What does the novel have to say about the relationship between parents and their children Essay Example

What does the novel have to say about the relationship between parents and their children Paper In 1861 during the epoch of the Industrial Revolution, George Eliot (real name: Mary Anne Evans), wrote the renowned novel ‘Silas Marner’. The novel deeply explores the nature of relationship between parent and child, portrayed by many characters in the book. I believe the main reason Eliot wrote ‘Silas Marner’ was because in the Victorian period, writers tried to entertain their readers whilst also embedding their beliefs and judgements into the reader’s mind, which comes across very clearly in the book. There are many Victorian values in the novel which are evident in the text, and some very different, some quite complicated, relationships in the novel, which reveal the complexity behind each inter-related connection between parents and children. â€Å"A child, more than all other gifts, that Earth can offer to a declining man, brings hope with it, and forward-looking thoughts. † This quote by Wordsworth portrays the whole meaning of the book, with several connections to different parts of the novel. Wordsworth had the idea that at the moment of birth, human beings move from a perfect, idealised world to a corrupt and faulty world. Children are closest to this early world and can remember the serenity and purity of it, but Wordsworth said that as they grew up, they lose that connection to the natural world. He believed that children can evoke and reawaken these memories of childhood in adults and bring them closer to the early and perfect world. Eliot had this quote in mind when writing a story of a child resurrecting the humanity and hope in a man submerged in isolation and spiritual desolation. We will write a custom essay sample on What does the novel have to say about the relationship between parents and their children specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on What does the novel have to say about the relationship between parents and their children specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on What does the novel have to say about the relationship between parents and their children specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer The ‘declining man’ is Silas, who was shown at the start of the book to be an ambitious and young linen weaver, who â€Å"worked at his vocation in a stone cottage†. The clever use of language devices include omniscient third person narration, in which it gives an overview of both plots with Eliot’s opinions planted in the text. This use of narration reveals Silas as a solitary outsider, who worked at his trade in the backward looking village of Raveloe â€Å"quite an hour’s journey on horseback from any turnpike. However, after his betrayal in Lantern Yard, his self alienation from the villagers of Raveloe and the death of his humanity after the theft of his gold hoard, Silas is resurrected by Eppie, the child that enters his cottage whilst he is in a fit. Eppie is his salvation and brings those forward looking thoughts and he becomes alive once again. Eliot’s own life is quite evidently expressed in ‘Silas Marner’, through characters such as Silas. She was born in 1819 at the same time as Queen Victoria, in the period of the Industrial Revolution where powerful influential woman and female literary figures were also active. Her life was a constant whirlwind – her mother died in 1836, and Eliot went on to meet Charles Bray who was a radical and free thinker, which led to Eliot rethinking her Christian faith and losing it. In 1849 her father died, and she went to the 142 Strand in London lodging there as a journalist, where she started an affair with John Chapman. This was controversial and went against moral Victorian values, as Chapman had a wife and a mistress living with him. After being sent back to Coventry and writing more reviews for intellectuals, philosophers, and thinkers, she planned to marry Herbert Spencer but it didn’t happen. She then fell in love with George Lewis who was married but believed in free love and open marriage, and with his encouragement and her determination to be taken seriously by distancing herself from frivolous books written by females, her career took off. However, she experienced separation from a rigid Christian society, and her family and brother who she adored rejected her which was heartbreaking for Eliot. Eliot went on to write about the rural life she remembered from childhood in Warwickshire about fond memories, the simplicity of living, and the honest approach to life, which went against the strict Christian society. This lifestyle of going against the normal can be grasped from the life of Silas in ‘Silas Marner’. Silas was a part of the growing and rigid Christian society, but after his betrayal in Lantern Yard after being falsely accused of stealing, he moved to Raveloe and lost this faith. Although Raveloe was undoubtedly a simpler and free living village, people still went to church and Silas didn’t want to be a part of this over fear of the same thing happening again. He experienced self alienation and separation from society, where he kept himself to himself. However, the introduction of Eppie into his life made him rethink his faith once again, and subsequently he followed the Christian way of life because of Eppie. Silas Marner vividly encapsulates the Victorian agony of rejecting faith, and the parent – child relationship between him and Eppie strengthens these values. Silas is a solitary character who lives â€Å"in a stone cottage that stood out among the nutty hedgerows near the village of Raveloe†. This suggests that he lives far from the other villagers in Raveloe, who regard him with suspicion because of