Manipulation techniques Essay Example for Free

Manipulation techniques Essay Richard is generally a callous person who shows no remorse to anyone or any action. He is duplicitous, manipulative, deceiving. He counter argues, compliments, quickly responds and twists peoples words.  Towards women, he is a different man. He is a very good actor and uses this as an advantage. He normally showers them with compliments and manipulates them.  In act 1 scene 2, Richard is put to the test of making Anne agree to marry him. This would prove difficult, as Richard has killed Annes husband and father-in-law. He compliments her in this scene so much, to pacify her. At this stage, Anne is angry and will not listen to him. For Richard to actually persuade her to marry him would be quite difficult. This is where his manipulation techniques come in. Nay, do not pause: for I did kill King Henry-but twas thy beauty that provokes me. Nay, now dispatch twas I that stabbed young Edward but twas thy heavenly face that set me on. This speech from Richard puts Anne in a very difficult position. She ha a sword in her hand, and he is in a vulnerable position. Anne knows he is a murderer and will feel petrified. This is how he manipulates her, Throughout the scene, there is a certain stichomythia. Where Anne makes fun of Richard and then Richard instantly responds about her beauty. He does not hesitate. Would it were mortal poison, for thy snake!, Never came poison from so sweet a place. He is responding very quickly and does not give up.  Richard says he killed her husband because of her beauty: Your beauty was the cause of this defect. He is saying she is so beautiful that he had to kill her husband so she could be free to marry him. He is trying to make out that she is responsible for her husbands death because he wants to make her feel guilty if she feel guilty, she will be even more vulnerable. He also uses very romantic language your beauty that did haunt me in my sleep. He knows women like to be called beautiful and telling her he killed because of her beauty emphasises how beautiful he finds her. Despite Annes initial hostility, Richards persuasive skills win her over. He is so effective that he makes Anne think Richard has become penitent who is honest and show remorse.  In act 4 scene 4, Richard talks to Elizabeth in a different tone in contrast to Anne. He doesnt shower her with compliments but he gives her ideas of thoughts that could be achieved if she agrees to make her daughter marry him.  Richard acts very innocent towards Elizabeth as if he has done nothing wrong. You speak as if that I had slain my cousins. He is trying to make Elizabeth think that Richard is calm, gentle and caring instead of malicious and cruel. Richard talks to Elizabeth a lot about advantages for Richard marrying her daughter: I do intend to make her queen of England. This would mean Elizabeth would be the queens mother.But mine shall be a comfort to your age. This means they will have children and she will be a grandmother and have a family again.  When Elizabeth sarcastically goes over all the ways he has hurt her family, Richard says, You mock me, madam. This is not the way to win your daughter. Richard answers simply and directly because he does not know what else to say. Faced with Elizabeths bitter sarcasm Richard is no longer being clever, witty and cynical. For the first time, he has met someone who can be more sarcastic than him and he doesnt know how to answer her. She is not frightened of him, so he cannot threaten her and, in any case, he needs her help to marry her daughter. He realises he cant get anywhere with her by being so clever, so he decides to persuade her by talking about what she will get out of allowing him to marry her daughter: wealth, status, grandchildren, he son allowed to return from exile. For the first time in the play, he has to treat someone as an equal.  Richards treatment of Anne in the first extract is different to the treatment of Elizabeth in the second in several ways: He showers Anne with compliments; he talks to Elizabeth about advantages of her daughter marring him; his conversation to Anne is a lot faster and rapid than the one to Elizabeth.

