The Origin of the Work of Art Essay Example for Free

The Origin of the Work of Art Essay In ‘The Origin of the Work of Art’ by German philosopher Martin Heidegger, the essence of the work of art and then the question of the meaning of a thing, are described according to the philosopher’s perspective. This was Heidegger’s first collection of writings on art. The critique had many opponents as well as allies who felt that this was a valuable contribution in making the meaning of art clearer to people. Heidegger states, the work of art â€Å"gives the earth (materials, color, sound, words) the chance to be present as what it really is. As long as the earth is used for something, it is not present as what it truly is. The truth, which the work of art reveals in this way, is a finite truth. It does not consist in a meaning, which lies in the open in an articulated form, but in a meaning, which is fathomless and deep. In its essence it is the strife between world and earth, between rising and sheltering.† (Kockelmans, 1985) However, to understand the statement by Martin Heidegger, â€Å"While truth and art are proper to the essence of reality with equal originality, they must diverge from one another and go counter to one another† (Kockelmans, 1985) one must move deep into the context of art and truth, particularly truth. Truth, according to Friedrich Nietzsche, who influenced Heidegger by a great degree, is presented in a metaphor where he points that â€Å"on the mountains of truth you can never climb in vain: either you will reach a point higher up today, or you will be training your powers so that you will be able to climb higher tomorrow.† (Lamb, 2004) However, the same truth goes though a mode of transference, when he mentions, â€Å"all things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.† (Lamb, 2004) This brings us to a stage where it becomes hard to interpret the application of truth from the perspective of Nietzsche. According to this parameters truth is an element that can be turned and twisted in accordance to occasion or need. Here he mentions that â€Å"all credibility, all good conscience, all evidence of truth come only from the senses†. (Lamb, 2004) However, the vital question is who would verify the justification of sense? Who would ascertain whether the interpretation of truth or the application of sense is modulated towards a betterment or general good? Hitler used Friedrich Nietzsche’s philosophy of truth for his own goal and turned it against the entire world using this philosophy as a tool of justifying his evil means. Therefore, truth is subjective and in words of Nietzsche himself, â€Å"all truth is simple is that not doubly a lie?† (Lamb, 2004) Thus, truth is an embellishment of justification with almost poetic or artistic application that can be turned and twisted to meet the end purpose. It is true that the rhetorical approach of Friedrich Nietzsche hardly leaves any stone unturned in favor of his argument and it is only after a mass killing of the 20th century did we aver realized the flaw of his theory. The anthropomorphism incorporated in his philosophy diverted a mass section of the human population towards a belief of truth that is difficult to practice and fatal when implemented in practical world. However, it can be ascertained to remark that there is no problem for the society to implement the nature of truth in art forms as it depicts a personal view of the truth. In this context it would be relevant to mention that Marx believed that there is little truth in art as it is only a medium that presents an mirror image of the reality whereas there are enough evident that explains art in a different mode. (Lamb, 2004) Marcuse believes that â€Å"the truth of art lies in the power to break the monopoly of established reality†. (Marcuse, 1995) However according to Wilde â€Å"art never expresses anything but itself.† (Lamb, 2004) Under such parameters, the application of truth in art hardly holds any ground. It is a curious notion to mention that Plato wanted all poets and artists to be sent out of the country because they presented as fractured form of truth. The same is true for the practical and present world. It should be remembered that on a practical ground while somewhere on a greater moral plane we are taught that lying is â€Å"wrong,† the fact is that Western Civilization as James Beniger asserts could be reduced to chaos without lies. The present generation believes that there are certain importance of truth but that truth is juxtaposed with the parameters of lies for the term ‘success’ in this world of market driven economy. From the perspective of a present generation, individual truth is as important as lying, no matter how metaphorical or paradoxical it might sound, thus its needs an explanation. Humans develop their ability to lie at a very early age. The average two-year-old is a liar, perhaps not a proficient and accomplished liar yet, but a liar nonetheless.   By the time, a child is a toddler, the innocence of youth is a myth, and the child has learned that lying is a necessary skill for survival in the world. The children who perfect the art of lying just might grow up to become successful politicians. Caught in a forbidden act, a two-year-old will quickly try to don a look of absolute innocence all while denying the alleged wrongdoing. Lying in children this young makes one wonder if lying is part of the human genetic code. The fact is, children probably are taught to lie by their first teachers- their parents. Brian Martin claims that parents carefully teach children how to lie and just as often lie to them (Martin, 2004). In teaching their children to lie, parents are preparing them to deal with the world. Once children set off for school, they must know how to lie effectively to teachers and classmates. Children who do not become good liars will not develop good interpersonal skills, and they will probably not become highly effective people. Every child needs to know how to explain the missing homework assignment and how to get along with playmates. Well-told lies are the most expedient means to these ends. In the adult world, the most successful people are those who are proficient liars. Businesses would