Thursday, October 31, 2019

Marketing Research Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 2

Marketing Research - Essay Example Consumer psychology being used as a factor to charge a high price is a strategy known as premium pricing. It might be assumed that this kind of strategy would be used to skim the market and take as much profits as possible and finally will have to be abandoned. This hypothesis is, however, incorrect to assume. As Smith (1997) alludes, premium pricing strategy might not simply aim to skim the market rather to maintain a high priced brand value without straining the consumer to an extent leveled with the skimming strategy. If the company prices its wines at a price much higher than the actual cost, but keeps it within affordable limits of the targeted market segment, the product is likely to establish a significant brand value. Brand value, however, is dependant on the kind of advertisement that has been done and the branding cost to establish the product while pricing itself is an independent variable as the actual costs of the product are not a deciding factor. Brand value in the example research were measured by mere exhibition of cost to the sampling participants. The assumption of a better reputation and taste based on the cost confirms the premium pricing method for the product to be an effective technique that utilized the expectation of the participants from a high priced wine to be better in taste as per Emmerich’s (2005) research. Other variables, as Emmerich (2005) states, that could affect the results of such a strategy include competitive forces; competitors will have the advantage to sell their products at lower prices and continuously challenge the price of the product. Researches could have measured comparison with competitive brands as an additional variable. An experiment to test this will require each participant to test and sample the wine qualitatively only knowing the tagged prices and not the actual prices. The given example employed a simple random sample of 20 participants, in a

Tuesday, October 29, 2019

Use of Language in the play Blood Wedding Essay Example for Free

Use of Language in the play Blood Wedding Essay I am analysing the play to help me understand the meaning of the play and the characters. This play is a translation of Blood Wedding as Federico was Spanish writer so therefore all the literature wont all be there. Plays arent easy to translate, as when it has been translated it must ensure that the final product works o stage as well as a play in a book. Lorcas translation took place in April and may 1988 in Madrid. The main problem with presenting and translating Lorcas play was that the characters speak from their souls and that Lorcas has writing in a theatre of poetry and emotions. The title Blood Wedding suggests tension throughout the play and the passionate union of two lovers, the bride and the bridegroom and Leonardo and the wife. In Act One Scene One we are introduced to the mother and the bridegroom. We can see that Lorca has represented the mother as being very over protected of the Bridegroom. He shows the audience this by his use of language, we notice that the mother likes to fuss around her son a lot e. g. making sure he has eaten before going out tot the vineyard. Son take some food with you When the son tells her no and that he will eat grapes at the vineyard by cutting them with a knife. This is when the tension rises between the mother and the bridegroom. The mother becomes cross and starts to shout about how knives are dangerous, this when we find out that she lost her husband and son due to being stabbed by a knife. If I were to live pulls my hair. From looking at this speech we see that Lorcas language is poetic, we immediately know that Lorcas views of the mother is that he has her treating her son like a child. As part of the audience I can see that the mother does do this through her use of language. As the audience we gain information about the mother and bridegrooms relationship by looking at the use of language and how its spoken, also from looking at language we look at the two characters and see how they communicate with each other, what their tones, pace and their relationship is like. The son changes the subject by bringing up the bride; by looking at the language we can see that the mother is very suspicious and curious about her. She had didnt there. This shows that she has been listening to the gossipers about the brides past. I think Lorca wants to set out that the mother doesnt want her son to be married. I think Lorca represents the mother as a bitter, evil old woman who doesnt think about her sons future as she is always shouting, saying nasty things. I have also notice that she asks a lot of question, this shows that she is curious especially about the lady her son will be marrying, Do you know my sons.? I think Lorca has chosen the language he has because it helps the audience to understand the characters more, their relationships with one another and to learn more about the characters personalities. I feel that the mother and the bridegroom do have a loving relationship after analysing the use of language they use. Youll be so happy! Both of you. I can see that they have communicated with each other strongly. Although we see that the mother isnt happy with him getting married, I think its because she doesnt want to feel as though she has lost another member of her family. After analysing the language, I can see that the mother is trying to set to the audience and the father that her son will be able to support and look after the bride, My son has the very best of prospects. I can also see that the son has a caring relationship with his mother, The first one is just for you.. This shows that the bridegroom knows that she wants him to children, it also shows that he is thinking about her and knows that shed like the family to extend. At the end of the play the language Lorca uses shows that the mother encourages the son to go after Leonardo and the bride, Go on, go. With you. I think from looking at the use of language between Leonardo and the bride in Act Two Scene One, Lorca has set out that these two characters deeply do love each other. Yes, I got always blame. When Leonardo says this, I think he is trying to tell the audience that he regrets marrying his wife and wishes he and the bride stuck together. I know Im crazy. around my room. This shows that the bride feels the same and doesnt know if she wants to marry the bridegroom. I think Lorca represent that she is only marrying the bridegroom as he is more her class as Leonardo isnt. At the end of the play when we see Leonardo and the bride together, I feel that they have a strong, caring and warm relationship after analysing the use of language. I can see that the bride tries to hide her feelings at first. Ill go my own back. But as Leonardo talks to her, telling her shes wrong, we begin to learn that she was the one who decided they should run away together. The language they use is filled with passion, Naked. feel myself burn. its the scent of your breast. Lets just go from here whispering all around. And is also very poetic, And grew thick with weeds. Lorca is using this language to show us that the bride didnt know whom she wanted to be with, someone with money or someone who she loved. The couple are very affectionate we can see that Leonardo really loves her, as there is a lot of touching, they are dedicating their love for one another. If this book didnt have the language it has, then the book wouldnt have maybe had a different ending. Lorca uses poetic language in his plays, it explains why such a theatrically innovative play Blood Wedding is full of echoes of folk culture. Poetic language shows expression of each character. The creation of poetry in Blood Wedding can lead us to imagery, we sense the feeling the characters are feeling. Lorcas dramatic language possesses a symbolism of imagery.