Understanding Human Behaviour through Reductionist Approach

Understanding Human Behaviour through Reductionist Approach â€Å"The only way to understand Human Behaviour is to take a Reductionist approach.† Critically discuss with reference to relevant seminal and contemporary literature in psychology. Reductionism can be defined as being the idea that a complex system, such as human behaviour, is nothing more than the sum of its parts and that a description of the system can be reduced to descriptions of the individual components. Many of the main approaches in psychology tend to take a reductionist approach when trying to explain their understanding of human behaviour, including the cognitive approach which uses machine mechanism (using the analogy of machines and their most simple components) to explain human behaviour, such as Berkowitz (1993). The behaviourist approach also tends to be reductionist in how it tries to explain human behaviour, usually reducing behaviour down to simply environmental factors such as reinforcement and punishment. Perhaps the most reductionist approach in psychology however is the biological approach. The biological approach takes a more scientific approach to explaining human behaviour and puts it mainly down to our biology, for example, Lacourse, Boivin, Brendgen et al. (2014) explained that the results from their research suggested that a toddler’s aggression is strongly associated with genetic factors. Many psychologists would agree that â€Å"The only way to understand Human Behaviour is to take a Reductionist approach† for example, Hull (2002) who stated that â€Å"Reductionism at its most extreme asserts that the only level worth investigating is the lowest technologically feasible level. All else is a waste of time.† Given the fact that scientists who use more reductionist approaches to understanding human behaviour tend to get the most grant money for their research, publish the most papers and also tend to make the most scientific advances within psychology, this may be true. However, other psychologists believe that the lower states involved in reductionism do not capture the necessary coherence of the rationalisation relation at the higher level and are known as being anti-reductionist. Biological psychologists explain human behaviour by trying to relate it to the functioning of the brain and the nervous system, relating it to the role of genetic influences and also by putting it down to chemical processes in the brain. These are all reductionist ways to explaining human behaviour due to the fact that, apart from physics, they are the lowest level of explaining behaviour. A prime example of a reductionist explanation to understanding human behaviour such as aggression is through genetics. This type of biological reductionism reduces aggressive behaviour in an individual down to the role of genetic influence, for example Dilalla (2002) concluded from her review on the role of genetics on aggression that there is a â€Å"growing body of evidence on the genetic effects on aggression† with â€Å"the majority of twin and adoption studies on antisocial behaviour in children suggest that genetic effects are important influences† suggesting that aggressive beh aviour is mainly due to the genetic make-up of an individual. This explanation of aggressive human behaviour is solely reductionist and fails to take into account any environmental and cultural factors. The social approach to psychology however, would explain this behaviour through â€Å"The Social Learning Theory† by Bandura (1978), putting aggressive behaviour of a child down to factors such as imitation. Bushman Huesmann (2006) explored aggression in both children and adults, and found that exposure to violence led to participants becoming more aggressive, suggesting that human behaviour such as aggression can be adopted through imitation, leading one to believe that reductionist approaches to human behaviour, such as the biological approach isn’t taking every factor into account that could contribute towards an individual’s behaviour. Reducing human behaviour down to lower levels of psychology that can be studied is useful in trying to understand how things work. Poldrack Wagner (2008) used Atinkson Shiffrin’s (1968) multi-store model of memory in order to assess long-term and short-term memory. This cognitive approach to understanding human behaviour, suggested that remembering information over either the long-term or short-term was due to how we process this information internally. Reducing this behaviour down to a simple component of the individual means that, for example if an individual has long-term memory loss, it is easier to target one specific part of the brain responsible for this, thus easier to treat. However, even though this is a useful aspect of reductionist explanations of human behaviour, some psychologists, such as Hull, would argue that these explanations offer only a simple solution to a much more complicated problem. Depression, for example, according to the biological approach shoul d be treated with anti-depressants as biological psychologists such as Carlson (2005) believe that depression is due to neurotransmitters in the brain. However, social psychologists such as Beattie (2005), who examined the social causes of depression, would say that this is overlooking the real problem which could be issues such as problems within the family. This is a fundamental problem with the reductionist approach to understanding human behaviour; it tends to ignore social and environmental factors that may also contribute towards behaviour and hence when it comes to applying reductionist approaches to everyday life and having implications for human behaviour, the treatments may not be as reliable as they could be. Although there are arguments for â€Å"The only way to understand Human Behaviour is to take a Reductionist approach† there are a lot more anti-reductionist arguments. Anti-reductionist psychologists such as Hull Regenmortel (2002) refer to reductionism in explaining human behaviour as â€Å"as successful as Reductionism has been, it is seriously inadequate and must be supplemented with a more holistic science.