cease to function if proprietors always told the truth. Without lies, there would be no politicians and no governments; the world would descend into anarchy. A good politician knows that people do not really want to hear the truth, especially if the truth is unpleasant; therefore, the best politicians always have ready lies that are always delivered with a caring and earnest expression. These are good lies because they reassure the people that all is well, and that is after all, what people want to hear. Lies are the foundation of democracy, and lies set people free. Be it a genetic trait or one acquired through social interactions, lying is a part of the fabric of civilization and socialization. In addition, this stands for each and every society down the ages of human history not just Western Civilization. Great societies are founded on lies, and the most successful people are the most adept liars. Relationships, businesses, and governments depend on lies. In wider sense, it could well be formulated that lying is a positive sign and approach of intelligence at the same time. (Lamb, 2004) It should be mentioned that as an individual on behalf of the present generation and that on a moral ground the importance of truth remains important. It could be ascertained that this truth should be composed and restored as an element of individual justification. This means that one should be justified in terms of truth to oneself. The human dignity is to be taken into consideration in relation to truth. One must always be true, clarified and justified to the personal self. This is the importance of truth and the value of truth and the rest depends on the survival strategies in the modern world. Thus, truth remains in its position while to survive one need the help of the other side of truth and that is lie. However, from the parameters of art it can be stated â€Å"art is an inherent element in the effort on the part of man to come to genuine self-understanding art works reveal to us what and how beings are. Each artwork opens its own world A world opens itself, the earth shelters and closes; both are present in the artwork. Furthermore, the work does not refer to something else as a sign or a symbol does, but it presents itself in its own Being and invites the beholder to dwell and while with it.† (Kockelmans, 1985) As Heidegger explains further: We note, â€Å"In order for truth to come-to-pass in a work of art, conservation is as essential as invention. Since the fact that truth is at work implies the conserver who is â€Å"startled and whiles in the openness that pervades the art work.† (Kockelmans, 1985) Thus, in defense of art as solitary medium it can be stated that nature is created by itself, while art is the creation of nature. Art knows no death and it is imperishable. As said by Longfellow that art is long and time is fleeting. The spices of nature are born only to die after a certain space of existence. Art continues indefinitely. Austin Dobson assessment of art is expressed in his saying that all passes. Art alone enduring stays to us. The bust outlasts the throne, the coin, Tiberius. Art is never demonstrative; it never catches attention with an exhibitionistic appeal. Obviously, a casual observer scarcely finds anything impressive, a thing of beauty, in it. On the other hand, the eye of a connoisseur never misses it. With his penetrating look and absorbing concern, he explores the innate charm of an object of art. According to the celebrated Latin poet Ovid, art lies in concealing art. If art is the magic of holding back time then artists are the magicians who captivate time in colors and canvases. As time passes by several take birth and perish, but some people with their achievements and contributions leave their footprints on the sands of time. These people remain immortal forever in the pages of history. It has been found that â€Å"the imagination is a necessary part of the creative process, and that somewhere between the imagination and the reality principle; the mind can play on an infinite measure of continuum between these binary opposites. Both imagination and rationality are necessary in order that separation from the here and now may occur without a complete severing with the past.† (Windt, 2004) However, in the juxtaposition of truth and art it can be stated that Art could even be considered something as simple as an action someone has done for a cause or for somebody. If someone holds the door for somebody else, it could be his or her art to be generous and courteous. Even acts of crime can be considered forms of art. In many thieving circles, the method of breaking and entering or robbing places is merely called the Art of Theft. Therefore, one can never really limit art to one thing. Rather, it is a wide arrangement of things. In addition, one can never truly crack down and say that something is only artistic if it is of some particular kind of medium, because somebody else will disagree. Art is anything that anyone does which has a profound effect on somebody or something else. From a simple act of kindness to a masterpiece painting which took years out of somebody’s life? Some art can be considered more complex, and some art can be considered simpler in contrast. However, the fact of the matter is, in the eye of the beholder, art could be anything. So is it possible for us to define what art is or can we really set any realistic guidelines as to what is art and what is not? It is always possible to create guidelines, but it is often considered an art form in itself to break said guidelines. What we can do, however, is center ourselves on the aesthetics of art. However, defining what is aesthetic and what is not can be quite an undertaking. Simply put, something that is aesthetically pleasing is something that appeals to the senses. For instance, flowers give a nice aesthetic sense of smell by offering their pleasant odors. A nicely painted picture can give off a nice aesthetic sight for somebody to enjoy. Often it is difficult to create something aesthetically pleasing, as there are many ways to offend peoples senses. For instance, if you wanted to create a painting to give off an aesthetic feeling of hope, you probably would not use an