about by code sharing is the security entanglement caused by the possibility of transfer of a security threat from one airline to another and later additional security precautions put in place by legal authorities (p.56). I referred to historic aviation talks by Bailey, & Rosen, (2003), where it reports on how the members of European Union moved toward designing a common market for their airlines. The European commission which was the administrative body sought authority from member states to negotiate airline contracts on their behalf. The members’ states of the European Union consisted of the following states: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, France, Germany, Netherlands, Greece, Italy, Ireland,