† Emotion, for example, is ignored by reductionist explanations due to the fact that it is seen as impossible that an individual’s emotions can be explained through lower levels of psychology, such as neurotransmitters. Thus, factors such as emotion can only be truly explained by less reductionist approaches such as an individual is happy due to the environment that surrounds them, not due to biological factors. A further approach to understanding human behaviour is taking into account the role of the environment. Reductionist biological approaches do not consider the environment when explaining human behaviour, however there is a lot of research suggesting that although an individual is born with certain biological traits, such as genes, environmental factors, for example an individual’s upbringing and people they are exposed to predominately shapes an individual’s behaviour further. However, taking an environmental approach to understanding human behaviour is also reductionist, but psychologists specialising in this area such as Brent are starting to integrate the small parts into the whole. In 1995, Brent assessed risk factors for adolescent suicide and suicidal behaviour and stressed the importance of environmental factors such as family, as well as biological factors on these risk factors. Taking a more holistic approach like Brent (2005) instead of a reductionist approach to understanding human behaviour tends to take many factors into account instead of just reducing an explanation down to its simplest form, thus can lead people to believe that a more holistic approach to understanding human behaviour is a lot more valid and reliable as, for example, when treating an individual of an illness such as depression, not only will the biological aspect of the illness be treated with anti-depressants, but the social aspect of the illness can also be treated with a form of counselling. Using a reductionist approach to understanding human behaviour can be seen to be not so useful when trying to explain individual factors due to the fact that reductionist explanations, although they are reduced to the lowest levels of psychology and thus are in the simplest form, generalise behaviour to a target population. Maguire, Gadian, Johnsrude et al. (2000) found that the amount of time spent as a London taxi driver positively correlated with the volume in the posterior hippocampus and from this, suggested that â€Å"the posterior hippocampus stores a spatial representation of the environment and can expand regionally to accommodate.† Here, Maguire et al (2000) have generalised their study of male, London taxi drivers to the population as a whole. Every individual is unique and so it would not be right to generalise these findings to everyone as the same behaviour in people may be due to different explanations, such as our biology and the environment. In conclusion reductionist approaches to understanding human behaviour can be seen to have led to further scientific advances within psychology due to the fact that reductionist approaches make it easier to find the cause of human behaviour, meaning that it is then easier to treat, by reducing the explanation down to its simplest form. However, as discussed, there are many problems and critiques of the reductionist approach to understanding human behaviour, with the main problem being that the reductionist approaches leave out vital factors such as the environment and social factors when explaining behaviour, thus by using a reductionist explanation it does not give a full explanation for a complex subject such as human behaviour, whereas taking a more holistic approach such as a humanist approach, takes many different factors into account. Therefore, reductionist explanations, is limited when it comes to understanding and explaining human behaviour. Samantha Carlisle

Gun Control - We Should Give a Gun to Every Citizen Essay -- Constitut

Gun Control – We Should Give a Gun to Every Citizen If the second amendment to the United States Constitution clearly states that, â€Å"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,† why do our lawmakers constantly debate the topic of weapons? Radical Democrats wish to make all guns illegal, meaning only policemen and servicemen would be equipped with guns (â€Å"Mission†). Radical Republicans (i.e. Charlton Heston), on the other hand, wish to place no restrictions whatsoever on guns, making semi-automatic and fully-automatic guns available to everybody living in or visiting the United States, without a background check or profile of the gun buyer (Heston). It seems that every time a terrible crime is committed in the United States involving a gun, the debate about gun control flares up again. The Columbine massacre and other school shootings, shootings at churches and in the workplace, the serial sniper near Washington D.C., and rises in gang activity are all examples of such events that have sp arked debates in Washington. Both sides, Democrat and Republican, have good points, but they are far from a solution. Radical Democrats have reason to want to eliminate guns from America because every year in America thousands of people are injured or killed by a firearm. It is also true that in the early 1990s there were an estimated 200 million privately-owned guns in the United States, and to try and confiscate all of those guns would be ridiculous (â€Å"Gun Control†). Radical Republicans have the 2nd amendment on their side in their quest to make all guns legal and unrestricted. They don’t have practicality or the safety of the country on their side, however. The release of fully-automatic guns into the public wou... ...he possibilities are endless. Giving a gun to every citizen of the United States is the only way to make our streets safe. It is also a very good way to stimulate the economy and prevent against foreign invasion. It may even save your life. WORKS CITED â€Å"The Assault Weapons Ban: Questions & Answers.† Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. August 2002. Brady Campaign. Org. 3 Dec 2002 http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/gunlaws/awb.asp>. â€Å"Gun Control.† 30 Mar 2002. Just Facts: A Resource for Independent Thinkers. 2 Dec 2002 http://www.justfacts.com/gun_control.htm>. Heston, Charles. â€Å"NRA President Charlton Heston’s Opening Comments.† 20 May 2000. NRA Annual Meeting. 2 Dec 2002 http://nrahq.org/transcripts/hestonam.asp>. â€Å"Mission.† GCN Introduction. July 1996. Gun Control Network. 2 Dec 2002 http://www.gun-control-network.org/genintro.htm>.