Saturday, October 26, 2019

The History And Evolution Of Saarc Politics Essay

The History And Evolution Of Saarc Politics Essay The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) comprises eight countries of South Asia, i.e. Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka. The idea of regional cooperation in South Asia was first mooted in May 1980 by Bangladesh President Ziaur Rahman. President Rahman addressed letters to the Heads of Government of the countries of South Asia, presenting his vision for the future of the region and the compelling arguments for regional cooperation in the context of evolving international realities. The Foreign Secretaries of seven countries in South Asia met for the first time in Colombo in April 1981 and identified five broad areas for regional cooperation. A series of meetings followed in Nepal (Kathmandu/November 1981), Pakistan (Islamabad/August, 1982), Bangladesh, India (Delhi/July 1983) to enhance regional cooperation. The next step of this process was the Foreign Ministers meeting in New Delhi in 1983 where they adopted the Declara tion on South Asian Regional Cooperation (SARC). During the next two years South Asian nations committed themselves to form this South Asian alliance and the process culminated in the First SAARC Summit held on 7-8 December in 1985 in Dhaka where the Heads of State or Government of seven countries, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka adopted the Charter formally establishing the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). It is an Association based on the consciousness that in an increasingly interdependent world, the objectives of peace, freedom, social justice and economic prosperity are best achieved in the South Asian region by fostering mutual understanding, good neighbourly relations and meaningful cooperation among the Member States which are bound by ties of history and culture The objectives and principles contained in the SAARC Charter are as follows: Objectives a) To promote the welfare of the peoples of South Asia and to improve their quality of life; b) To accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region and to provide all individuals the opportunity to live in dignity and to realise their full potential c) To promote and strengthen collective self-reliance among the countries of South Asia; d) To contribute to mutual trust, understanding and appreciation of one anothers problems; d) To promote active collaboration and mutual assistance in the economic, social, cultural, technical and scientific fields e) To strengthen cooperation with other developing countries; f) To strengthen cooperation among themselves in international forums on matters of common interests; and g) To cooperate with international and regional organisations with similar aims and purposes. Principles a) Cooperation within the framework of the Association is based on respect for the principles of sovereign equality, territorial integrity, political independence, non-interference in the internal affairs of other States and mutual benefit; b) Such cooperation is to complement and not to substitute bilateral or multilateral cooperation; and c) Such cooperation should be consistent with bilateral and multilateral obligations of Member States. Preamble to the SAARC Charter The preamble to the SAARC Charter spells out the intention of forming this South Asian alliance as We, the Heads of State or Government of BANGLADESH, BHUTAN, INDIA, MALDIVES, NEPAL, PAKISTAN and SRI LANKA; Desirous of promoting peace, stability, amity and progress in the region through strict adherence to the principles of the UNITED NATIONS CHARTER and NON-ALIGNMENT, particularly respect for the principles of sovereign equality, territorial integrity, national independence, non-use of force and non-interference in the internal affairs of other States and peaceful settlement of all disputes Conscious that in an increasingly interdependent world, the objectives of peace, freedom, social justice and economic prosperity are best achieved in the SOUTH ASIAN region by fostering mutual understanding, good neighbourly relations and meaningful cooperation among the Member States which are bound by ties of history and culture Aware of the common problems, interests and aspirations of the peoples of SOUTH ASIA and the need for joint action and enhanced cooperation within their respective political and economic systems and cultural traditions' Convinced that regional cooperation among the countries of SOUTH ASIA is mutually beneficial, desirable and necessary for promoting the welfare and improving the quality of life of the peoples of the region; Convinced further that economic, social and technical cooperation among the countries of SOUTH ASIA would contribute significantly to national and collective self-reliance; Recognising that increased cooperation, contacts and exchanges among the countries of the region will contribute to the promotion of friendship and understanding among their peoples; Do hereby agree to establish an organization to be known as SOUTH ASIAN ASSOCIATION FOR REGIONAL COOPERATION hereinafter referred to as the ASSOCIATIONà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Changes in SAARC over a period of time After more than two decades since its founding at the initiative of General Zia-ul -Rahman, the then President of Bangladesh, the number of members is being increased from seven to eight. And for the first time a member with no common border with India Afghanistan joined SAARC. Also China, Japan, US, South Korea and the European Union attended the Summit as observers. It is only logical that in the not very distant future Russia too will be added to the list of observers. SAARC was conceived as an organisation to promote regional economic and technological cooperation. It was expected that such cooperation, if it is sustained will lead to increased political and security cooperation. Both in the case of European Union and ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations) the countries concerned had a shared perception of their security challenges.  