over abundance of dark colors. Dark colors are often used to show calmness or even more commonly, something sad and depressing. In addition, when painting, if you use wider and more circular strokes with a lighter press on your brush, you will give off more depressing tones and colors. Therefore, it would be more advisable to use lighter colors and more agile handling of the brush. Lighter colors often give off a feeling of warmth and happiness, which is something that you would like to be doing if you would like to create something hopeful. However, to create something that gives off a strong aesthetic presence, you usually must feel some sort of emotional attachment to whatever it is you are working on three. One must have a feeling for whatever it is you are working on. Only then will you truly pour out everything from your heart and mind. When you can accomplish this, you can create something with true aesthetic value. If you can describe your emotions in your artwork, it becomes easier for others to understand what you were trying to do, and more often, give them a stronger emotional sense. In a way, this creates a bond between the artist and the observer, allowing true aesthetic value to be created within a work of art. However, this still does not fully aid us in our quest to find out whether we can define what art is. There are some things, which do not stimulate our emotions as much but may still hold a different aesthetic value. Some of the most common examples of these are mathematical charts and scientific writings. Although they do not hold any intrinsic aesthetic values, they still provide a sense of artwork within the mind. Mathematics helps us to develop our logical minds and to expand our ability to memorize details and think things through. However, as odd as it may sound, even mathematics can help to produce powerful works of art. One of the most profound methods of art within mathematics must be the Golden Ratio. The Golden Ratio is a number, which is defined simply as width being 1.618 times the height of something 4 or approximately one and a half times the height of something. Although unexplained, you can prove it to yourself by viewing pictures of the Greek structure known as the Parthenon that the Golden Ratio is one of the most beautiful artistic forms in existence. The difference in width by length gives a soothing aura and relaxes the entire body when viewed. One of the other valuable aesthetic forms, which have come from math, is the circle. Although we may never truly define what Pi is, it is known that it is the calculation for a perfect circle. Pi is simple defined as an outer diameter 3.14 times the length of the radius of a circle. Circular shapes have always been known to be very pleasing to the eye, and this could help to explain why Roman structures may not be as pleasing as other circular structures. The Romans, for a time, were on top of the world and had to prove it by being correct in everything. This even meant their own calculation of Pi, which, in Roman times, was known to be 3.45. Interestingly enough, when you view Roman buildings with a bird’s eye view, you can notice that they are slightly ovular. This gives an awkward feel to them and helps to explain why Greek architecture has always been slightly more respected than Roman architecture. Even science has a place in the world of common art. For, without science, we would not have many of the methods of designing art as we do now. Paint, for instance, if not developed without science would not be in existence now. Chemistry and metallurgy have been two of the most significant expansions to the world of contemporary art however. Chemistry has helped to develop various substances, which react to different surfaces, and modern chemistry has helped to evolve this even further. Now we have fluorescent paints, synthetic canvases and neon gases to help create bright signs in the sky. Metallurgy has helped in sculpture design and in the design of many modern tools used in art. Many artists are now using welding as a medium for their artistic expression. The fields of science and art seem to go hand in hand when you think of them in this way. Computers in particular have had a profound effect on the development of aesthetic value in art today. Many artists conglomerate around the Internet to share their works of art and receive critiques from various sources to develop their talent further. In fact, there have been many programs developed which help people to develop art on the computer itself. Flash animation is a popular method of electronic art design, which is a conglomeration of various artistic images placed together in a mobile video sequence. Photo editing has been enhanced by several modern software programs, and you can even create unique three-dimensional images with some modern programs. Graphic design has been greatly enhanced by the advent of the modern computer. So many programs and computer platforms have been specifically tailored for Graphic Design that in recent years the industry has had an explosion in growth. Companies everywhere are constantly seeking artists to design their logos, papers, pamphlets and promotional media. However, with so many developments in the field of art, have we become closer to being able to define art in one true sense? Alternatively, rather, have we learned to adapt and respect all forms of art and their inherent values? What might be considered a masterpiece in the past by everyone may only be considered a masterpiece to a small number of people in this modern day. Rather than classifying art in one major group, we should respect all art for its value and its effect on society as a whole. It is debatable that we will ever be able to identify art in the analytical sense, but we will learn new ways to improve our talents and we will constantly gain more resources to spread our art across all reaches of the universe. It does not really matter whether or not we can define art, because art is just an expression. It is a method for human beings to get out their emotions and share them with the rest of the world. It helps to describe what cannot be spoken. A picture is worth a thousand words, but even those thousand words can yet again produce a thousand additional pictures. In addition, in this method of thought, art has an infinite number of possibilities and an infinite number of ways to influence the lives of others.