Rome Essays - Kings Of Rome, Roman Mythology, Julio-Claudian Dynasty

Rome Rome is an ancient city located on the western coast of Italy by the Meditterranian Sea.(3:289) The city of Rome was founded, according to the legend, by Romulus in 753 BC. Remus and Romulus were two mythological sons of Mars, the god of war. "T hrough military expansion and colonizations, and by granting citizenship to conquered tribes, the city joined all of Italy south of the Po in the 100-year period before 268 BC." First, the Latin and other tribes were joined, then the Etruscans (a civili zed people north of Rome) and the Greek colonies in the south. "With a large army and several hundred thousand in reserve, Rome defeated Carthage in the 3 Punic Wars, 264-241, 218-201, 149-146, (despite the invasion of Italy by Hannibal, 218), therefore gaining territory in Spain and North America."(1:721) New provinces were added in the East as Rome exploited local disputes to conquer Greece and Asia Minor in the 2d century BC and Egypt in the first (after the defeat and suicide of Antony and Cleop atra, 30 BC). All the Mediterranean civilized world up to the disputed Parthian border was now Roman, and remained so for 500 years. " Less civilized regions were added to the Empire: Gaul (conquered by Julius Ceaser, 56-49 BC), Britain (43 AD) and Dacia , NE of the Danube (117 AD)."(1:721) " The original republican government, with democratic features added in the fourth and fifth centuries BC, deteriorated under the pressures of empire and class conflict (Gracchus brothers, social reformers, murdere d 133,121; slave revolts 135,73). After a series of civil wars (Marius vs. Sulla 88-82, Caeser vs. Pompey 49-45, triumvirate vs. Caesar's assassins 44-43, Antony vs. Octavian 32-30), the empire came under the rule or a defined monarch (first emperor, Agu stus, 27 BC-14 AD). Provincials (nearly all granted citizenship by Caracalla,212 AD) came to dominate the army and cival service. Traditional Roman law, systmatized and interpreted by independant jurists, and local self-rule in provincial cities were su pplanted by a vast tax-collecting bureaucracyin the 3d and 4th centuries. The legal rights of women, children, and slaves were strenghtened."(1:721) Roman innovations in civil engineering included water mills, windmills, and rotary mills and the use of cement that hardened under water. Monumental architechture (baths, theaters, apartment houses) relied on the arch and dome. "The network of roads (some still standing) stretched 53,000 miles, passing through moutain tunnels as long as 3.5 miles. Co nceived in 312 BC, the 360 mile Appian Way was a superhighway that the Romans traveled from Rome to Caupa, in Campania...The road took about 10 to 15 days to travel...It was considered the Queen of roads by the Romans, but it is a "l'il ole road" by moder n standards." Aqueducts brought water to cities, underground sewers removed waste. Some of the sewers were so well built, they are still in use today.(2:715) Roman art and literature were derivative of Greek models. Innovations were made in scul pture (naturalistic busts and equestrian statues), decorative wall painting (as at Pompeii), satire (Juvenal, 60-127), history (Tacitus, 56-120), prose romance (Petronius, d. 66 AD). Violense and torture dominated mass public amusements, which were suppo rted by the state. "Rome was first settled around 800 BC. Most of the streets in the time of the Roman Empire were narrow and crooked. Some were very dirty. Some parts of the city were wide and beautiful with white marble buildings, great columne d pourches, and triumphal arches. Anciant Rome had the population of modern Rome. The centers of Roman life were open places where public meetings were held. Such a meeting place was called a forum. One of these was so much more important than the oth ers that it was called the Roman forum. The long, narrow Roman Forum was also the market place of the city. The temple of Jupiter Capitolinus was the oldest and most sacred temple of Rome. "Historians beleive that Rome once had as many as three hund red temples. The best known of these was the Pantheon, which was the temple to all the gods. The Pantheon became the Christian Church of Santa Maria Rotonda in 608 AD.This circular domed church is today is the most perfectly preserved of all the anciant roman building."(1:721)