his cataleptic fits, which they believe derive from the devil. Back in Lantern Yard his fits are considered a sign of righteousness, however in Raveloe, â€Å"his trances look more like visitations of Satan. † This shows the role of religion in Raveloe, as they follow God and appear extremely superstitious. The villagers associate his medical knowledge with the devil occult, but they tolerate him in their village because his job as a weaver is useful. We learn that Silas works for no purpose, it simply fills his time and he hoards the profits and does nothing with it. He spends as little on himself as possible in order to let his gold hoard grow. The constant weaving and solitude â€Å"reduced his life to the unquestioning activity of a spinning insect†, which suggests that his lifestyle never changed as he was constantly spinning cloth. Silas chooses to block out his past because it’s too painful to even think about for him, the fact that he was betrayed by his best friend made him rethink his faith and lose trust in religion and people. Raveloe is a completely different place to Lantern Yard in terms of what it means to Silas. Lantern Yard was a conservative and peaceful place, where everyone was focused on strict religious values and a simple, frugal life. Raveloe is the opposite – it has a laid back feel with degenerate and laid back inhabitants, who have plenty to spare and are materialistic rather than finding happiness in the simple things. Squire Cass is then introduced as â€Å"the greatest man in Raveloe†, who everybody respects and nobody would ever accuse of doing wrong. The squire is totally absorbed in his own life and petty criticisms. His two sons, Godfrey and Dunstan, are prime examples of the faults in the way their father brought them up. Squire Cass has the attitude that money can solve everything, and that you don’t need to discipline your children or take responsibility for anything – as long as you have financial security your family will be perfect in everybody else’s eyes. His wife died a long time ago, and she was the one who was â€Å"the fountain of wholesome love†, whereas Squire Cass seems to lose interest in them very quickly. Squire Cass is an extremely bad role model to his sons, which is later expressed in the book. For example, Squire never disciplined Dunstan and as a result he died trying to pay back rent money he owed to his father in a reckless way. Squire Cass failed as a father because there is no trust in the relationship between Dunstan and Godfrey and their father. They feel they cannot tell him about how Dunstan lost the rent money because of fear of what he’d do. Furthermore, Godfrey is scared to tell him of his affair with Molly, because he is afraid his father will disown him and he is accused of being â€Å"weak like his mother†. Squire Cass takes credit for anything good that his sons do, but as soon as they make a mistake he threatens to disown them. Like both Marner and the Cass’ lives, it is filled with artificial pleasures. Silas has happiness from his gold hoard, Dunstan likes the difficulties he can cause for others, and Godfrey is content with the idyllic vision of his future with Nancy. Dunstan, who can get Godfrey to do whatever he wants through blackmail and temptation about Godfrey’s secret affair, sets off to sell Wildfire, Godfrey’s horse in order to get back the rent money. Dunstan has a superficial reality over the power he has. He may have an influential and persuasive hold over Godfrey, but in the place of the village he has no real power. However, after sealing the deal but then falling of Wildfire and killing him, Dunstan searches for another way to get the money back. His mind is fixed on the thought of Marner’s gold, as it had been village gossip that he had a lot of money hidden somewhere. He adopts the attitude of†why borrow Marner’s money when you can just take it†, which he has learnt from his father. He walks into the inviting cottage and â€Å"his eyes travelled eagerly over the floor, where the bricks, distinct in the fire light, were discernible under the sprinkling of sand. † This suggests Dunstan is keen to find the money and quickly get out of there, and he doesn’t mind doing a corrupt act if it means getting to Godfrey. When he lifts the brick from the floor up and steals the money, he steps back out into the darkness, never to be seen again. Eliot’s style of writing in this fast paced chapter captures Dunstan’s inner voice, as his phrases, words and beliefs are embedded into the third person narration. Dunstan has this attitude that nothing matters as long as he’s happy and he doesn’t seem to care if anybody else gets hurt by his actions – this is derived from his own father’s behaviour. Marner has this idea that as his life is so repetitive, nothing out of the ordinary could happen because of this daily cycle. However when he goes to count his money and finds it missing, his human form seems to die and he frantically panics. His only reassurance is his own reality, and so he reluctantly starts weaving monotonously once again. Marner is traumatised by his loss, as it is all he believed he had to live for and now that artificial and dormant hope had gone. He treated the loss of his gold like a person would treat the loss of their child – he was deeply upset and became even more of a recluse. Silas is reduced to having to ask the villagers help catch the thief, which is a novel idea to him, however they soon sympathise with him and it creates community bonds as such. Later on, Dolly Winthrop introduces the idea of children as she â€Å"stroked Aaron’s brown head, and thought it must do Master Marner good to see a ‘pictur of a child. But Marner, on the other side of the hearth, saw the neat featured rosy face as a mere dim, round, with two dark spots in it. † This