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   There are no strict guidelines for defining art nor will there ever be. Everything is in the eye of the beholder, but it does not matter. As long as society keeps using art forms and aesthetic values to gain a newfound sense of identity, I think the world will live without being able to define what art is. So do not pursue the field and believe you must define others work, but rather, attempt to find its emotional value and apply it to your own life. Thus, in conclusion, it can be stated that the statement of Martin Heidegger enumerating art is comparatively true and partly wrong. This is because truth cannot be imposed on art in the context of realism but the undefined part of art makes it wrong. This is because if art is not completely defined and if truth is uncertain at many parts, as seen earlier, the relation between the two becomes tentative and vague. Thus, whether art and truth are inseparable or they are in contradiction to each other remains a debatable issue for further arguments in the future. Bibliography: Kockelmans, Joseph J; 1985; Heidegger on Art and Art Works; Springer Lamb, Davis; (2004); Cult to Culture: The Development of Civilization on the Strategic Strata; National Book Trust. 2004 Marcuse, Herbert; 1994; The Aesthetic Dimension; Art and its Significance; Suny Press; Martin, Brian. (2003-2004). â€Å"Telling Lies for a Better World?† Social Anarchism 35: 27-39.   Retrieved on 7 April, 2008 from http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/pubs/03sa.html Windt, Gerda van de; (2004); Artistic Imagination: Transforming Sorrow into Beauty Truth and Art; Arts Education – Faculty of Education. Simon Fraser University

Risperdal :: Drugs Schizophrenia Essays

Risperdal Risperidone is an atypical antipsychotic used to alleviate the symptoms of schizophrenia. Schizophrenia is defined by its effects in altering perception, thoughts, or consciousness called hallucinations or delusions. It affects about 1% of the population, with about 2 million people affected in the United States. About 50% of those affected become severely and permanently disabled and dependent upon public assistance. Schizophrenics make up about 10% of the totally disabled population and as much as 14% of the homeless. The United States spends about $70 billion annually. About 1 out of 4 patients will attempt suicide, and 1 in 10 will succeed. There is great social stigma associated with the disease (Sarason & Sarason, 2001, pg. 350). The dopamine theory behind the cause of schizophrenia states that in part excess dopamine is a possible factor or there is more than an average number of dopamine, Type 2 receptors. Risperidone acts on the dopamine D2 receptor (Sarason, et al, 2001, pg. 368). Risperidone is a psychotropic drug and is part of the chemical class of benzisoxazole derivatives used as a treatment for schizophrenia, with some results for bipolar manic disorder, as well. The molecular formula is C23H27FN4O2, with a molecular weight of 410.49 (Ereshefsky & Mascarena, 2003). Route of administration is oral. Once the drug passes the esophagus and stomach, it makes its way into the small intestines. There are beds of capillaries within the intestine walls.

The Road

Why do you think McCarthy has chosen not to give his characters names? How do the generic labels of â€Å"the man† and â€Å"the boy† affect the way you /readers relate to them? While reading The Road, a novel written by Cormac McCarthy, I was jerked from the warmth, comfort, and safety of my home and thrown into a cold, dark, and desolate world, walking alongside â€Å"the man† and â€Å"the boy†. McCarthy composes his work so graphically that readers are drawn right into the story.I believe Cormac McCarthy wanted the figures in this book to be universal, so that the reader could imagine him/her self as â€Å"the boy† or â€Å"the man† at any given moment, and to be able to feel as they do. To do this McCarthy did not designate the characters in his book with names, and because of this, I was able to connect with â€Å"the man† and â€Å"the boy† on a personal level and envision myself uniting with them in their chilling journe y. As the reader, I was deeply overwhelmed with many mixed emotions such as compassion, sadness, happiness, disgust, remorse, and fear.I have pity for the characters in the book The Road, because â€Å"the man† and â€Å"the boy† have to pass day to day struggling to survive in a frigid bleak world where food is scarce â€Å"They squatted in the road and ate rice and cold beans they’d cooked days ago. † â€Å"Already beginning to ferment. †(McCarthy 29). The landscape is blackened, and mankind is almost extinct â€Å"The mummied dead everywhere. †(McCarthy 24). As I read on I noticed myself connecting more deeply with the characters.When the boy’s mother takes her own life, I was deeply saddened and my heart broke for â€Å"the boy† simply because his mom, someone he cherished and loved so much, had given up on hope and faith and deserted him. I just wanted to take hold of the child and comfort him even though at this moment he has no clue his mother has left. I also felt sorry for â€Å"the man†, one, because he has to tell his child where his mother is â€Å"For the love of God woman. What am I to tell him? † (McCarthy 58), and two, because his love and best friend was in such despair and there was nothing he could do to impel her to stay.As a mother, in some ways, I also felt sorry for the mother in this book, because most women dream of the day she will have a child of her own to love, care for, and teach, but this mother had to give birth to her son after the great catastrophe, and instead of bringing her tears of happiness, it brought tears of sorrow. She now knows that she has to raise her son in this dark and barley habitable world and that it will be a constant struggle to survive. â€Å"My heart was ripped out of me the night he was born†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (McCarthy 57).On the other hand though, I am