This did not happen in case of SAARC. There was a war between two members of the SAARC in 1999 and a military confrontation in 2002. Therefore nurturing SAARC as a regional organisation has been a far more challenging task than those faced by organisations like the European Union and the ASEAN. In fact one member of SAARC (Pakistan) refuses to extend the normal most favoured nation treatment to its neighbour (India) though this is a basic prerequisite under the World Trade Organisation regulations. Though there has been a formal agreement to convert the SAARC region into a free trade area, Pakistan and Bangladesh have been reluctant to move towards the fulfillment of that objective. In reality SAARC is largely a name board with annual rituals, not always regularly observed. While in other parts of the world, the trend is towards countries coming together to form larger markets, in South Asia this sentiment prevails only among Sri Lanka, Bhutan and India. Pakistan and Bangladesh do not contribute to the world-wide wisdom that countries coming together to form larger markets is a mutually beneficially proposition.  Ã‚   In Europian countries like Germany and France got over their centuries old animosity. This happened when countries like Germany, Italy, Spain discarded their authoritarian regimes and became democracies. In ASEAN too Indonesia and Malaysia concluded peace after years of confrontation. Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia who fought long wars with the US, which was supported by other ASEAN countries have now become economic and political partners of countries which helped to wage war against them. Unfortunately such radical transformation has not taken place in South Asia. There are reasons to believe that underlying this difference in development may be that religion-based identity exercises greater dominance in some countries of South Asia than nationalism-based identity. In admitting a number of successful economic powers as observers to the SAARC, the expectation is that such interaction may help to convert the mindset of the countries which still resist regional economic cooperation and integration in a world which is rapidly globalising. India has attempted to get Bangladesh into a BIMSTECH arrangement consisting of Bangladesh, India, Myanmar and Sri Lanka. Such a change in mindset is a time-consuming process and therefore there should not be exaggerated expectations with the new beginning with entry of Afghanistan into SAARC and five new observers. The future of SAARC appears to be brighter because in the past.   SAARC was buffeted by Cold War tensions and Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh were attempting to exploit the differences between India and China and India and the US. Recent changes in the orientation of US policy and the Washington perception about the need to have a balance of power in Asia and consequent need to enhance Indo-US relations have had a radical impact on Indias relations with China and South East Asia.  Ã‚   Increasingly India is referred to as one of the six balancers of power in the emerging international system. India today has a strategic partnership with Russia, the US and the European Union and a strategic dialogue with China and Japan.  Ã‚   The visits of Premier Wen Jia Bao of China, President Vladamir Putin of Russia, Prime Junichiro Minister Koizumi of Japan and President Bush to India and invitation to India along with China to attend the G-8 summit of advanced industrial powers has helped to transform the situation in the SAARC region towards increasing cooperation.  Ã‚   There is now better realisation that neither India-China nor India-US relations can be exploited by other nations as happened during the Cold War. In the SAARC region democracy is gaining ground. Afghanistan has an elected government for the first time. Recent developments in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal, though yet to result in full blown democracy are moving in a positive direction. In Bhutan monarchy is voluntarily transforming itself into a democracy. Some Pakistani intellectuals argue that the factor that stands in the way of regional cooperation and integration in South Asia is the overwhelming dominance of India which constitutes more than 70 per cent of the population, resources and industrial and agricultural production of the region. It is therefore difficult to compare the evolution of SAARC with that of European Union or ASEAN. In a sense it could be argued that India itself with its multi-culturalism, multilingual, multiethnic and multi religious composition is like a further integrated European Union. Political evolution within India has made it inevitable that India will be federally governed by coalitions of all-India and regional parties with regional autonomy and aspirations fully accommodated. This development is bound to have its impact on the rest of the SAARC region. So will Indias rapid economic development, its aspirations to become a knowledge based society, its secular values and democracy. There were people in Indias neighbourhood who thought Indian unity would not survive. This conviction persuaded them not to invest in the evolution of SAARC over the last two decades. That situation is changing. Though it is unrealistic to expect any immediate radical changes in the attitudes of Pakistan and even Bangladesh towards SAARC there is no doubt that a new era of increasing integration is beginning, because of the forces of globalisation and emergence of an international balance of power. Challenges Opportunities The region is full of challenges and opportunities. South Asia is home to more than 1.5 billion people associated with various racial, lingual and religious groups. Some of the main challenges and problems facing the region include poverty, illiteracy, underdevelopment, terrorism, human trafficking, and racial and ethnic conflicts. Similarly, food and energy crises have also come out as burning issues of the region. In spite of such challenges and problems, South Asia is abundant in human as well as natural resources. When these resources are managed and utilized effectively, the region is sure to make considerable socio-economic progress within a short span of time. The South Asian people have many reasons to be optimistic if we look at the SAARC Charter that has included all the existing realities in the sub-continent, with the countries of different sizes, various levels of socio-economic development, historical legacies between and among the nations of the region. But, when the progress made by SAARC is assessed minutely, we do not find a very encouraging picture in terms of quality of life the people in South Asia. However, SAARC is gradually fostering cooperation among the member states in a wide range of areas. Because of its contributions to promoting peace, good neighbourly relations and bringing about socio-economic transformation in the region, SAARC has become a valuable forum among its member states. As a saying goes: Rome was not built in a day, the regional forum also requires some more time to achieve its goals and objectives.