suggests that Dolly believes Aaron is an example of a picturesque child, but Silas simply sees an empty rosy cheeked face with dark eyes. This is how Silas sees children before Eppie came into his life. It shows that he seems to have no time for children and is not accustomed to the love, happiness and pride they can bring to the adults. Molly Farren is introduced fully, but it is clear she does not look after Eppie and is not capable too because of her opium addiction. She decided to go back to Raveloe to tell everyone of Godfrey’s unfaithfulness and lack of care for her and his child. She blames Godfrey for everything bad in her life, although some of it is down to â€Å"the demon opium to which she was enslaved. † This suggests Molly is tied to opium, she embezzles Godfrey’s money all her life to support her drug addiction rather than to support her child. Godfrey thinks his own daughter Eppie is a liability, and Molly uses Eppie to manipulate and get to Godfrey (playing with his mind. She purposely takes her into the snow with her to go to the Squire’s party with the soul intent to make a fool of Godfrey. She happily died and showed no struggle to survive or grasp Eppie. Eppie sees the bright lights of Marner’s house, and she walks in whilst he was in a trance. When Silas comes around, he believes Eppie is his gold coins that have been returned. Eppie becomes his salvation and that moment, his soul is regenerat ed and Silas is redeemed for his actions. Eppie starts crying for ‘mammy’, and Silas follows the footsteps to discover Molly’s dead body – so he rushes to the Squire’s party for a doctor. When the Squire’s party is notified, Godfrey becomes alarmed that if Molly doesn’t die, she will reveal all about his secret double life. He thinks he might have to care for Eppie which will ruin his chances with Nancy. Godfrey hopes Molly dies so his affair doesn’t come to light, and as he thinks money can solve everything, he gives Silas some money to buy the child some clothes, seemingly out of the goodness of his own heart. This shows the parent-child relationship between Godfrey and his father Squire – he is avoiding the responsibility of his child and using money to make everything okay like his father always has done. Godfrey values his own selfish happiness over his fatherly responsibility which is exactly what Squire Cass did – the relationship between them has moved down the generations and progressed. Eppie replaces Silas’ love of money with his love of Eppie – she is his salvation. Its a lone thing-and Im a lone thing. My moneys gone, I dont know where-and this is come from I dont know where. I know nothing-Im partly mazed. This shows why Marner wants to keep Eppie, he has no idea how his gold was taken and now he has no idea how Eppie has appeared, but he is amazed at the chance and Eppie seems to be his last chance. He learns to love Eppie as she is happy and reminds him of his former self (just like Wordsworth’s quote. ) When people try to take Eppie away Silas begs to look after her as her mother is dead and her father is unknown – he cares for her greatly and gives her the name Eppie. Silas learns to adapt quickly to children considering his isolation from others for 15 years. The second Eppie walks into his life and actually needs Silas, his humanity is redeemed. Although Eppie has low expectations of Silas because her mother never touched or talked to her (this shows the level of neglect), Silas has a natural protectiveness instinctively and vows to never hurt her and he puts her before himself. Gold is a symbol of rare, expensive, high quality, precious, material wealth, which represents importance and value – and Eppie symbolises all of these things. Silas becomes popular in the village and accepted because of his loving attitude to Eppie. The villagers are more sympathetic, especially women, who doubt how we will cope. Silas is very protective of Eppie, stating â€Å"she’ll be my little un, she’ll be nobody else’s†. This is because Silas is afraid that Eppie will love someone else more than she loves him. Eliot wonderfully contrasts the gold and the child, stating that gold is deaf, dumb and blind to life, whereas Eppie is the opposite who eats at life, sucks the life out of everything, and is so alive. She forces forward looking thoughts for Silas and becomes a healing process for him to accept his past. Gold asked him to constantly weave and be isolated, Eppie reawakens his senses with life and gets him out to meet people and brings him back to life – she resurrects him. Eliot’s use of contrast emphasizes the effect of Eppie on Silas. â€Å"As the child’s mind was growing into knowledge, his mind was growing into memory: as her life unfolded, his soul, long stupefied in a cold narrow prison, was unfolding too, and trembling gradually into full consciousness. This suggests that as Eppie grows, Silas’ mind begins to except his cold past and regain full life into him. Dolly tries to make Silas punish Eppie for running away, but although at first he is adamant he never will, he agrees to because the thought of her running away petrifies him. Silas put Eppie in the coal hole but the punishment ended as soon as she cried – the form of discipline faile d because he simply can’t bear to harm Eppie. There is no repulsion to Silas when with Eppie, and it shows that money doesn’t necessarily bring happiness. Godfrey believes it’s easier to hide behind the inconvenience of her mother dying in the snow than taking responsibility. This is made easier because the Squire’s family is respected and nobody would think anything disrespectful or salacious such as the unfolded events that happened – nobody suspects these untoward things. In part two of the novel, we learn that Godfrey believes he has a god given right over Eppie and suddenly