Free Essays on Man Of La Mancha

I read the play â€Å"The Man Of La Mancha† by Dale Wasserman, Joe Darion and Mitch Leigh. The Man Of La Mancha is set in the age of the Spanish Inquisition in Spain. The set begins in a dank prison cell scene filled with prisoners that await judgment of the captain of the Inquisition. A man named Cervantes enters with his man servant with a large chest and sets himself down in the cell to await his fate. The prisoners see the chest and take the advantage to loot through and get some luxury items but the chest is filled with wigs and make-up. A judge arrives to question Cervantes and give him an opportunity to plead his case. Cervantes says that his case would best be described in a play. The summons the prisoners to play the roles of the people he encounters and has his man servant play Sancho, while Cervantes plays Don Quixote. Don Quixote and Sancho are riding on horses along a stretch of highway when Quixote comes across a windmill that he believes is a giant wh ile Sancho tells him repeatedly that it’s a windmill. Quixote runs off and gets pummeled by the windmill and crawling back on stage figures out that he was only defeated because he was never properly dubbed a knight. He sees what he thinks is a castle in the distance when in reality it’s an inn. They arrive at the inn and Quixote falls in love with the local whore Aldonza. He approaches the innkeeper thinking he is a duke and asks to be knighted so the innkeeper regretfully does this and Quixote is a knight in his eyes now. The duo set off in search for adventure when they find none they return to the inn when the knight of the mirrors arrives to show Quixote that he is not a knight and is nothing more than a crazed old man. Quixote falls and is nursed back to health by his niece and Aldonza, but he is convinced that he is a normal man, until Sancho sings a song that they sang together on their adventures and realizes that he really is the gallant knight D... Free Essays on Man Of La Mancha Free Essays on Man Of La Mancha I read the play â€Å"The Man Of La Mancha† by Dale Wasserman, Joe Darion and Mitch Leigh. The Man Of La Mancha is set in the age of the Spanish Inquisition in Spain. The set begins in a dank prison cell scene filled with prisoners that await judgment of the captain of the Inquisition. A man named Cervantes enters with his man servant with a large chest and sets himself down in the cell to await his fate. The prisoners see the chest and take the advantage to loot through and get some luxury items but the chest is filled with wigs and make-up. A judge arrives to question Cervantes and give him an opportunity to plead his case. Cervantes says that his case would best be described in a play. The summons the prisoners to play the roles of the people he encounters and has his man servant play Sancho, while Cervantes plays Don Quixote. Don Quixote and Sancho are riding on horses along a stretch of highway when Quixote comes across a windmill that he believes is a giant wh ile Sancho tells him repeatedly that it’s a windmill. Quixote runs off and gets pummeled by the windmill and crawling back on stage figures out that he was only defeated because he was never properly dubbed a knight. He sees what he thinks is a castle in the distance when in reality it’s an inn. They arrive at the inn and Quixote falls in love with the local whore Aldonza. He approaches the innkeeper thinking he is a duke and asks to be knighted so the innkeeper regretfully does this and Quixote is a knight in his eyes now. The duo set off in search for adventure when they find none they return to the inn when the knight of the mirrors arrives to show Quixote that he is not a knight and is nothing more than a crazed old man. Quixote falls and is nursed back to health by his niece and Aldonza, but he is convinced that he is a normal man, until Sancho sings a song that they sang together on their adventures and realizes that he really is the gallant knight D...