Friday, October 25, 2019

Use of Symbolism, Tone, and Irony in The Swimmer, by John Cheever Essay

Finding home boarded up; a sensation of coldness and unwelcoming takes over. Sudden misfortunes arise from what was once a perfect life, and the world appears upside-down. Attempts to remember what went wrong fail. Memories are unclear and time seems blurry. At one time, John Cheever found himself in this position, using alcohol to ignore his problems. John Cheever was born in Quincy, Massachusetts in 1912. In 1941, he moved to suburban Westchester and eventually became addicted to alcohol, which is a recurrent motif in many of his short stories. He died in 1982 from cancer. In his short story, "The Swimmer," an affluent man named Neddy Merrill decides to swim through all of the pools in his county to reach his own house. The neighbors welcome him at first, until a storm passes and everyone begins to regard him negatively. When he finally reaches home from his journey, he finds his house empty and boarded up. Just like the author, Ned suffered after he put aside his issues. John Cheever develops his theme that changes will inevitably come as time passes by in his short story "The Swimmer" through his use of symbolism, tone, and irony. At first glance,"The Swimmer" is literally a story about a man who swims through pools only to come home to an empty house- the symbolism makes it much more than that. One of the main symbols in "The Swimmer" is the swimming pools, which represent time periods. Halfway through the story, Ned reaches the Welchers and realises that they "had definitely gone away. [Their] pool furniture was folded, stacked, and covered with a tarpaulin" (Cheever). Unknown to Neddy, large amount of time has passed between the time he started his voyage and where he is now. Ned does not remember the Welchers' s... ...ss. Works Cited Blythe, Hal, and Charlie Sweet. "Man-Made vs. Natural Cycles: What Really Happens in 'The Swimmer..'" Studies in Short Fiction 27.3 (Summer 1990): 415-418. Rpt. in Short Story Criticism. Ed. Jelena O. Krstovic. Vol. 120. Detroit: Gale, 2009. Literature Resource Center. Web. 29 Jan. 2014. Cheever, John. The Swimmer. N.p.: Library of America, 2009. Print. Morace, Robert A. "The Swimmer: Overview." Reference Guide to Short Fiction. Ed. Noelle Watson. Detroit: St. James Press, 1994.Literature Resource Center. Web. 30 Jan. 2014. "The Swimmer." Short Story Criticism. Ed. Janet Witalec. Vol. 57. Detroit: Gale, 2003. Literature Resource Center. Web. 17 Feb. 2014. Watts, Harold H. "John Cheever: Overview." Reference Guide to American Literature. Ed. Jim Kamp. 3rd ed. Detroit: St. James Press, 1994. Literature Resource Center. Web. 18 Feb. 2014.