wants her back because Nancy can’t have children of her own. I believe Eliot wrote the book in two parts simply too emphasize the growing up of Eppie over sixteen years, and so as a reader we can grasp what changes and similarities come about because of this. The tone of the story is sympathetic to each character’s story, revealing in depth emotions and the relationship between parent and child. When Eppie asks if â€Å"God would like me to be married, sir? †, Silas although has no views over marrying within class, does doubt the value of his love to Eppie. â€Å"Things will change; whether we like it or no; things won’t go on for along while just as they are and no difference. This suggests that Silas knows that the marriage between Aaron and Eppie will change things between them, although Eppie claims he will live with the both of them. The relationship between Eppie and Silas is really tested when Godfrey turns up wanting his child back after refusing to have anything to do with her for 16 years. The villagers feel â⠂¬Å"it’s natural he should be disappointed at not having any children†, however I think that to shirk his responsibility for 16 years then demand Eppie back now that she’s grown up is wrong. Nancy feels that â€Å"to adopt a child because children of your own had been denied you, was to try and choose your lot in spite of Providence. † This means that Nancy believes that if God chose for her not to be able to conceive, it was wrong to try and adopt a child to replace this loss. However, when Godfrey reveals all to Nancy about his past and affair, and how Eppie really is his, she feels it’s his duty to look after Eppie and Nancy feels it will bring the two of them closer, with her ultimately getting her child. For Nancy to just forgive Godfrey and not leave him shows the trust between them, although the grief from being unable to have children is replaced by the concept that they can just take Eppie away from Silas. Silas allows Eppie to speak for herself and choose who she wants to live with – the choice between money, or human decency and relationships. This shows that Silas trusts Eppie will make the right decision with her life and what she feels is right, he places all his faith in Eppie to do the right thing. When Eppie chooses to stay with Silas in the â€Å"idyllic and happy† cottage, far away from having to be a lady and wealth, the true colours of their relationship is shown. Eppie is Silas’ salvation, and he learns to trust her with all his heart, and she later redeems him by him having faith in her. This is an example of a tight knitted and loving bond – the relationship between Eppie and Silas is relentless to any outsider, and they both have this perfect trust and love in which they place in each other. This is very different to every other character in the book. For example, the relationship between Squire Cass and his sons is totally the opposite – he believes money solves absolutely everything, and just as Godfrey copied, they both shirk their responsibilities which leads to devastating events. Molly Farran has no bond with her child at all – she never paid her attention or love, which Silas redeems Eppie in a sense as he gives her what she had always lacked. In conclusion, I believe that children did bring some hope and forward looking thoughts to some of the characters in the novel, and to others they got what they deserved. The effect of Eppie on Silas’ life is profound, she definitely brought forward looking thoughts, however, Dunstan and Godfrey certainly didn’t for their father because he simply had no interest in them. The sadness over the incapability of Nancy to conceive is weighed out by Godfrey’s actions, and so they didn’t deserve forward looking hopes from a child, which is exactly what they got.

The Reality Of Huckleberry Finn essays

The Reality Of Huckleberry Finn essays Huckleberry Finn is a book that contains elements of romantic and realistic fiction; even though it contains both these elements, it is a book on realistic fiction, and that is how it was written to be. Mark Twain used historical facts and data to make this story realistic, it used situations that would normally happen in the time the novel takes place in. Huckleberry Finn's father is a vagrant and a despicable person; his actions are written to how a man of that characteristic would act. Two more characters in this novel also act accordingly; the Duke and the Dauphin. A couple of crooks and frauds who are ill at heart and produce no good at all. A kind man Jim, a black slave at the beginning of this novel, goes through much and many people go through much for him. Of these characters I have just mentioned, Jim is the only considerate one, and the Duke and the Dauphin and Huckleberry Finn's father are evil. Huckleberry Finn has no strong feelings for his father except that of resentment. His father abandoned him when he was a child and come backs to town once in a while. His father would beat Huck many times usually because he was drunk. This is not unusual for someone drunk to do if that person is a beater. "I used to be scared of him all the time, he tanned me so much." (Twain, p. 25) Besides him beating Huck, his father has put fear into Huck, which is sad, but is realistic. Besides beating Huck, he also scolded him for trying to get an education; he though Huck was trying to become smarter than his father, and he wouldn't have that. "You're educated, too, they say can read and write. You think you're better'n your father, now, don't you, because he can't? I'll take it out of you." (Twain, pg. 26) Not only is Huck's father mean and petty, he is also greedy. "'I've been in town two days, and I hain't heard nothing but about you bein' rich. I heard about it away down the riv er, too. That's why I come. You git me t...