Australian case Modbury Triangle Shopping Centre Pty Ltd v Anzil

This case was heard by the High Court of Australia. In this case, the respondent was successful during the trial. Similarly, the responder proved to be successful when the Full Court of Supreme Court of South Australia heard the appeal. Under these circumstances, Modbury Triangle Shopping Center made an appeal to the High Court of Australia. The facts of this case can be briefly described as follows. In this case, the appellant, Modbury owned a shopping center. On the other hand, Mr. Anzil, the respondent was hired by a video store that had leased premises in the center. In front of the weekly shop there was a large outdoor parking for the center. The car park was owned by the shopping center, Modbury. The video store remained open until 10 PM in the night and after that time the lights of the car park were automatically switched off. In this case, the respondent was leaving his workplace at 10:30 PM on a Sunday night and the lights of the car park were turned off. Subsequently, the respondent was attacked by three unidentified persons. One of the assailants had a baseball bat and the respondent suffered serious injuries. According to the lease agreement, the lighting in the common areas like the parking area was provided. According to the discretion of the appellant had a part of the cost was paid by the tenant. Earlier, almost 2 years ago, the practice was to let the lights on at the 11 PM. Later on, a request was made by the co-manager of the video store that the lights should be allowed in the 10:15 PM but just ended and nearly 12 months before the attack, the practice was adopted to switch off the lights at 10 PM. Under these circumstances, the proprietor of the shopping center was sued by the plaintiff in negligence for his failure to exercise reasonable care and switching off the lights in the car park. In this way, the case was related with the liability of the occupier for the criminal conduct of a third party. Therefore the main issue in this case was to decide if and when a person can be held liable towards another person for a duty to take reasonable care for controlling the conduct of the third party.[1] In this case, although it was argued by the appellant that the attack could have been prevented if better lighting was present in the car park, but the majority of the judges were quite skeptical of this claim. Therefore, it appears that mainly the case was conducted on the issue if the risk of injury was created or increased by the defendant due to poor lighting. It was pointed out by the court that in this case, the claim of the building was not based on the physical conditions in the car parking (for example that he had tripped over due to bad lighting). Instead, the claim in the present case was based on the third party's deliberate criminal actions. Therefore the issue in this case was related with the liability of the defendant for an omission, particularly the liability of the defendant regarding the criminal actions of third party. It was decided by the majority of these days that Modbury, as the occupier of the premises, had a duty which did not extend to take precautions fo r preventing the physical injury was to the plaintiff by criminals. In order to decide if the occupiers had a did you get towards the persons who entered their land, the proximity test needs to be applied. In case of this test, physical proximity, circumstantial proximity and casual proximity is involved. Apart from it, under such circumstances, another test that can be used is the three stages test.[2] The three stages in this regard are if the damage suffered by the plaintiff can be described as reasonably foreseeable, if the relationship that existed between the plaintiff and defendant can be described as sufficiently proximate and if so, can it be described as fair, just and reasonable under the circumstances to impose the duty of care on the defendant. The questions that need to be asked for the purpose of deciding if there has been a breach of the required standard of care include the question if it was foreseeable, if the risk was not insignificant and if any other reasonable person would have taken the precautions under similar circumstances in which the defendant was. There are other relevant factors that also need to be considered like if the cost involved in taking the precautions would have considerably increased the cost of energy. It was also claimed by the apparent than an occupier of land is not how a duty of care, which requires the occupier to take reasonable care for preventing physical injury to the plaintiff that may be caused as a result of the criminal behavior of a third-party.