Wednesday, October 23, 2019

Parallel Motivations in the Iliad and the Odyssey Essay

The Iliad and the Odyssey were poems written by Homer about events in Greek mythology. The Iliad detailed the final year of the Trojan war, which pitted the Greeks against the Trojans, and this poetic story described the outcome of the war. Homer’s Odyssey describes the adventures of Odysseus (Ulysses, as he was known in Roman mythology) as he tries to return home, to Ithaca, following the Trojan War. But there is one them that is present in both of these poems, and that is that when everyone is longing for home, disaster and further complications always arise. In the Iliad, the Greeks are trying to wrap up the war quickly, because many of the men miss their homes, but the bloody battle is claiming lives form both sides, and in the Odyssey, Odysseus only wants to return home, to his wife and son, but he is delayed by a series of events and catastrophes that for some time, only leads him further and further from home. The Iliad details the final year of the Trojan War, which was waged by the Greeks on the Trojans over Helen of Sparta, wife of Menelaus, who was the brother of the Greek commander, Agamemnon. Paris of Troy was told he could be granted one wish by Aphrodite, the love and beauty goddess, and he decided that he wanted Helen, who he though was the most beautiful woman in the world. The Trojans were able to get Helen, and hold her in Troy, and the Greeks attacked Troy over Helen, according to the myth. But in the final year of the War, it had been drawn out, and many Greek combatants only wanted to return home. At the beginning of the Iliad, Achilles, a Greek warrior who was extra fearsome (due to his nearly-immortal status- as the only place on his body that could be harmed was the back of his heel), was not participating in the battle, because Agamemnon had agreed to return a war prize of Achilles, who was a young girl, to Sparta, and Achilles was upset. So with Achilles out, Paris of Troy’s older brother Hector, the Trojan Prince, was the greatest warrior in the war, and he did some serious damage to the Greek forces. Achilles’ friend Patroclus goes into battle, disguised as Achilles, and Hector kills him, thinking he has killed Achilles. Achilles is angered by the slaying of his friend, and kills Hector in combat, and drags his body around the besieged city of Troy for days, but King Priam, the King of Troy, comes out to the Greek camp and negotiates with Achilles for the body, so that he could give his son proper burial. Achilles lets him have the body, and the Iliad ends with Hector’s funeral. The Odyssey is Homer’s work that details the plight of Odysseus as he tries to return home after the Trojan War. After the Iliad, Achilles was slain by Paris, who was able to strike him in the heel with a single arrow, which killed him, but the Greeks were victorious due to the wisdom and cunning of Odysseus. He came up with the plan for the Trojan horse, which was a war prize that the Greeks built for the Trojans, as they pretended defeat, but when the Trojans brought it into the city, some Greeks jumped out, and opened the gates to their comrades, and the Greeks overwhelmed the Trojans from inside the city’s walls. After the war, Odysseus and his men set off on their twelve vessels, headed for Ithaca, but disaster did not wait long to strike. The actual poem begins in the middle of the storyline of the Odyssey, which is at the point where Odysseus has been held captive by the nymph Calypso for seven years, and Athena, the goddess of wisdom, is preparing Telemachus, Odysseus’ young son, for a voyage that will act as a search for his father. At the same time, Odysseus’ wife, Penelope is fending off suitors, who wish to marry her, and take over as king of Ithaca, and Odysseus’ replacement, but she is able to delay them. At that time, Odysseus is very worn out, and wishes to return home to see his wife and son, because he has been away for decades, fighting in the Trojan War, and then encountering disasters, and spending time as Calypso’s unwilling companion on her island. But Zeus sends Hermes, the messenger god to tell Calypso that she must let Odysseus go free to his family, and she gives him food, and he builds a raft to set off. And here is another recurring theme of the story, which is of hope, as throughout the Iliad and Odyssey there are times when everything seems like it is going to be alright, but them further disasters and complications occur. But Poseidon, father of a Cyclops that he had killed, named Polyphemus, wrecks his raft, and Odysseus swims ashore to another island. Odysseus reveals his story to Demodocus, the ruler of the land where he washed ashore, after the story of the end of the Trojan War was told to him. This is where Odysseus explains what had happened to him from the end of the war until the end of his stay on Calypso’s island. It was an act of betrayal by Odysseus’ crew that most delayed his return to Ithaca following the Trojan War. He had gone to the island of Aeolus, the master of the winds, who had given him a bag of winds, which he was told to use wisely, to aid in his return home. Odysseus told his crew never to touch the bag, but thinking that it contained gold, they opened it when Odysseus slept, and the winds blew the ships back away from Ithaca as it was coming into sight, to near where their voyage had began. After that, Odysseus and his men encountered malevolent nymphs and cannibals, all of whom further delayed Odysseus as he tried to return home. He stayed with one nymph, Circe, for a year, where he and his crew feasted and drank, but then they set off again for Ithaca, and Circe helped them get started. There were countless times in the Odyssey when it seemed like everything was going alright, and that the men would be to Ithaca in just a few days if everything went on course, but it never did. Some disaster always arose that made it harder for the men to return home. After leaving Circe, Odysseus had been told that he had to visit a dead poet in the underworld for instructions to get back to Ithaca. When he went to the underworld for advice, he saw his mother there, and Agamemnon’s spirit, along with those of other Greek companions who had been slain during or after the war. When he left the underworld, Odysseus sailed back to Circe’s island again. Before left again, the Circe warned him about some of the dangers that he would still have to go through on his return, and she instructed him on how to safely survive them and continue to