Frank and Ritas Relationship Essay -- Educating Rita Relationships Es

Frank and Rita's Relationship At the start of the play, Frank and Rita can be seen as opposites; Frank is a middle aged academic, whilst Rita is a young, female hairdresser. Any friendship between the two seems unlikely, but they quickly warm to one another as first appearances show. They are both involved in unsatisfactory relationships, and they both want more from life than it seems to offer. The main difference between the characters are that, whereas Rita has recognised her unhappiness and is determined to change it through becoming educated, Frank is more negative and prefers to drown his sorrows in alcohol. Frank and Rita become friends because she needs him to teach her, and he needs the vitality and freshness that she brings to his life. Willy Russell presents Frank and Rita’s relationship, and the changes it goes through, in a variety of ways. The relationship starts off well when they meet each other in scene one and the contrast of personalities is shown very well, Frank leads the boring lifestyle, whereas Rita bursts in and is full of life- their personalities and characters are totally opposite. Frank could do with a bit of something different in his life and this is why he takes to her so warmly. I think that the reader comes under the impression that Frank may want something out of this relationship other than teaching his literary knowledge. RITA: This Forster, honest to God he doesn’t half get on my tits. FRANK: Good. You must show me the evidence. This quote shows that Frank likes to flirt with Rita and shows that literary knowledge is not all that is on his mind. Rita, however, just wants to learn and be good friends with Frank but nothing more. From Rita’s perspective fra... ... goes on to tell Rita how he has changed her and that he doesn’t like the change he sees. Frank in his own words then says that he can’t bare Rita anymore. Through the last few scenes both of them have changed considerably and Frank especially does not like the change that he sees in Rita and due to this he continues to argue with her. The most important thing is that education has given Rita choice. She now has a lot more freedom to what she wants, as she is educated, she can choose form a number of jobs, she can choose which type of people she wishes to socialise with an so on. I think that overall both of them have learned that sometimes times change and people change and In the end I think they both accept this as they get on good ground with each other. At the very end Rita gives Frank a hair cut that she has promised him since Act one scene one. Frank and Rita's Relationship Essay -- Educating Rita Relationships Es Frank and Rita's Relationship At the start of the play, Frank and Rita can be seen as opposites; Frank is a middle aged academic, whilst Rita is a young, female hairdresser. Any friendship between the two seems unlikely, but they quickly warm to one another as first appearances show. They are both involved in unsatisfactory relationships, and they both want more from life than it seems to offer. The main difference between the characters are that, whereas Rita has recognised her unhappiness and is determined to change it through becoming educated, Frank is more negative and prefers to drown his sorrows in alcohol. Frank and Rita become friends because she needs him to teach her, and he needs the vitality and freshness that she brings to his life. Willy Russell presents Frank and Rita’s relationship, and the changes it goes through, in a variety of ways. The relationship starts off well when they meet each other in scene one and the contrast of personalities is shown very well, Frank leads the boring lifestyle, whereas Rita bursts in and is full of life- their personalities and characters are totally opposite. Frank could do with a bit of something different in his life and this is why he takes to her so warmly. I think that the reader comes under the impression that Frank may want something out of this relationship other than teaching his literary knowledge. RITA: This Forster, honest to God he doesn’t half get on my tits. FRANK: Good. You must show me the evidence. This quote shows that Frank likes to flirt with Rita and shows that literary knowledge is not all that is on his mind. Rita, however, just wants to learn and be good friends with Frank but nothing more. From Rita’s perspective fra... ... goes on to tell Rita how he has changed her and that he doesn’t like the change he sees. Frank in his own words then says that he can’t bare Rita anymore. Through the last few scenes both of them have changed considerably and Frank especially does not like the change that he sees in Rita and due to this he continues to argue with her. The most important thing is that education has given Rita choice. She now has a lot more freedom to what she wants, as she is educated, she can choose form a number of jobs, she can choose which type of people she wishes to socialise with an so on. I think that overall both of them have learned that sometimes times change and people change and In the end I think they both accept this as they get on good ground with each other. At the very end Rita gives Frank a hair cut that she has promised him since Act one scene one.