also disgusted with the mother for the one reason that she gave up, and now her family , especially her child, has to suffer the consequences due to her actions, but again, given that I put myself in her situation, would I do the same thing? While reading I also felt deep sadness in many parts, for one instance, when â€Å"the man† dies, at this point in the book I had tears streaming down my face. â€Å"He slept close to his father that night and held him but when he woke in the morning his father was cold and stiff. † â€Å"He sat there a long time weeping†¦ (McCarthy 281). â€Å"He knelt beside his father held his cold hand and said his name over and over again. †(McCarthy 281). At one part in the book, remorse, disgust, sadness, and compassion were the stirred emotions that hit me all t once. It was the time when a thief robs â€Å"the boy† while he is asleep on the beach. When â€Å"the boy† was first robbed I was angry and disgusted with the thief who had robbed a sleeping innocent child, I could never see myself doing th is especially in a situation where food is hard to come by and staying warm is almost impossible!When they finally catch up with the thief â€Å"the man† points the gun at him and threatens to shoot him. â€Å"The boy† is pleading with his father not to kill the thief. â€Å"The man† says to the thief â€Å"Take your clothes off. †(McCarthy 256). â€Å"Take them off every goddamn stitch. † (McCarthy 256). Eventually the thief is completely naked, â€Å"the boy† and the thief are begging â€Å"the man† not to do this, but the man looks at the thief and says â€Å"You didn’t mind doing it to us. †(McCarthy 257). Now I feel that the thief is getting what he deserves.When they leave the thief standing in the road â€Å"the boy† becomes extremely upset, â€Å"And They set out along south with the boy crying and looking back at the nude and saltlike creature standing there in the road shivering and hugging himself. â⠂¬  â€Å"Oh Papa, he sobbed. †(McCarthy 258). I am now starting to feel the compassion the boy has towards the thief â€Å"He was hungry, Papa. † â€Å"He’s going to die. †(McCarthy 259). They finally take the thief’s clothes back and pile them in the middle of the road and I am glad of this.Later as they were lying down at camp I believe the man was starting to feel guilty, and he spoke â€Å"I wasnt going to kill him, he said. † â€Å"But the boy didnt answer. † â€Å"They rolled themselves in the blankets and lay there in the dark. † â€Å"He could tell the boy was awake and after a while the boy said: but we did kill him. †(McCarthy 260). When â€Å"the boy† made this comment I felt deep remorse and disgust in myself for having felt so harshly toward the thief in the beginning.I also felt happiness and relief in this story when â€Å"the man† and â€Å"the boy† found the underground shelter beh ind the house in the field, I felt as if I was there with them discovering the grand riches this den held! â€Å"Oh my God, he whispered. † â€Å"Oh my God. † â€Å"What is it Papa? † â€Å"Come down. † â€Å"Oh my God. † â€Å"Come down. † (McCarthy138). â€Å"Crate upon crate of canned goods. † â€Å"Tomatoes, peaches, beans, apricots. † â€Å"Canned hams. † â€Å"Corned beef. † â€Å"Hundreds of gallons of water in ten gallon plastic jerry jugs. †(McCarthy 138).In this underground hideaway was everything they needed to survive. I was so overwhelmed with joy and comfort that I forgot for a moment about the cruel cold world above. During many portions of this novel I experienced also many sensations of fear. The most prominent passage is where â€Å"the man† and â€Å"the boy† come across a house and both are vulnerable due to fatigue and starvation. â€Å"They’d had no food and littl e sleep in five days and in this condition on the outskirts of a small town they came upon a once grand house sited on a rise above the road†(McCarthy 105).As they start toward the house â€Å"the boy† becomes frightened and â€Å"the man† or father tries to reassure him that everything is okay and that they have to go inside. At this point I am feeling a little uneasy about the two entering the house. As they cross the porch â€Å"the boy† is trying to convince his father not to go inside, agreeing with the boy I imagine myself in his shoes and I am pleading for â€Å"the man† not to enter. â€Å"The man† is determined and tells the boy â€Å"We’ve got to find something to eat. † â€Å"We have no choice. †(McCarthy 106).When inside the home â€Å"the boy hung on to his hand. † â€Å"He was terrified. † (McCarthy 107). While investigating the house they come across a door in a room next to the kitchen that m ight have been considered a pantry at one time. â€Å"In the floor of this room was a door or hatch and it was locked with a large padlock made of stacked steel plates. †(McCarthy 108). â€Å"The boy† again tries to plead with his father to leave, and I again right along with him, but now my tension and curiosity is starting to rise a bit, wondering what is underneath this door. The man† believes there is a significant reason for this door being locked, so he makes his way to the tool shed â€Å"half dragging the child and went sorting through tools† (McCarthy 109). He retrieves a shovel, heads back into the house, and pry’s the door open. Now I am holding my breath just waiting for the outcome, good or bad, I do not know, but I am very anxious. â€Å"He started down he rough wooden steps. He ducked his head and then flicked the lighter†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (McCarthy 110).