Ithaca. The first danger that he was to face were the Sirens, which were evil sea nymphs who lured sailors to their deaths with beautiful singing, and made the sailors jump overboard when they heard the voices of the nymphs. Odysseus ordered his men to plug their ears with wax to make it so that they would not hear the Sirens’ singing, which would lead to their deaths. But he wanted to hear their songs himself, so he had his men tie him to the ship’s mast so that he could not be led away, and he cut himself trying to break free of his restraints. Odysseus and his men then passed through the narrow cavern between Scylla, a monster with many heads, and Charybdis, a dangerous whirlpool, and they landed on the land of Thrinacia. But his men there, ignoring the warnings of Circe, killed some of the sacred cattle that belonged to the god Helios, and after they set off, he caused the ships to run aground, killing everyone but Odysseus, who washed up on Calypso’s island, taking the reader back to the point that the beginning of the story began at. This detailed all of the problems that Odysseus had encountered so far in his quest to return home, after a seemingly never-ending war. People in the Iliad were of the same mind state, which was that they could never return home, as the war was always full of complications and divine interventions that prolonged the Trojan War, and Odysseus found that his journey back after the war had many of the same characteristics. This is the biggest similarity between the two poems: as people are exhausted, and longing for home, complications always delay there return, and make life for the Greeks (and for Odysseus, in the Odyssey) more miserable. The Phaeacians, of whom Demodocus, who he was telling his story to, was the king, decided to help Odysseus, and being skilled navigators, they sailed him to a hidden harbor at Ithaca, and Odysseus then stayed at the hut of one of his former slaves, who was a swineherd. There, with the help of Athena, the goddess of wisdom, who had always admired and tried to help Odysseus, he planned his entrance into Ithaca, and how he would reveal himself to his wife and son, and how he would defeat the suitors of Penelope. But as Odysseus is preparing for his fight with the suitors, who would certainly try to kill him, he maintains that he is not himself at all, and with the help of Athena, he disguises himself as an elderly beggar, and tells the herders he is staying with a fictitious tale about he came from Crete. At that time, Athena helps Telemachus, Odysseus’ son, return home from Sparta, where he had gone to ask about his father’s whereabouts, and after returning to Ithaca, he meets Odysseus, who reveals his identity, but maintains his disguise, and tells no one else of his true identity. This represents another theme that is present in both the Iliad and the Odyssey, which is that patience and wisdom are more valiant than strength and brute force, and when it comes down to it, wisdom usually prevails. As after nearly a decade of fighting, the Trojan War was still going strong, it took an act of guile and wisdom and patience, on the part of Odysseus to secure a Greek victory. And here, as Odysseus decided to maintain his new identity until every threat had been neutralized, he was again exhibiting the same kind of patience and wisdom that he had used to win the Trojan War for the Greeks. Still disguised as a beggar, Odysseus returns to his old house that he had not seen in over two decades, and sees that it is overrun by rowdy, disrespectful suitors, who aim to marry his wife so that they can take over as King of Ithaca. But Odysseus has other plans, and calculates the strategies that he will use to defeat the suitors as Eumaeus, the swineherd, and former slave of Odysseus escorts him through the house. He meets his wife Penelope, and is able to maintain his disguise, but a house keeper, who washes the beggar Odysseus’ feet notices a scar that Odysseus had received from a boar hunt many years before he left to fight in the Trojan War, but he convinces the house keeper to remain silent. The next day, Penelope has the suitors come into a room to compete for her in an archery competition that uses the bow of Odysseus. None of the suitors are strong enough to string the bow, so Odysseus, disguised as a beggar, steps forward, and as the suitors are laughing at him, he strings it. Then he, his son, and some of his former slaves turn on the suitors, and kill them all. After that, some of the supporters of the slain suitors decide that Odysseus has caused the deaths of too many men from Ithaca, blaming him for the deaths of the men he went to war with, and who were shipwrecked do to their own disobedience, in addition to the deaths of the suitors. But Athena convinces everyone to accept Odysseus again as the King of Ithaca, and the Odyssey is finished. There are many parallel themes that are present in both the Iliad and the Odyssey, but perhaps the most notable theme is the longing for home, which can only be satisfied by wisdom. During the Trojan War, Greek forces find themselves exhausted, and longing for home, but complications are only prolonging the war. Whenever they have a major accomplishment, catastrophe results in the story of the war. After Achilles was able to defeat Hector, Paris defeats Achilles. And in the end, it was the wisdom and patience of Odysseus that one the war for the Greeks. And in the Odyssey, things go much the same way. As Odysseus and his men are trying to return from Troy, and head back to Ithaca, whenever they have a significant gain, a setback seems to follow. When Odysseus got the back of winds that would allow him to control the winds and safely, and quickly navigate the vessels back to Ithaca, his disobedient men cause a problem, sending the ships back the way that they had come from. But in the end, it was Odysseus alone who returned, as he was able to ignore temptations, and find his way home to Ithaca, and to his family. And in the very end of Homer’s story, Odysseus used his wisdom to defeat his final enemies, as he was able to maintain his false identity until every threat had been nullified. This is how the Trojan War was won by Odysseus and the Greeks, and how he was able to finally find his way back to his family. Works Cited Homer. The Iliad. trans. Robert Fagles. New York: Penguin, 1990. Finley, M. I. The World of Odysseus. New York: Signet, 1974. Myrsiades, Kostas, ed. Approaches to Teaching Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey. New York: MLA, 1987.

Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Admiral Frank Jack Fletcher in World War II

Admiral Frank Jack Fletcher in World War II Admiral Frank Jack Fletcher was an American naval officer who played a key role in the early battles of World War II in the Pacific. An Iowa native, he received the Medal of Honor for his actions during the occupation of Veracruz. Though he had little experience with carriers, Fletcher directed Allied forces at the Battle of the Coral Sea in May 1942 and at the Battle of Midway a month later. That August, he oversaw the invasion of Guadalcanal and was criticized for withdrawing his ships leaving the Marines ashore unprotected and under-supplied. Fletcher later commanded Allied forces in the northern Pacific in the final years of the conflict. Early Life and Career A native of Marshalltown, IA, Frank Jack Fletcher was born April 29, 1885. The nephew of a naval officer, Fletcher elected to pursue a similar career. Appointed to the US Naval Academy in 1902, his classmates included Raymond Spruance, John McCain, Sr., and Henry Kent Hewitt. Completing his class work on February 12, 1906, he proved an above average student and ranked 26th in a class of 116. Departing Annapolis, Fletcher began serving the two years at sea that were then required prior to commissioning. Initially reporting to USS Rhode Island (BB-17), he later served aboard USS Ohio (BB-12). In September 1907, Fletcher moved to the armed yacht USS Eagle. While on board, he received his commission as a ensign in February 1908. Later assigned to USS Franklin, the receiving ship at Norfolk, Fletcher oversaw drafting men for service with the Pacific Fleet. Traveling with this contingent aboard USS Tennessee (ACR-10), he arrived in at Cavite, Philippines during the fall of 1909. That November, Fletcher was assigned to the destroyer USS Chauncey. Veracruz Serving with the Asiatic Torpedo Flotilla, Fletcher received his first command in April 1910 when ordered to the destroyer USS Dale. As the ships commander, he led to a top ranking among the US Navys destroyers at that springs battle practice as well as claimed the gunnery trophy. Remaining in the Far East, he later captained Chauncey in 1912. That December, Fletcher returned to the United States and reported aboard the new battleship USS Florida (BB-30). While with the ship, he took part in the Occupation of Veracruz which began in April 1914. Part of the naval forces led by his uncle, Rear Admiral Frank Friday Fletcher, he was placed in command of the chartered mail steamer Esperanza and successfully rescued 350 refugees while under fire. Later in the campaign, Fletcher brought a number of foreign nationals out of the interior by train after a complex series of negotiations with the local Mexican authorities. Earning a formal commendation for his efforts, this was later upgraded to the Medal of Honor in 1915. Leaving Florida that July, Fletcher reported for duty as Aide and Flag Lieutenant for his uncle who was assuming command of the Atlantic Fleet. Admiral Frank Jack Fletcher Rank: AdmiralService: United States NavyNickname(s): Black JackBorn: April 29, 1885 in Marshalltown, IADied: April 25, 1973 in Bethesda, MDParents: Thomas J. and Alice FletcherSpouse: Martha RichardsConflicts: World War I, World War IIKnown For: Battle of the Coral Sea, Battle of Midway, Invasion of Guadalcanal, Battle of the Eastern Solomons World War I Remaining with his uncle until September 1915, Fletcher then departed to take an assignment at Annapolis. With the American entry into World War I in April 1917, he became the gunnery officer aboard USS Kearsarge (BB-5) Transferred that September, Fletcher, now a lieutenant commander, briefly commanded USS Margaret before sailing for Europe. Arriving in February 1918, he took command of the destroyer USS Allen before moving to USS Benham that May. Commanding Benham for most of the year, Fletcher received the Navy Cross for his actions during convoy duty in the North Atlantic. Departing that fall, he traveled to San Francisco where he oversaw the construction of vessels for the US Navy at Union Iron Works. Interwar Years Following a staff posting in Washington, Fletcher returned to sea in 1922 with a series of assignments on the Asiatic Station. These included command of the destroyer USS Whipple followed by the gunboat USS Sacramento and submarine tender USS Rainbow. In this final vessel, Fletcher also oversaw the submarine base at Cavite, Philippines. Ordered home in 1925, he saw duty at the Washington Naval Yard before joining USS Colorado (BB-45) as executive officer in 1927. After two years of duty aboard the battleship, Fletcher was selected to attend the US Naval War College at Newport, RI. Graduating, he sought additional education at the US Army War College before accepting an appointment as Chief of Staff to the Commander in Chief, US Asiatic Fleet in August 1931. Serving as chief of staff to Admiral Montgomery M. Taylor for two years with the rank of captain, Fletcher gained early insight into Japanese naval operations following their invasion of Manchuria. Ordered back to Washington after two years, he next held a post in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations. This was followed by duty as Aide to Secretary of the Navy Claude A. Swanson. In June 1936, Fletcher assumed command of the battleship USS New Mexico (BB-40). Sailing as flagship of Battleship Division Three, he furthered the vessels reputation as an elite warship. He was aided in this by the future father of the nuclear navy, Lieutenant Hyman G. Rickover, who was New Mexicos assistant engineering officer. Fletcher remained with the vessel until December 1937 when he departed for duty in the Navy Department. Made Assistant Chief of the Bureau of Navigation in June 1938, Fletcher was promoted to rear admiral the following year. Ordered to the US Pacific Fleet in late 1939, he first commanded Cruiser Division Three and later