Rubber Chicken Bone Science Experiment

Rubber Chicken Bone Science Experiment You wont be able to make a wish on a wishbone with the rubber chicken bone science experiment! In this experiment, you use vinegar to remove the calcium in chicken bones to make them rubbery. This is a simple project that illustrates what would happen to your own bones if the calcium in them is used more quickly than it is replaced. Materials for This Project VinegarChicken boneJar big enough you can cover the bone with vinegar While you can use any bone for this experiment, a leg (drumstick) is a particularly good choice because its normally a strong and brittle bone. Any bone will work, though, and you can compare bones from different parts of a chicken to see how flexible they are initially compared with how they change when calcium is removed from them. Make Rubber Chicken Bones Try to bend a chicken bone without breaking it. Get a sense of how strong the bone is.Soak chicken bones in vinegar.Check on the bones after a few hours and days to see how easy they are to bend. If you want to extract as much calcium as possible, soak the bones in vinegar for 3-5 days.When you are done soaking the bones, you can remove them from the vinegar, rinse them in water and allow them to dry. While you have vinegar handy, how about using it to  make a bouncy ball from an egg? How It Works The acetic acid in the vinegar reacts with the calcium in the chicken bones. This weakens them, causing them to become soft and rubbery  as if they had come from a rubber chicken. What Rubber Chicken Bones Mean for You The calcium in your bones is what makes them hard and strong. As you age, you may deplete the calcium faster than you replace it. If too much calcium is lost from your bones, they may become brittle and susceptible to breaking. Exercise and a diet that includes calcium-rich foods can help prevent this from happening. Bones Aren't Just Calcium While the calcium in bones in the form of hydroxyapatite makes them strong enough to support your body, they cant be made completely of the mineral or they would be brittle and prone to breakage. This is why vinegar doesnt completely dissolve bones. While the calcium is removed, the fibrous protein called collagen remains. Collagen gives bones enough flexibility to withstand everyday wear and tear. It is the most abundant protein in the human body, found not just in bones, but also in skin, muscles, blood vessels, ligaments, and tendons. Bones are close to 70% hydroxyapatite, with most of the remaining 30% consisting of collagen. The two materials together are stronger than either one alone, in much the same way reinforced concrete is stronger than either of it components. Science Ideas to Explore Carbonated soft drinks are also acidic. What happens if you soak bones in soda rather than vinegar?Teeth consist almost entirely of the calcium mineral hydroxyapatite. What do you predict will remain of a tooth if you soak it in vinegar for a long time? How about the effect of soda on teeth?