â€Å"Coldness and Damp. † â€Å"An ungodly stench. † (McCarthy 110). What came next caught me completely off guard! Huddled against the back wall were naked people, male and female, all trying to hide, shielding their faces with their hands. † â€Å"On the mattress lay a man with his legs gone to the hip and the stumps of them blackened and burnt. † â€Å"The smell was hideous. † â€Å"Jesus, he whispered. †(McCarthy 110). Now I am in a complete state of shock, fear, and disgust. Unbelievable! All at once I am feeling the fear and shock of â€Å"the man†, â€Å"the boy†, and the mangled victims that have been terrorized, probably raped, eaten or at least half dismembered and eaten by the wicked and ruthless barbarians! Then one by one they turned and blinked in the pitiful light. † â€Å"Help us, they whispered. † â€Å"Please help us. †(McCarthy 110). My heart is now beginning to race. When they finally reach the top of this grave, â€Å"He shoved the boy through the hatch and sent him sp rawling. † â€Å"He stood and got hold of the door and swung it over and let it slam down and he turned to grab the boy but the boy had gotten up and was doing his little dance of terror. †(McCarthy 111).As if this horrific and vivid image engraved in my head was not enough, McCarthy immediately throws me into a sheer state of terror and panic. â€Å"†¦ the boy was pointing out the window and when he looked he went cold all over. † â€Å"Coming across the field toward the house were four bearded men and two women. † â€Å"He grabbed the boy by the hand. † â€Å"Christ, he said. † â€Å"Run. † â€Å"Run. † I had to literally set the book aside, go outdoors, calm down, and smoke a cigarette to calm my nerves. Finally my heart rate returned to normal and I picked up the book and continued to read.After I completed this part in the story and discovered that â€Å"the man† and â€Å"the boy† had escaped I got up ch ecked on my children to reassure myself that they were asleep safe and warm in their bed, I quickly ran back through the house like a child with a sense of fear that something was going to jump out and grab me at any moment, I jumped in the bed got as close to my husband as possible and eventually drifted off to sleep. When I finished reading The Road by Cormac McCarthy, I was astonished at how deep I was able to connect with the characters and the fact that this book touched me as deeply as it did.It also made me think what if†¦? In reality if this were to happen would I have the courage and strength of â€Å"the man† and â€Å"the boy† or would I be like the mother as McCarthy states it â€Å" †¦a faithless slut†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (57), who has taken death as a new lover. Over all I personally believe that this novel was absolutely fantastic, even though I had nightmares for a few nights after I had completed the book. This just goes to show what a great writer McCarthy is, he touches his readers so deeply they even dream about his work. I would defiantly pick up this book and read it again just for fun. The Road The post-apocalyptic novel â€Å"The Road†, written by Cormac McCarthy was published in 2006. [1] It deals with the journey of a father together with his son, who try to reach the coast after America, its nature and civilisation has been destroyed by some catastrophe. Therefore some important issues are implied: travelling, fear of death, nuclear war, goodness, religion, cannibalism and of course the relationship between father and son. Maybe that is the reason why McCarthy dedicated the novel to his son: John Francis McCarthy. In 2007 McCarthy won the Pulitzer Prize for fiction for this novel. 2] In 2009 the Novel was made into a film, also called â€Å"The Road† and directed by John Hillcoat. [3] There are some interesting aspects, regarding the similarities and differences between the novel and its cinematic adaptation. The Novel Cormac McCarthy tells the story of a journey, made by father and son. They survived a nuclear catastrophe, which is not described in detail and want to go south in order to reach the coast. They have a card in order to carry their habits. They hope for a humanitarian climate, nourishments and other peaceful survivors. Due to the apocalypse, they have to deal with a lot of trouble during their trip. In order to survive despite the lack of food, a lot of people became cannibals. Cannibalism is no option for the man and his son, because they belong to the good ones. Therefore they have to be carful who they trust and their search for food is more difficult. In addition they have to take care for their clothing, especially for their shoes because it is very cold since the catastrophe. [4] â€Å"Mostly he worried about their shoes. That and food. Always food. † (McCarthy, 2006: 17) [5] The most problematic aspect is the fathers task to raise his son under such circumstances without neglecting the sense of humanness. The world he knows was completely destroyed and there is no common childhood. The son has to cope with aspects like cannibalism and suicide very early. He also has to accept the circumstance, that his father is going to die sooner or later and that he needs to be able to live on his own when the time comes. His father tries to prepare him as good as he can. McCarthy tells the story among 287 pages. He uses 3rd person narration, where the narrator is omniscient, because he knows about thoughts, dreams and fears of the father and his son. His style of writing without chapters stresses the travel motive. It highlights the fact that the protagonists have to go on and on until they reach the coast and that there are no other important stages in between. Another important technique is the avoidance of names which means that both protagonists remain anonym. This technique highlights the aspect, that in case of a nuclear catastrophe, this scenario could happen to anyone. The father and his son serve as representatives for humankind. In addition there are no concrete names of places which indicates, that this scenario could not just happen to anyone, it could also happen anywhere in the world. There are two more aspects, which remain unclear. The first one is the fate of the mother. The book does not make clear what happened to her because for them, it does not matter. She is gone and that is all they need to know. Secondly there are no details mentioned when it comes to the catastrophe which also indicates that it is not important what happened. The man and his son are alive and so they have to challenge the circumstances, indifferent what caused them. â€Å"The clocks stopped at 1:17. A long shear of light and then a series of low concussions. (†¦) A dull rose glow in the windowglas. (McCarthy, 2006: 52) McCarthy creates a very desperate imagery. His preferred chosen words are dark and sad. He uses short sentences, which guarantees that the novel is written in a minimal, but tough very closely style. [6] â€Å"No list of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one’s heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes. † (McCarthy, 2006: 54) Even the dialogues between father and son or between them and strangers they met are very short. In addition there are a lot of details described, no matter if they are tolerable or hardly shocking. â€Å"They could smell something cooking. Let’s circle around, the man said. (†¦) They left their food cooking. (†¦) What is it? He said. What is it? The boy shook his head. Oh Papa, he said. He turned and looked again. What the bay had seen was a charred human infant headless and gutted and blackening on the spit. † (McCarthy, 2006: 198) The two unnamed Protagonists The son is about 10 years old and was born after the catastrophe. That is why he does not know the world as it was before. He has although no childhood like one would think of. He has to grow up without his mom, knowing that his father will also fade away one day. Therefore he has to learn very much important skills in a short amount of time. He has no real toys and no other kids around him. In contrast he knows how to kill himself and feels responsible for his father, who became ill. It is important to say, that the son serves as a symbol for hope. â€Å"He knew only that the child was his warrant. He said: If he is not the word of God God never spoke. † (McCarthy, 2006: 5) Not only for his father, also for other people they met. For example Ely, the second stranger they met thought that he was an angel. Within the story the young boy grows from a child with a lot of questions and fears to a boy with a big sense of humanity, who knows a lot about the world he lives in and feels responsible for other people. â€Å"The man squatted and looked at him. I’m scared, he said. Do you understand? I’m scared. (†¦) You’re not the one who has to worry about everything. The boy said something but he couldn’t understand him. What? he aid. He looked up, his wet and grimy face. Yes I am, he said. I am the one. † (McCarthy, 2006: 259) The father can be characterized as a reactor. Whenever it comes to violent actions he is just acting in self-defence. He knows the world as it has been before the catastrophe, and feels sorry for his son but he also knows that he can not hold the horror away from him. He faces the fact that his son h as to live on his own one day and that it is his job to make sure that he will be able to do so. Therefore he is distrustful when it comes to strangers. He always reminds his son to be less helpful and a bit more wary but often he does not succeed. In addition he is very ill and weak. The only reason why he is able to go on without committing suicide is his son. Everything he does is for him. â€Å"He held the boy close to him. So thin. My heart, he said. My heart. But he knew that if he were a good father still it might well be as she had said. That the boy was all that stood between him and death. † (McCarthy, 2006: 29) Ending The ending of the novel is a happy one. They manage to reach the coast and the father dies in peace. After some days other survivors appear. There is another man, a woman and two other children, a boy and a girl. The boy talks to the man and makes clear that they belong to the good guys who â€Å"carry the fire†, which means that they do not kill and eat other people. After he made that clear, it is okay for him to go with them. Therefore the ending implies a new beginning, because it could be possible that the boy and the girl create descendants one day, which would be a first step to get a new population. â€Å"The woman when he saw him put her arms around him and held him. (†¦) I am so glad to see you. She would talk to him sometimes about God. He tried to talk to God but the best thing was to talk to his father and he did talk to him and he didn’t forget. † (McCarthy, 2006: 286) The Movie The movie â€Å"The Road† was published in 2009. John Hillcoat (Director) and Joe Penhall (Screenplay) produced a cinematic adaptation of the novel with the same title and story which takes 111 minutes. The role of the father is played by Viggo Mortensen and Kodi Smit-McPhee plays the role of the son. [7] As already said, the story is almost the same. There are just a few changes within it. For example there are some flashbacks to the time before the catastrophe and shortly after it, when the mother was still alive. In addition there are some omissions because of details which would have been too shocking, like the passage with the infant corpse. [8] Despite those supplements and omissions Hillcoat and Penhall did a really good job. They managed it to copy the imagery of McCarthy’s special style of writing into the atmosphere of the film. Therefore they used a number of techniques. [9] The depressive and sad atmosphere is easily created by mostly grey and brown colours. Furthermore the film was produced in wintertime, when there automatically lies snow and the trees are without leaves. The film implies no ordinary scenery, because it is not a complex story. The contrast comes when the flashbacks to the time before the catastrophe are shown. The colours change into very intensive ones, it is summer and you always hear nice piano music. One could also argue that the piano serves as a symbol for the presence of the mother and for civilisation because it represents culture. When the father remembers his wife there is always piano music which accentuates the scenes. Later in the film he has to cut an old piano into pieces in order to get wood for a fire. This is a clear indication that he is angry with his wife because of her decision to commit suicide. Those scenes are different to the few passages about the mother in the book. She is not a big issue in the novel. Within the book the story is told by an omniscient 3rd person narrator. In the cinematic adaptation the man tells the story. This is a contrast to the book, where the actions, feelings and thoughts of the man are part of the narration. On the one hand one could argue that this contrast is problematic because in the end the father is going to die and the way of narration could be too personal. But on the other hand Hillcoat and Penhall had to choose someone who tells the story and they had no other opportunity if they want to have the option of