Cruiser Division Six. While Fletcher was in the latter post, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. World War II With the US entry into World War II, Fletcher received orders to take Task Force 11, centered on the carrier USS Saratoga (CV-3) to relieve Wake Island which was under attack from the Japanese. Moving towards the island, Fletcher was recalled on December 22 when leaders received reports of two Japanese carriers operating in the area. Though a surface commander, Fletcher took command of Task Force 17 on January 1, 1942. Commanding from the carrier USS Yorktown (CV-5) he learned air operations at sea while cooperating with Vice Admiral William Bull Halseys Task Force 8 in mounting raids against the Marshall and Gilbert Islands that February. A month later, Fletcher served as second in command to Vice Admiral Wilson Brown during operations against Salamaua and Lae on New Guinea. Battle of the Coral Sea With Japanese forces threatening Port Moresby, New Guinea in early May, Fletcher received orders from the Commander in Chief, US Pacific Fleet, Admiral Chester Nimitz, to intercept the enemy. Joined by aviation expert Rear Admiral Aubrey Fitch and USS Lexington (CV-2) he moved his forces into the Coral Sea. After mounting air strikes against Japanese forces on Tulagi on May 4, Fletcher received word that the Japanese invasion fleet was approaching. Though air searches failed to find the enemy the next day, efforts on May 7 proved more successful. Opening the Battle of the Coral Sea, Fletcher, with Fitchs assistance, mounted strikes which succeeded in sinking the carrier Shoho. The next day, American aircraft badly damaged the carrier Shokaku, but Japanese forces succeeded in sinking Lexington and damaging Yorktown. Battered, the Japanese elected to withdraw after the battle giving the Allies a key strategic victory. Battle of Midway Forced to return to Pearl Harbor to make repairs on Yorktown, Fletcher was in port only briefly before being dispatched by Nimitz to oversee the defense of Midway. Sailing, he joined with Spruances Task Force 16 which possessed the carriers USS Enterprise (CV-6) and USS Hornet (CV-8). Serving as the senior commander at the Battle of Midway, Fletcher mounted strikes against the Japanese fleet on June 4. Vice Admiral Frank Jack Fletcher, September 1942. US Naval History and Heritage Command The initial attacks sunk the carriers Akagi, Soryu, and Kaga. Responding, the Japanese carrier Hiryu launched two raids against Yorktown that afternoon before being sunk by American aircraft. The Japanese attacks succeeded in crippling the carrier and forced Fletcher to shift his flag to the heavy cruiser USS Astoria. Though Yorktown was later lost to a submarine attack, the battle proved a key victory for the Allies and was the turning point of the war in the Pacific. Fighting in the Solomons On July 15, Fletcher received a promotion to vice admiral. Nimitz had tried to obtain this promotion in May and June but had been blocked by Washington as some perceived Fletchers actions at the Coral Sea and Midway as being overly-cautious. Fletchers rebuttal to these claims was that he was attempting to preserve the US Navys scarce resources in the Pacific in the wake of Pearl Harbor. Given command of Task Force 61, Nimitz directed Fletcher to oversee the invasion of Guadalcanal in the Solomon Islands. Landing the 1st Marine Division on August 7, his carrier aircraft provided cover from Japanese land-based fighters and bombers. Concerned about fuel and aircraft losses, Fletcher elected to withdraw his carriers from the area on August 8. This move proved controversial it compelled the amphibious forces transports to withdraw before landing much of the 1st Marine Divisions supplies and artillery. Fletcher justified his decision based on the need to protect the carriers for use against their Japanese counterparts. Left exposed, the Marines ashore were subjected to nightly shelling from Japanese naval forces and were short on supplies. While the Marines consolidated their position, the Japanese began planning a counter-offensive to reclaim the island. Overseen by Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, the Imperial Japanese Navy commenced Operation Ka in late August. This called for Japanese three carriers, led by Vice Admiral Chuichi Nagumo, to eliminate Fletchers ships which would permit surface forces to clear the area around Guadalcanal. This done, a large troop convoy would proceed to the island. Clashing at the Battle of the Eastern Solomons on August 24-25, Fletcher succeeded in sinking the light carrier Ryujo but had Enterprise badly damaged. Though largely inconclusive, the battle forced the Japanese convoy to turn around and compelled them to deliver supplies to Guadalcanal by destroyer or submarine. Later War Following Eastern Solomons, the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Ernest J. King, severely criticized Fletcher for not pursuing Japanese forces after the battle. A week after the engagement, Fletchers flagship, Saratoga, was torpedoed by I-26. The damage sustained forced the carrier to return to Pearl Harbor. Arriving, an exhausted Fletcher was given leave. On November 18, he assumed command of the 13th Naval District and Northwestern Sea Frontier with his headquarters at Seattle. In this post for the remainder of the war, Fletcher also became commander of the Alaskan Sea Frontier in April 1944. Pushing ships across the North Pacific, he mounted attacks on the Kurile Islands. With the end of the war in September 1945, Fletchers forces occupied northern Japan. Returning to the United States later that year, Fletcher joined the General Board of the Navy Department on December 17. Later chairing the board, he retired from active duty on May 1, 1947. Elevated to the rank of admiral upon leaving the service, Fletcher retired to Maryland. He later died on April 25, 1973, and was buried at Arlington National Cemetery.