Text, Image, Culture Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Text, Image, Culture - Essay Example Most of the consumers buy televisions to satisfy their need of being connected to the world. Before, small television sets already satisfied this need. However, when the big televisions were introduced, the society began to change their through of being duly satisfied. It came to be that bigger televisions would bring about better self satisfaction level for many consumers. Besides convenience, they are satisfied by the fact that they are able to benefit from the best and most recent innovations of technology, which makes them a part of a modern society. Psychologically, being able to get along with the society is a great benefit in terms of self-satisfaction matters of an individual. Usually, owning large-sized televisions suggest extravagance and luxury. This fact then adds up to the social status of an individual who has the capability to purchase the said type of televisions. Normally, a person who owns a television set that is of a large-size is usually identified as someone who has a better social status than that of the others who own smaller television types. Yes, owning a large television also identifies the financial capability of the consumer. As known to many, large televisions cost higher than that of the smaller ones. This is mainly because of the features that it posses and the elements of entertainment that it offers its viewers. Aside from this, the marketing strategy of the said types of television sets suggest that if consumers buy them, they are to be considered "cool" by the society. As a result, many consumers who buy the said device have the same idealism as they take ownership of the television. On Personal Companionship Many among those who purchase large sized television would want to fulfill their need of having a personal companion. Psychologically, this may be termed as a personal need of having someone or something to fill the void of companionship within a person. More than just the idea of relaxation that the television provides, for many introvert persons who would rather stay at home than mingle with other outside, televisions serves as a personal companion. The certainties of the fulfillment of the said television regarding the said need could be seen in the actual provisions of the television of bringing the world to the house of the television viewer or owner. On Advertising Matters and Social Culture In a world of numerous products offered by different manufacturing companies, advertising strategies used by the business establishments could be both appealing and blinding to the eyes of the consumers. Why is this so This is due to the fact that marketing

Different Difficulties in Learning Children Essay

Different Difficulties in Learning Children - Essay Example In fact, he elaborates that such children need help in learning to do their own chores or paying closer attention to something important. Gates (2008) provides a more practical explanation of learning disability by saying that children with such difficulties cannot understand, learn, and communicate in comparison to other children. The normal procedure in which our brain processes information is extremely complex. In situations such as viewing an image or speaking, the brain has to process several tasks including retrieving information from memory, recognizing the data to transmit and processing the information to either store in memory or invoke the auditory parts for communication. Most of these activities occur at various locations in the brain, sometimes in a simultaneous fashion. The task of linking up and associating these various segments is the responsibility of our brain. In the case of people with learning disabilities, the only difference is with regards to the different m anner in which their brains process information unlike the case with other individuals. Thomas (2003) says that people with learning disabilities are not handicapped or lazy. Instead, he contends that they tend to have at least an average level of intelligence. Their difficulties simply arise from the different ways in which their brains process information. A broader scientific explanation to this phenomenon is explained by the four stages of information processing (Input, Integration, Storage and Output) under which learning disabilities are categorized. While people with input disabilities have problems with visual and auditory perception, individuals with integration difficulties are unable to categorize and interpret information from the input stage based on previous learning. Some learning difficulties occur in the later stages due to issues in retaining long-term memory.  Several cases of learning disability occur much later during the information-processing scenario due to factors like muscle inhibition and lack of necessary motor skills.

Meaning Behind Aussie Battler Essay Example for Free

Meaning Behind Aussie Battler Essay The film industry determines the way we view our films. Australian films often backup the idea of the ‘Aussie battler/hero’. A battler/hero is known as someone who fights for what they believe in, their country, their heritage, their family, friends, dignity and pride. A battler’s job is to protect and hold onto what they are fighting for, whether it is for the good or for the bad. The Aussie Battler is known for being a working class citizen who commits there heart and soul into their work, land, culture and family. Many Australian films explore the concept of ‘Overcoming Adversity’ and explore into the idea of the ‘Aussie Battler/hero’. Wonderful examples of films that directly look into this idea of the ‘Aussie Battler/hero’, is Ned Kelly (2003) and The Castle (1997). Ned Kelly is a film based in the 70’s/80s about a group of young men, Ned Kelly (Heath Ledger), Joseph Byrne (Orlando Bloom), Dan Kelly (Laurence Kinlan) and Steve Hart (Philip Barantini), also known as ‘the Kelly gang’, fighting to preserve their heritage and remain true to their family. The director of Ned Kelly ‘Gregor Jordan’ has contributed the idea of how overcoming adversity can be problematic and difficult, but can also change society. The Castle a film directed by Rob Sitch is about a man, Darryl Kerrigan (Michael Caton) facing the authority because he believes in fighting for his right to not lose everything he has worked for, for unnecessary government requests. The film