[3] Therefore in the present case also, the occupier did not have any control over the actions of the attackers or on the circumstances under which the attack took place. The general rule that can be applied in the present situation is that the person does not have a duty to control the other person to prevent such person from causing damage to a third person. Generally for the purpose of occupier's liability, the duty of care in negligence regarding the physical condition of the premises arises as a result of the power that the occupier had to control the persons who enter or remain on the land and also the power of the occupiers to control the state of land. Moreover, the occupiers in a better position as compared to an entra nt to know regarding the physical condition of the premises.[4] Regarding the issue of a duty of control over third parties, it was the opinion of the majority in this case that the scope of the duties of an occupier does not extend to third parties. Apart from the exceptional circumstances or in case of the presence of the special relationship between the parties, liability is not imposed by the common   law regarding the ommission to take positive steps for the purpose of protecting the other person from the criminal actions of the other party. It was also stated in this case that if a special relationship is not present, it is not the duty of a person to take steps to prevent causing harm to another person as a result of the interactions of a third party even if such a risk can be described as foreseeable. It will also recognize by the court that under some exceptional cases, a duty can be imposed on a party to take positive steps that are required in order to prevent a reasonably foreseeable risk. That has been created independent from the conduct of the defendant. Such a situation arises in cases where there is a special or protective relationship present between the parties, and an obligation has been assumed by the defendant to protect the plaintiff.[5] It can be said that such a protective relationship is present where the defendant has the capability to control the risk of harm that may be caused to the plaintiff and in cases where the plaintiff can be described as vulnerable and depending on the plaintiff for the prevention of such harm.[6] But in the present case, it was noted by the court that the occupier was not in a position to control the actions of the assailants. Similarly, the occupier did not have any knowledge regarding the impending attack. The court stated that the middle attacks cannot be predicted and it was not possible for the occupier to control such an attack.[7] Under these circumstances, it was stated that the occupier cannot be held liable in the present case, because the immediate and direct cause of the injuries suffered by the plaintiff was the attack by the offenders and these injuries were not suffered as an absence of lighting. Similarly, this fact was also noted that responsibility was not assumed by the occupier regarding the safety of the respondent. It was reasonable for the occupier to believe that the employer of the respondent would protect him. Concerning the occupier, the respondent can be placed in similar position in which any other member of the public can be placed. Similarly in the present case, the contribution of the occupier in the injuries suffered by the respondent was negligible. If liability is imposed on the occupier, it would mean that the financial responsibility has been shifted regarding the consequences of a crime, from the wrongdoer to another person. Even if such person did not have the capability to impact the behavior due to which the injuries were caused. Moreover the court stated that there is no doubt that an occupier of land has the duty of care towards the persons who unlawfully present on the land. In the present case also, it can be said that the appellant had a duty towards the first to respond and regarding the physical condition of the car park. However, the issue in this case was related with the fact if the appellant also had a duty of the kind that is relevant for the harm that was offered by the first respondent. This issue was discussed in this case in the form of the argument related with the nature or scope of the duty. In the present case, the nature of farm caused to the respondent was in the form of physical injuries that have been caused by a third party and the respondent did not have any control over the actions of the third-party.[8] Therefore, it can be said in the present case that any relevant duty in such circumstances can be described as the duty related with the security of the respondent. It can be a duty of a person, in his position as the occupier of land, which requires him to take reasonable care for protecting the persons who were in the position of the respondent against conduct, which includes the criminal actions of the third parties. Under these circumstances, the majority decision given by the High Court was that the appeal of Modbry should be allowed on both the issues. Consequently, it was decided by the High Court that Modbury cannot be held liable for injuries suffered by Mr. Anzil. In support of the decision, it was stated by the court. That being an occupier of land, Modbury has a duty of care towards Mr. Anzil but this