Children And Play In The First Essay -- essays research papers

Child’s Play: The First Two Years of Life In the first two years of life play is both a reflection of and an influence on all areas of infant development: intellectual, social, emotional and physical. Play is a central, all–encompassing characteristic of infant development, allowing children to learn about the world and themselves. Even during the first half-year of life infant’s really do play, even though the interpretation of what is play and what is exploration must first be established. The focus of this paper is to discuss three forms of play that occur during the first two years of life. The work of Jean Piaget and other psychologists in supporting and developing these ideas is critical. The first of these is sensorimotor play which begins with the infant’s accidental discovery of an activity that is inherently satisfying, and consists of the continuos repetition of that activity for the sheer joy of doing so (Hughes, 1991). The second is play with objects involves the intentional handling of an o bject that leads to satisfaction from the handling. Finally symbolic play is the use of mental representation, in which one object represents another (Hughes, 1991). Exploration or Play?   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The differences between play and exploration can be difficult to assess. When infants are exploring their surroundings, they are usually cautious and serious. While examining an item during exploration an infant would smell, taste and perhaps rub the item against his/her cheek in a ritualistic manner. In play however, an infant would jump from one object to another without care, and play activities are completely devoid of the rigidity previously described.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Finally, when children explore their entire attention is drawn on the object begin explored. Their heart rates are steady, and they are unwilling to be interrupted. Yet, during play the children’s heart rate is variable and they are interrupted easily (Hughes, 1991). It should be easier to tell the difference between play and exploration using these behavioral differences as a guideline. Sensorimotor Play   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The first year of life consists of what Jean Piaget called sensorimotor play or practice play (Piaget, 1962), the repetition of already assimilated sensory or motor activities for the sheer pleasure of doing so. Piaget suggests th... ... even more sophisticated, as children combine objects in play, use them appropriately, and begin incorporating them into symbolic play.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Symbolic play is characterized by a serious of levels that suddenly appear in the second year. Further development is seen as each level is symbolic play is explored. Decentration refers to the degree that a child is able to shift focus from self to external objects. Decontextualization refers to the use of one object as a substitute for another, and integration is the organization of play into complex patterns. References Garvey, C. (1990). Play. Cambridge: Harvard University. Hughes, F. P. (1991). Children, play and development. Boston: Allyn/Bacon. Piaget, J. (1962). Play, dreams, and imitation in childhood. New York: Norton. Piaget, J. (1963). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: Free Press. Rosenblatt, D. (1977). Developmental trends in infant play. In B. Tizard & D. Harvey   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  (Eds.), The biology of play. Philadelphia: Lippincott. Sheridan, M.D. (1977). Spontaneous play in early childhood from birth to six years.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  England: NFER Publishing.

Classic detective story Essay

      It had to be something a lot smaller because the only other opening in Julia’s room that communicated with somewhere outside of the room was the ventilation shaft in the ceiling which was directly connected to the ventilation shaft in the ceiling of Dr. Roylott’s room. Holmes also spotted the mysterious bell pull, which turned out to be a dummy. The strange thing about this bell pull was that it was hung from somewhere inside the ventilation shaft and it was positioned directly above the pillow on the bed. Holmes then goes in into a deep state of reverie putting everything that Helen Stoner told him happened together with all the clues that he had found in Stoke Moran. This matches my expectation of a classic detective story where the detective finds clues, analyses them and them puts them all together with all the information he has obtained from other sources such as the victim, people who knew the dead person, people who had some sort of relationship with both the person that died and the victim. In this deep state of meditation he solves the mystery but he has yet to solve the crime. So Holmes tells Helen Stoner to place a lamp outside of her window when Dr. Roylott retires to his chamber at night. Holmes also tells Helen to leave the shutters open in the room so that he and Watson can get in when she signals them. Holmes and Watson wait for the signal at the village inn. Later when Helen signals them with the lamp they head for Stoke Moran. They go into her room through the open shutter and wait for a number of hours before Holmes spots a snake coming through the ventilator. At this point in time Holmes knows who has committed the crime and how for sure. This then matches my next expectation that with all that is happening the detective then deduces