industry determines the way people view films. Australian films often backup the idea of the Aussie Battler. An Aussie battler is referred to as someone who fights for what they believe in, their country their heritage, family, friends, dignity and pride. A battlers job is to protect and hold onto what they believe is worth fighting for, whether is is for good or bad. The Aussie battler is known to be a working class citizen who commits their sweat, blood and time into their work, land, culture and family. Many Australian films explore into the concept of overcoming adversity, and look deeply into the understanding the idea of the Aussie battler. Wonderful examples of films that directly look into this concept of the Aussie Battler’ is Ned Kelly (2003) and The Castle (1997). Ned Kelly is a Film based in 1880s about a group of men (Ned Kelly (Heath Ledger), Joseph Byrne (Orlando Bloom), Dan Kelly (Laurence Kinlan) and Steve Hart (Philip Barantini), also known as The Kelly Gang. The gang’s objective is to fight, preserve their heritage and change how the authority treats the Irish. The director of Ned Kelly, Gregor Jordan has contributed the idea of how overcoming diversity can be problematic and difficult, but can also change society’s views and ways. The Castle, a film directed by Rob Sitch, is about a man, Darryl Kerrigan (Michael Caton) facing the authority because he believes in fighting for his right to not lose something that is a big part of his life and something he has worked for his whole life. The events that arise in both films revolving around the characters, reiterate this idea of ‘Over coming Adversity’ and the ‘Aussie Battler/hero’ is emerged through a variety of techniques incorporated from their respective directors. In the first scene of Ned Kelly he is portrayed as a great contribution to society by saving his class mates life from drowning in a river. He received a green hero’s sash. Another scene that also really shows Ned as a battler is where he is chasing one of the authorities through the bushes. Ned shoots the authority multiple times and once he finally stops Ned tells him ‘he would not have shot if he hadn’t kept running’; he also tried to stop him from bleeding but in the end couldn’t and was forced to put a bullet through his heart. A scene where Ned’s image is turned around is where he steals the horse and gets caught from the authority; Ned loses it and threatens the authority which then lands him in jail and from this point on Ned falls into the role of ‘The Aussie Battler’. Ned Kelly belongs to an Irish heritage that immigrated to Australia for a better life, but not realizing what laid ahead for them they were pushed low down in society and struggled to keep an income. The Kelly’s were given a piece of land by the selectors where they were allowed to grow their own crops, producing their own food and founder animals for income. The authorities in Ned Kelly were self-centred and, self-indulged. The way the authority treated the Irish was different to how they treated their own. That’s where the Kelly Gang and the authority differed. Ned was pleasant to everyone he came across, he didn’t chose to harm them, gave them respect and the rights they deserved wether they were his own people or not. The events that arise in both films revolving around the two main character ‘Ned Kelly’ and ‘Darryl Kerrigan’, reiterate this idea of ‘overcoming adversity’ and the ‘Aussie battler’ is emerged through a variety of different techniques that have been incorporated by their respective directors’. In a scene towards the start of the film that shows Ned as a battler is where he is hunting a policeman through the bush lands because he ran. Ned finally guns down the policeman and finds the man lying on the ground in immense pain. Ned tells the policeman ‘he would not have shot him if he had not run’. This scene shows the battler side of Ned because further on in this scene Ned is forced to kill the policeman because there was nothing he could do to save him. The Castle is a classic Australian film the stereotypes the Aussie image but also conveys the message that Australians are tough and fight for right. The Kerrigan family is an admirable representation of the average Australian family. They are tight-knit, willing to help and passionate about sticking together as a family. There is a scene that particularly shows off the characteristics of a battler/ fighter within the castle. This scene is were Darryl is at his court hearing. When the Jury goes on break, Darryl sends out his message to his lawyer who then uses what he says in his debate. By Darryl really expression his true emotions, they win. Darryl Kerrigan resembles the typical Australian father. Although his family isn’t well off and don’t particularly live in a great spot (beside an airport), its home, it all comes from the heart. Darryl is a battler; he supports everyone’s opinions but in the end makes his decisions based upon his beliefs. He doesn’t particularly have a high status in society with him working as a tow truck driver but still manages to stay positive because he doesn’t care what people think of him, he’s a proud Australian. He works and fights for the things he needs and can appeal to ones emotions. He uses his power to battle against the bad to win the good. The directors of both Ned Kelly and The Castle have incorporated a variety of different cinematic techniques that make both films memorable in their own manner. Techniques that come under the branch are Setting, Dialogue, and Costuming, Camera angles and movement and sound. Ned Kelly desires the affect for its audience to become entangled within the films story line and to do this the film must include a range of different and somewhat unusual techniques to gather attention. The setting for Ned Kelly is rather stereotypical to the era the film is set in. Most scenes where the Kelly gang do major work is set on the authority’s side. This is the brighter, more classic, rich side, whereas most other scenes such as fighting and war is done in the bushlands, outback where the Kelly’s feel safe and indulged in their own culture. The lighting in Ned Kelly is very much so leaned to low key lighting. If you notice high key lighting comes into play when the Kelly’s are in the authority’s territory and low key lighting for the rest. The dialogue used in Ned Kelly is very traditional and formal. The authority take on a different role in