duty cannot be considered to be extending to take reasonable steps for the purpose of preventing the criminal actions of third parties, as a result of which, physical injuries were suffered by Mr. Anzil. Under the circumstances where Modbury did not have any control over the conduct of the attackers. The court pointed out that even if it can be said that the failure of Modbury to provide proper lighting in the car park could have facilitated the time in the same way as it had made provision for the car park and descent and decided to park his car there but it cannot be treated as the. Main cause behind the injuries suffered by Mr. Anzil. In this case, the direct cause due to which Mr. Anzil had suffered the injuries was the conduct of the three assailants over which Modbury had no control. It was also noted by the court that in this case, the inadequate lighting had not caused the concealment of a dangerous object or condition in the carpark as a result of which, damage may have been suffered by person or property. Due to the unpredictability of criminal behavior, as a general rule, and when a special relationship is not present, a duty is not imposed by the law to prevent harm to another person caused by the criminal conduct of third parties even if such harm can be described as reasonably foreseeable.[9] Therefore the court stated that the occupier, Modbury was not liable for the injuries suffered by the respondent. Chomentowski v Red Garter Restaurant Ltd (1970) 92 WN (NSW) 1070 Commissioner for Railways v McDermott [1967] 1 AC 169 at 186 Dorset Yacht Co v Home Office [1970] AC 1004 Fraser v State Transport Authority (1985) 39 SASR 57 Hill v Van Erp (1997) 188 CLR 159 at 229 Kondis v State Transport Authority (1984) 154 CLR 672 at 687 Pitt Son & Badgery Ltd v Proulefco (1984) 153 CLR 644 Public Transport Corporation v Sartori [1997] 1 VR 168 Smith v Leurs (1945) 70 CLR 256 at 262 Commissioner for Railways v McDermott [1967] 1 AC 169 at 186. Smith v Leurs (1945) 70 CLR 256 at 262 Dorset Yacht Co v Home Office [1970] AC 1004. Kondis v State Transport Authority (1984) 154 CLR 672 at 687 Hill v Van Erp (1997) 188 CLR 159 at 229 Chomentowski v Red Garter Restaurant Ltd (1970) 92 WN (NSW) 1070 Public Transport Corporation v Sartori [1997] 1 VR 168 Fraser v State Transport Authority (1985) 39 SASR 57 Pitt Son & Badgery Ltd v Proulefco (1984) 153 CLR 644

Memorandum Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Memorandum - Essay Example There are three candidates waiting for the heart transplant. The first candidate is Jerry, who has 3 teenage daughters studying and an unemployed wife. He is the bread winner in the family and is 5 years short of his retirement eligibility. His chances of living after a heart surgery will be 10-15 years. The second candidate is a 12 year old girl named Lisa. Her father works in the same hospital and offered to donate or give $2 Million dollars if the heart will be transplanted to Lisa. Lisa suffered 12 years of lifelong health issues and her chances of living after the surgery are not good. The hospital needed money to finish the construction of the specialized facilities that could help a lot of patients. The third candidate is Ozzie who happens to be a 38 years old homeless drug abuser. He is single and his heart condition is due to excessive intake of cocaine. He is also a volunteer in a certain charity and is teaching and helping troubled teens and giving them insights and wisdom against drug abuse and other issues. He signed a contract in the same charity and will continue working as a counsellor-mentor if he will get the transplant. Ethics is defined as the study of right or wrong conduct which focuses on moral situation (Ruggiero, 2008). In the situation above we can definitely say that making the decision on granting the heart transplant to only one of the three candidates is very difficult. There are a lot of things to consider. At first, when evaluating the three candidates, my feelings deeply sympathize for Jerry. Jerry is the most suitable candidate to get the transplant because he is the one which has the highest chances of living years and he has 4 family members who will be benefited. His 3 children need his support for their education and his wife is unemployed. But in making an ethical decision, feelings such as sympathy are not reliable for analysing moral issues (Ruggiero, 2008). When deciding by feelings, it is completely ignoring other people’s feelings (Ruggiero, 2008). According to J.S. Mill and Jeremy Bentham who are the most famous teleological ethicists, the most ethical action is the one based on utility or consequence and is the one which gives the most benefits and least harm. When making a decision on principles of utilitarianism, we should consider everyone affected by the decision. In this situation, Jerry will directly benefit 4 persons, Ozzie will benefit the troubled children and Lisa will help the hospital finish the specialized facilities and will help a lot of patients. Lisa’s condition may not be good after the heart transplant, but her father, an oncologist in the same hospital, will donate a big amount of $2 Million that wil l greatly help improve the hospital and will therefore serve and help more patients in the future. The benefit that Lisa can give is a long-term benefit to a number of patients. Granting the transplant to Lisa will definitely boost Dr. Doe’s loyalty to the hospital and his loyalty to the patients. Although Ozzie can help a lot of troubled children serving as a counsellor-mentor, his chances of recidivism to drug addiction is high. And if he