what must have happened and if it was a murder who the villain was that committed the crime. He then immediately switches on the light and strikes at the snake causing it to return through the ventilator in a very angry mood. Then they all here the terrible screen of a man’s hoarse voice. They all immediately head for Dr. Roylott’s chamber and find him dead. He is killed by an Indian Swamp adder, which they find wrapped around his head. Holmes then explains how he solved the mystery and then the crime. This all matches my final expectation of a classic detective story, which is that the villain is either arrested or killed. The expectations of plot that are fulfilled in the Gatewood Caper The Gatewood Caper begins with a private detective being sent to help a man called Harvey Gatewood get his kidnapped daughter Audrey back. The detective is known only as the â€Å"the continental Op†. In this essay I will refer to him from now on as â€Å"the Op†. The Op is sent by the Continental Detective Agency to solve the kidnap of Harvey Gatewood’s daughter Audrey and to find out where she is being held then rescue her. In the Gatewood Caper the mystery surrounds the kidnap of Harvey Gatewood’s daughter Audrey, so my first expectation of a classic detective story’s plot and how it should involve some sort of mystery is fulfilled. In the Gatewood Caper it is the detective that comes to offer help to the victim and not the other way around like in the Speckled Band where the victim asks the detective to investigate something for them. So my next expectation that the victim approaches the detective to get his help is not fulfilled. No one has died and my expectation of a classic detective story that a there is a death and that it is either the result of a terrible crime or accidental is not fulfilled. This all makes the Gatewood Caper even less like a classic detective story. The only person that can solve the crime in this story is the Op and so that matches my next expectation of a classic detective story that the only person who can solve the crime is the detective. The Op then listens to Gatewood’s story and this fulfils my next expectation of a classic detective story where the detective listens to the victim’s story. Harvey Gatewood tells the Op what happened before he last saw Audrey. He tells to the Op about everything that he saw Audrey do before he last saw her. He tells the Op that the last time he saw Audrey was the day before at around seven in the evening. The next morning Gatewood receives a letter from the kidnappers demanding a ransom of $50,000 in $100 bills (American for notes) for her release. In the Gatewood Caper the detective doesn’t really ask many questions to Gatewood because he is so uncooperative. It’s more like the reverse of my expectation that the detective questions the victim is fulfilled. It’s almost like Gatewood has been described so much like a villain that it’s almost impossible to think of him as a victim. My next expectation that the detective investigates the scene of the death is not fulfilled because there is no scene of death in the Gatewood Caper as the crime is a kidnap. Instead in the Gatewood Caper the detective investigates Audrey’s rooms to find any clues or anything that will point to anyone who would want to kidnap Audrey. He finds nothing. Then the next day at 2:30 Harvey Gatewood gets a call from the kidnappers saying that they want him to the deliver the money straight away to someone he will spot when they signal him by holding a handkerchief to their face and then dropping it. They tell Gatewood that he will have to deliver the money to the person somewhere between his house and the waterfront along Clay Street. A woman signals Gatewood using the handkerchief he gives her the money and a couple of the other Ops follow the woman. They loose the woman in an alleyway where they find her clothes discarded all over the floor. They quickly realise that this must have been a woman disguised as a man. The trail of clothes leads to a backdoor of an apartment, which they find was occupied by a man called Leyton. The Op investigates this apartment and finds nothing but this fulfils are expectation that the detective investigates the scene to find any clues but again the Op finds nothing. The only clue that the Op has now has to work on is Leyton’s description. So he starts to investigate all the clothes shops in the Oakland area asking them whether or not they have seen anyone matching Leyton’s description buying woman’s clothes and if they have any records or names. The Op gets lucky with the first shop he investigates because they have a record of a man who bought woman’s clothes matching Leyton’s description. This mans name is Mr. Offord and the Op also gets the address. The Op goes to see Mr. Offord and then finds out that he is not living alone but with a young woman possibly Audrey. The Op recognises Mr. Offord as being a conman. The Op goes up to his room but is then shot at but the bullets miss. The Op then kicks the door down and finds Audrey. He then explains how he solved the mystery of Audrey’s kidnap to â€Å"penny† Quayle the conman and Audrey. This fulfils are expectation of a classic detective story’s plot whereby from all the information the detective gathers he puts it all together to deduce what really happened. The villain in the story actually turns out to be the victim and in the end does not get punished because she blackmails her father with the threat of going to the papers with incriminating information that she has about him about his previous illegal activities. My