there dialogue as they used different words, words that come off more offensive and cruel. Costuming is also another very outmoded label. The Kelly’s customarily wore old, scrawny, filthy unwashed clothes. They also were mostly seen in dark long pants and jackets, not a lot of skin was shown which contributed to the aspects of low key lighting. The outcast side of people had scrawny hair, beards and were dressed in dirty clothing. Whereas the upper-class side were dressed in clean cut, brighter coloured clothing that resembled there place in society. In both Ned Kelly and the Castle similar camera angles and movements were used. High Angles where used to show power i. e. the authority standing over Ned making him look weaker and more vulnerable. Particularly towards the start of both films you notice low angles and high angles being used to show authority, but as the films progressed you start to notice the change in angles and where the cameras are positioned. Throughout both films you will notice an establishing shot being used at the start of most scenes followed by either a close up or mid shot, depending wether the scene was to include dialogue where then they would need a close up or just a mid-shot. There were many cuts during dialogue which also showed great importance in what the characters were saying. The castle resembled typical Australian dress standards for that time (Flannelettes, Jeans and bowl cuts). The Authority seemed to be dressed in smart clothing the reminded you of control and responsibility. Dialogue in The Castle was stereotypically an Australian accent. The slang, the way the words are slurred and how the pronunciations of words are carried out. The authority defiantly takes on another type of channel of communication, they talk more proper, formal and tend to shorten their words to sound like they aren’t slurring. The setting in the castle is bright and cheerful. It creates a friendly environment that also shows a real Australian household. They do this by creating a rundown house, not much money and living right next to an airport. The lighting the frames this film is high key. Even when darkness controls the time of the scene light still manages to be the key element to the shots. Both films show and encourage messages about Australia in two completely different but similar ways. Ned Kelly shows a message that stealing is wrong and fighting is not the answer, but fighting for what you believe in, fighting for the right to not let others contradict your life is ok. On the other hand the message about The Castle is exactly the same but carried out differently. The castle shows the fact that Australians are not very materialistic and in general are quite simplistic and positive. Both films also conveyed the message that family is important and supporting that idea of love and trust is what makes life worth living for. Ned Kelly chose reveal the idea of using violence, crime and death to portray its message, whereas The Castle did not. The Castle showed its message through family values, gratitude and reverence. Both of these films had the authority against them, they stuck together and became united as one. By the end of both films we were left with the feeling of knowing and understanding how both families’ fought together. If one was going down they were all going down. What was also so great about these two films is that we could watch them grow from battlers into heroes. Ultimately both films were devised to create a sense of understanding about the Australian culture. For certain message and concepts to be conveyed a range of different techniques had to be used, from characterization, to cinematography. The plots direction leaded to the audience grasping different emotions and challenged the audience to experience a film unlike most modern productions.

Can One Perceive Or Confirm The Existence Of An Idea Or Object That Is :: essays research papers

Can One Perceive Or Confirm The Existence Of An Idea Or Object That Is External To Him Mainly - God? "I think therefore I am." Man wills, refuses, perceives, understands, and denies many principles. As explained by Rene' Descartes, man is a thinking thing, a conscious being who truthfully exists because he is certain that it is so. All that man perceives is internally present and not external to him or his mind. The focal point of the third meditation that must be dealt with is: Can one perceive or confirm the existence of an idea or object that is external to him mainly - God? There are three ways, Descartes explains, that one may come to the conclusion of an objects existence. The first is through nature. The second is through feeling an object independent of one's will, for example; heat and cold. The third, and most elaborated upon is the point of cause and effect, or more simply, the objective reality of an idea. We will primarily deal with the third reason of cause and effect. Descartes brings some examples to demonstrate his cause and effect theory. More importantly, is the logic that lies behind the actual theory. The rationale that an object will have an effect is only if it stems from a legitimate cause. A stone, for example, cannot be perceived accurately if there isn't an initial idea preceding with equal or superior properties in one's intellect. The mind generates ideas and develops reality through previous schema or beliefs as Descartes states: "And although an idea may give rise to another idea, this regress cannot, nevertheless, be infinite;we must in the end reach a first idea, the cause of which is, as it were, the archetype in which all the reality that is found objectively in these ideas is contained formally." Additionally, properties such as color, sound, heat, and cold are too complex in their nature for Descartes to determine whether they are true or false. In other words, are the ideas that one has about a property true or false? Consequently, Descartes concludes that there is a common element between examples like the stone and the cold. The cold portraying the unreal or false object and the stone as a true object. He contends that they both contain "substance" like man himself, and are therefore similar. The only difficulty that arises is the consideration of God's existence. There is no substance or idea for the notion of God to originate from. The valid question that Descartes asks is: Is it conceivable that a finite being have the idea of an infinite existence?