Power in Complex Societies Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Power in Complex Societies - Essay Example The gods were worshiped with a lot of respect and anything that was said to come from the god was not taken lightly. The ancient leaders knew this and took the fullest advantage of this. The brains of the communities were brainwashed to trust religion. In ancient Egypt, the king ruled over the people and even owned their wealth. This way, he was able to control the people in totality. The king visited the temple regularly to assert his power. He also participated in the rituals of the community. The kings mainly used this source of power where the military and political power also had other determinants (O’Connor & Reid 176). He could then capture the minds of the people. In ancient Athens, there was great reference to religion. The ways of the gods were respected just like in ancient Egypt. In Athens, there were several impiety trials for those who did not respect religion. For example, Anaxagoras was prosecuted for doubting the existence of the god sun. The leaders knew this too well and thus by using religion, they dictated how the Athenians lived. They also protected their dynasties using religion. The Athenians had a lot of belief in prophecy and there were a lot of divinations. In most instances, the results of the divinations favored the reigns of the leaders who were there at the time. Religion also shaped the political culture at the time and thus was the main source of power in most ancient kingdoms including Athens. Sparta had a sophisticated ideological system. The system of power dictated that few elite people ruled over the majority in the community. Sparta had both military and political power. The king was also the spiritual leader of the people and that used this role to assert his authority in the community. Being militaristic state, the ideologies that the community believed played a great role in propelling the dynasties that reigned at the

Two versions of Macbeth act 5 scene 1 Essay Example for Free

Two versions of Macbeth act 5 scene 1 Essay I have studied two versions of Macbeth act 5 scene 1, otherwise known as the sleepwalking scene. They are the Royal Shakespeare Company, and the BBC productions. I have watched several productions but I am going to focus on these two versions in particular. I want to examine the significance of the scene and analyse how it has been produced and directed. This scene is extremely important because it occurs just after Macduff has swore to avenge the killing of his family and just before we see Malcolms army getting ready to fight against Macbeth. The scene is situated in an important part of the play also, because Shakespeare traditionally places the finale of the play in act 5. It is the first time we have seen Lady Macbeth since the banquet and the scene is used to tell us what has been happening to her in the meantime. It is there to allow the viewer to enter the mind of Lady Macbeth and to realise the nightmare she is living in. It is there to show how she is coping with recent events and it will be the last time we ever see her. She is not alone in this scene; a doctor and a gentlewoman are also there. Their roles are to observe Lady Macbeth discreetly and to comment on what she is saying and doing. We find out about her insecurity and that she is afraid of the dark. We also learn that guilt has taken over and that she is extremely unhappy. As one of the major characters in the play, Lady Macbeth has been involved in some of the main events. For example, she was in alliance with her husband in Duncans murder, and even persuaded Macbeth to go through with the murder after he had decided to leave things to chance (Act 1 Scene 7). She organised the whole murder by laying out the daggers and she drugged the possets of the grooms. She also helps Macbeth after the murder by distracting others when she fainted so her involvement was very significant. At that stage she is the dominant partner in the marriage. She has seen a chance to make her husband king and is determined not to let it slip away. She asked evil spirits to unsex me here and for any natural feelings to disappear so she would not hesitate in carrying out the murder. This seems to have worked because when she is persuading her husband her language is very forceful and she conjures up images of horror. Her wish for the evil spirits to