flashbacks and omniscience. According to the protagonists there is one other existing difference. In the book the boy seems to accept his fate and tries to make the best out of it. He grows up very fast and is rather adulty than childish. In the film he collects some artefacts like a broken comb of his mother, wears her clothes and also has a few toys. He is often scared and cries when he is. All in all, the boy is played like a child and not as grown up as he is described in the book. The overlapping aspect is the importance of â€Å"to carry the fire†. He is always asking if someone carries the fire, which means not to kill other people and disregard morality and values. The biggest difference between the novel and its cinematic adaptation is the ending. In the book it is described as a happy end. The father dies, the son meets another family who also carries the fire and can go with them. In addition the family has a daughter, which means that there is a new beginning for civilisation implied. This procedure is the same at the end of the film but there are some details which change the situation. Firstly the thumbs of the veteran are missing or garbled. That was also the case when they met the thief who has stolen their cart with all their goods. Those missing fingers can lead to the suggestion that he had been a member of a cannibalism commune. This would also fit to the question why a family should voluntary incorporate another hungry child. In fact there is no food left and every additional person is a risk at the same time. One also has to remember that they have a dog in the movie, which is pure luxury according to the circumstances they live in. According to those details there are two possibilities: either they are just as friendly and careful as the boy and it is an act of charity, or they see their chance in getting extra food without killing someone of their family or group. Novel or Movie? In my opinion both works are really great. I like the novel of McCarthy very much because of his style of writing and the atmosphere within the story. The dialogues are short, concise and therefore fit totally in. In addition the characters with their actions, thoughts, feelings and dreams as well as the ending of the story are simply realistic. There are some differences when it comes to the cinematic adaptation but those are no reasons for regarding the film as inferior. As already said, I think that Hillcoat and Penhall did a great job because it must have been very hard to transport McCarthy’s style of writing into a movie. What I like most is the ending of the film. It is less clear than in the book and every viewer can decide which option seems to be more realistic. I think the interpretation of the ending refers to ones personal character traits. If the viewer is as prudent, distrusting and sometimes hopeless like the father he will maybe be more likely to see it critical. In contrast a viewer who is as optimistic as the son will probably see the details as unimportant and therefore recognize the ending as a happy end, like the one of the book. This opportunity of individual interpretation is a great aspect of the movie.Bibliography McCarthy, Comac. The Road. New York: Vintage Books, 2006 http://www.buecher.de/shop/krimi–thriller/the-road/mccarthy-cormac/products_products/detail/prod_id/22749892/session/0c16e28341622398e76f09549b0dc89c/ (23.02.2012) http://www.cormacmccarthy.com/works/theroad.htm (23.02.2012) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0898367/ (23.02.2012) http://sweetcheese.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/41jilx9r0rl_ss500_.jpg (23.02.2012) http://quaterlyconversation.com/the-road-by-cormac-mccarthy-review (23.02.2012) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0898367/ (25.02.2012) Movie: â€Å"The Road†, Universum Film GmbH: 2009 http://www.beyondhollywood.com/the-road-2008-movie-images-gallery/the-road-movie/ (25.02.2012)

Essay about Analysis of Jack Johnsons Cookie Jar - 920 Words

Analysis of Jack Johnsons Cookie Jar Jack Johnson’s song, â€Å"Cookie Jar† is a powerful influence to challenge the beliefs and values of western society. The song is all about blaming what you have done on someone else, hence the title Cookie Jar. The title is â€Å"Cookie Jar† because of the old saying â€Å"Who stole the cookie from the cookie jar, Who me, Yes you, No not me† this means that we are always trying to find someone else to blame, rather than ourselves, we try to find a scapegoat to get us†¦show more content†¦The repetition of â€Å"turn it around† makes the listeners think about what should they do and what can they do to try to stop things like children playing with guns, because the repetition makes the listeners hear it more then once and therefore the will absorb it more and remember it , so they can turn it around. Jack Johnson is writing about how children are influenced by what they see on TV. In this song the boy watches violent shows that have people shooting each other with guns, the child now sees guns as something you are able to use on people and kills another child. â€Å"Sure I pulled the trigger but it needed to be done, Cause life’s been killing me ever since it begun† this means that even the boy is blaming his misdeeds on life, this challenges the beliefs of society because the boy is saying life is bad now, and there isn’t much good in life. TV has a large influence upon children and there shouldn’t be shows with guns and violence on at a time when children might be watching TV. The second stanza also makes listeners argue whether or not parents are doing their job by actually being a parent and looking out for their children, this canShow MoreRelatedVarian Solution153645 Words   |  615 Pagesremarkably stable for the last 50 years or so. Potatoe s cost 2 crowns per sack, meatballs cost 4 crowns per crock, and jam costs 6 crowns per jar. (a) Write down a budget equation for a citizen named Gunnar who has an income of 360 crowns per year. Let P stand for the number of sacks of potatoes, M for the number of crocks of meatballs, and J for the number of jars of jam consumed by Gunnar in a year. 2P + 4M + 6J = 360. (b) The citizens of this country are in general very clever people, but they