expectation that the villain is either arrested or killed is not fulfilled making this story even less like a classic detective story. The Speckled Band is a perfect example of what a classic detective story should be like because it matches all my expectations in every way. The Gatewood Caper is completely different and is nothing like a classic detective story. Although it does match some of my expectations of how the plot of a classic detective story should be like it is a very modern story with a very modern plot. The main difference between the plot in the Speckled Band which is a classic detective story and the plot in the Gatewood Caper which is a modern detective story is that in a classic detective story the plot goes along a straight line and everything that happens we might expect to happen, happens whereas in the plot of a modern detective story everything we might expect to happen doesn’t always happen. Expectations of character that are fulfilled We expect the character of the detective in any classic detective to be a man who is extremely clever, intuitive, observant, inquisitive, deductive and highly instinctive. The name of the detective in the Speckled Band is Sherlock Holmes. Holmes matches all of my expectations of how the character in a detective story should be and so too does the Op in the Gatewood Caper. The big difference is that the Op is a lot weaker in all of these aspects when you directly compare him to someone of the likes of Sherlock Holmes. Sherlock Holmes probably the greatest detective of all time whereas the Op is just an ordinary policeman turned detective. We expect the character of a detective in any classic detective story to be something of a superhero but what we see in any modern detective story is the character of a detective has a big sense of realism associated with him which makes it all that little more believable so that we can relate to the detective more. We also expect the character of the detective in any classic detective story to be very strong (powerful), tough, very brave, a good soul and an expert in his field of work. Again Holmes is these things and personifies greatness whereas the Op is also has all these aspects but again is weaker in every department. This is again done on purpose to make it all more realistic and believable. Sherlock Holmes is the more classic detective whereas the Op is the more modern detective. We also expect the detective in any classic detective story to go into soliloquy and Holmes does this a lot whereas the Op never does this and we aren’t able to connect with his thoughts as much as we do with Holmes. We expect the character of the villain in any classic detective story to be man who is extremely clever, very strong (powerful) and tough but at the same time a man who is evil, devious, very greedy, and deceptive. We also expect the villain to be dangerous and psychotic. In the Speckled Band the villain Dr. Roylott matches all my expectations of how a villain should be like in any classic detective story whereas the surprise villain in the Gatewood Caper is nothing like my expectations of how the character of a villain should be in any detective story. Dr. Roylott is a huge giant of a man who bends pokers to scare people, whereas because Audrey is a woman she is portrayed as being weak in the Gatewood Caper but is still the villain. Audrey Gatewood has parts of the character of the victim mixed in with parts of the character from the villain. She is a woman and that is the main the difference between what a villain could never be in a classic detective story and could possibly be a modern detective story. Although she might be a woman she is certainly not the victim because she is not innocent, helpless, afraid, a good soul or someone who is grateful for anything. In fact she is the exact opposite a spoiled brat. Also although she is not the victim she is certainly the villain because she does in fact have all the qualities of being a villain except that she is not very strong, or tough. Dr. Grimesby Roylott is the more classic villain whereas Audrey Gatewood is the more modern victim. We expect the character of the victim in any classic detective story to be a woman who is weak, innocent, helpless, afraid, a good soul and someone who is extremely grateful to anyone who will help them. Firstly in the Speckled Band the victim Helen Stoner fulfils all of these expectations whereas in the modern detective story the Gatewood Caper the victim is Harvey Gatewood and he is nothing like the victim but everything the villain is in a classic detective story. He simply does not belong in the role of the victim so he does not fulfil any expectation of the character of the victim in a classic detective story. He has every quality of a villain in a classic detective story and the exact opposite of every quality the character of the victim has in a classic detective story. In fact the way he is described in the story he is almost identical to Dr. Roylott in the Speckled Band. Helen Stoner is the more classic victim whereas Harvey Gatewood is nothing like a classic victim and is the more modern victim. Setting The setting in the Speckled Band was very interesting because of how it was described in such high detail from every blade of grass to the huge mansion of Stoke Moran. The setting really did provide an excellent atmosphere because it was so complex and always changing. The story starts off and is set in one the biggest, most highly populated cities in the world, London. It is a bustling metropolis and you can imagine the atmosphere it creates and how