fill me from the crown to the toe top-full of direst cruelty has been granted. Manhood is a frequent theme in this early scene. Lady Macbeth sees it simply as a man should have courage to act and to face danger but Macbeth says that he dares to do anything that is suitable to a man; to do more would be unmanly. She knows how to manipulate her husband and this is clearly shown when Macbeth gives in to his wifes demands and decides to go ahead with the murder after the questioning of his manhood. Her ruthless determination has made Macbeth overcome his doubts. These early characteristics have all but disappeared by the sleepwalking scene. She is no longer the ambitious, determined, moral blackmailer. Instead she is a broken woman, emotionally drained and a shadow of her former self. The banquet scene has fully taxed her resources and resulted in her total collapse. She is now guilt-ridden as her soliloquy discloses. She knows about the other murders and this has taken its toll on her mentally and physically too. The significance of sleepwalking is that her guilt is depriving her of any comfort, even sleeping. The gentlewoman and the doctor open the scene. The doctor is questioning the gentlewoman about lady Macbeths condition. She responds by telling the doctor about her sleepwalking but when he asks the gentlewoman what Lady Macbeth has said, she replies that sir, which I will not report after her, explaining that she has no witness to confirm her speech. This suggests that knowing what Lady Macbeth has said could be dangerous for her. While the doctor is trying to persuade her, Lady Macbeth appears whilst holding a candle, this is interesting because it symbolises the good that is still inside her. In both productions she is lit in a way to imply that she is possessed by the supernatural. The mist and darkness reminds us of Banquo and Macbeth before they met the witches on the moor. It also brings back memories of the witches (act 1 scene 1) when they talked about the fog and filthy air. Lady Macbeth is seen to be rubbing her hands frantically and talks about the blood on them. She mentions a spot that she cannot remove; this could be the mark of the devil or maybe it is symbolising the guilt within her. She cannot wash away her murderous deeds. She goes through a roller coaster of emotions as she receives flashbacks from when she and her husband were plotting to kill Duncan. She says one; two: why, then tis time to dot. This is her remembering the ringing of the bell when Duncan was about to be murdered. She continues, Hell is murky! She has said this because she knows what her fate will be and understands the consequences of her actions. She is in complete despair at this stage. She also reveals that she knows about Macduffs family when she says the thane of fife had a wife: where is she now? She is no longer innocent of this knowledge. She constantly rubs her hands and states will these hands neer be clean? and heres the smell of blood still: all the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. This is quite ironic because it is her who says to Macbeth after the murder of King Duncan, that a little water will clear us of this deed (act 2 scene 2). The contrast is no more evident than here, this is where Lady Macbeth takes charge of the situation after Macbeth had forgot to plant the daggers on the grooms. She takes the daggers to do it herself and reassures Macbeth. If you compare this to the sleepwalking scene you can see the difference. Not only has she got the guilt of Duncan, Banquo and Macduffs family but also she has now realised that Macbeth does not need her and doesnt confide in her anymore. This once strong woman is now worthless. Near the end of the scene the doctor recognises that she needs a priest more than a physician. Compare the state of their relation at these two points as well. What once was a strong solid relationship is now left in tatters. The two productions differ in certain ways. In the BBC version, the stage is misty and it is set inside a castle. Archways and stonewalls are clearly visible. There are steps leading to Lady Macbeths bedroom and the scene starts with the doctor and gentlewoman talking to each other in the middle of a large room. Jean Lapotaire is playing Lady Macbeth and she tends to over act her part. She moves about a lot more than Judi Dench in the RSC production. She appears almost as a ghost figure. She is illuminated and I think the director does this to make us aware of a supernatural presence. The camera focuses in on her and she is lit from the back which I believe adds to the effect. Both actresses walk by the doctor and gentlewoman, which suggests that Lady Macbeth is completely oblivious to what is going on around her, this quote supports that theory, aye, but their sense is shut. Lady Macbeth is constantly changing the tone of her voice and facial expressions from being joyful to afraid. This helps illustrate the utter despair she is feeling and contributes to the dramatic effect. Her delivery is breathy and exaggerated, I believe that her performance is over dramatised but on the other hand she is trying to convey the state of mind that Lady Macbeth is in. The doctor is quite old and is convincing. He is startled and shocked at what he hears. The gentlewoman is emotional and her tone of voice varies to help express her emotion In the RSC production, the most obvious difference is the lack of props. It is a very dark stage and there is only a table and chair. The director has created the illusion that a candle is lighting up Lady Macbeths face but it is more likely due to the lighting department. This helps to create a sense of evilness. Judi Dench acts very differently to Jean Lapotaire. When she enters her eyes are swollen to give the effect of her crying. The Gentlewomans delivery is monotonous and the Doctor is quite young. The delivery of the words and facial expressions are very important in this production due to the lack of visual effects. Judi Dench does not move very much and opts to sit down at the table instead. The camera remains focused on Lady Macbeths face. The candle/lighting helps the audience to see her facial expressions more clearly. She is very convincing and her tears seem to be genuine. When the death of Banquo is mentioned the camera looks at the Doctor to show his shock. Neither the Doctor nor the Gentlewoman are dressed in clothing from that period. Judi Dench lets out a huge cry, this cry is heavily exaggerated but I think it helps to convey the pent up emotion that she has been feeling. The light of the candle can be seen fading away as Lady Macbeth leaves, this is the last time we will see her. All in all, I preferred the RSC production I thought Judi Denchs performance was excellent. Jean Lapotaire was sometimes slightly comical because of her over exaggeration but this may be more appealing to people who are not familiar with Macbeth. Jean Lapotaires delivery was interesting. She almost sang the line the thane of fife had a wife: where is she now? like a nursery rhyme, this is somewhat ironic considering that it was tragic. I think the RSC caught the real significance and emotion of the scene well. I think an older Doctor could improve it and I believe the Gentlewomans delivery could be more passionate.

Dreams in The Great Gatsby by F.Scott Fitzgerald Essay -- The Great Ga

A dream is an intangible paradise. In the heavenly world of a dream, all hopes are within reach, and time knows no defined direction. To dream is to believe in the existence of the limitless realm. To dream is to be consumed by the passion and beauty of life, for although a dream may never become a reality, the true substance of a dream is its place in the heart. Jay Gatsby is a dreamer. He believes that the future can return him to his past and to his love, Daisy. Time blocks Gatsby’s dream, for Daisy has made Gatsby a mere memory by marrying Tom Buchanan. Tom and Daisy have minor conflicts with time that parallel Gatsby’s principal struggle with time, yet Gatsby’s dream emerges as the distinguishing factor of his conflict. When challenging the natural course of time, a dream, created by the intricate workings of the mind, and a simple memory of the past cannot be attained with the greatness of their origin. In The Great Gatsby, Gatsby’s destruction and t he death of his undying dream are intensified through the magnification of the conflicts found in the characters of Tom and Daisy Buchanan. By dreaming, Jay Gatsby develops a false world that can never completely capture the grandeur of its original place in time. An attraction exists between Gatsby and the past, for Gatsby’s past holds the source of the dream that molds the individual he becomes. Thus, the beginning of Jay Gatsby is marked by the beginning of his dream when he falls in love with Daisy Fay. "He knew that when he kissed this girl, and forever wed his unutterable visions to her perishable breath, his mind would never romp again like the mind of God" (Fitzgerald 112). From this moment, Gatsby is forever held captive by his dream of Daisy and their love. Imprison... ... York: Twayne, 1963. Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1953. Lehan, Richard. The Great Gatsby: The Limits of Wonder. Ed. Robert Lecker. Boston: Twayne, 1990. Raleigh, John Henry. "F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby: Legendary Bases and Allegorical Significances." F. Scott Fitzgerald: A Collection of Critical Essays. Ed. Arthur Mizener. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1963. 99-103. Steinbrink, Jeffrey. "‘Boats Against the Current’: Morality and the Myth of Renewal in The Great Gatsby." Twentieth-Century Literature 26.2 (Summer 1980): 157-170. Stern, Milton R. The Golden Moment: The Novels of F. Scott Fitzgerald. Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1971. â€Å"Thoughts on The Great Gatsby.† Lily In Canada. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 March 2015. http://lilyincanada.wordpress.com/2013/05/15/thoughts-on-the-great-gatsby/