strong it is over everything else. While this huge feeling of atmosphere is creating by the setting Helen Stoner is going to see Sherlock Holmes. Then the setting changes once Helen arrives to see Holmes, it suddenly changes from being an extremely busy and chaotic atmosphere to an extremely peaceful, quiet and relaxing environment whilst inside Holmes’s home. I enjoyed the setting when Holmes and Watson leave for Leatherhead from Waterloo station as I have always like trains so I can imagine exactly what it would have been like with all the steam trains and the huge atmosphere created by people getting on and off the trains to get off at London or travel to other places. Then when at Stoke Moran the setting changes to this mansion with a small village nearby. The setting here is a dark, scary and lonely place. You can feel the mystery and danger resonating from every wall, every corridor and every room. We don’t feel safe in this place because we know that it has a very mysterious past and a very mysterious owner. It is a very old building built in the 17th century and is almost crumbling to pieces because of decay in some parts. You can imagine the sense of fear that would be created from a setting like this just by walking through the long dark corridors. With each step moved you would here the echo through the whole building because of the dominating silence. The only light would be of that slipping through the small dirt sprayed windows adding to the feeling of loneliness and fear creating extreme suspense. The setting in the in the Gatewood Caper is my favourite personally. I enjoyed the very beginning of the story because of the deep sense of tension that is created by the description of Harvey Gatewood’s Lumber Corporation HQ. I can imagine a it as a huge building full of people working for this one Scrooge like tyrant of a businessman who absolutely loves to quash all opposition and dominate his industry. This setting provides a huge sense of excitement and liveliness. You rarely get a sense of fear or loneliness in the Gatewood Caper because of the setting and how there are always people wherever the Op goes and so there is always someone to talk to. This is another big difference between classic and modern detective story’s where in a classic detective story there are less characters but they are more detailed and you get to know them better whereas in a modern detective story there are more characters who are less detailed which often makes it very confusing. You can then imagine all the cars speeding through the city and past Gatewood’s empire, all the people coming in and out of the building, all the noises caused by the people and machinery creates an immense feeling of power and prosperity which makes me feel good as I can really relate to this kind of setting having being born and raised in modern day London. I loved the setting between Gatewood’s house and the waterfront walking along clay Street. I can just imagine the sense of excitement that I would get if a were just an innocent bystander walking along Clay Street and I saw the mysterious drop off of $50,000 and then saw someone dressed like a woman in black but with the figure of a being followed by so many private detectives. I also enjoyed the setting of the police station at the end with all the detectives in the station drinking coffee and eating donuts. Between the two stories I enjoyed the setting in the Gatewood Caper the most because it was more modern and a lot more like I was used to seeing in life. I definitely expected the setting in the Speckled Band to be old and lonely. I also expected the setting in the Gatewood Caper to be so modern and lively. Structure The structure in the Speckled Band is very different from the structure of the Gatewood Caper. In both stories at the very start of the story we find out what it’s all about and whom everyone is as is the case with the beginning of any detective story. What is very different about the beginning periods of both stories is that one is a complete mystery and it is uncertain what has happened whereas the other is not a mystery at all as the crime is known. In any classic detective story the crime is not known until somewhere in the middle or at the end of the story whereas in a modern detective story the crime is usually known and made clear right at the very beginning. This is a key difference in structure because in any classic detective story the mystery is of great importance because it draws suspense and tension into the reader whereas in a modern detective story the crime is usually more important than the mystery is because modern day readers generally have less patience and want what they read to get to the point quickly. In the Speckled Band the period of uncertainty is both in the beginning period and the middle period of the story whereas in the Gatewood Caper it is in the middle period and also the ending period. In both stories the mystery is solved and the crime explained in the end period. Style of writing When I read Speckled Band the style of writing created a very slow and dull mood within me but I couldn’t help being captivated by it even if it may have been dull or slow. The writer built up suspense using highly implicit and detailed language.

The Harsh Reality of Racism

Black Boy, a novel by Richard Wright, is a heart-wrenching story about the harsh reality of racism, prejudice, and hostility that are revealed through the struggles of one young black boy. The young black boy is desperately trying to understand the cruel and negative world he is living in. This young black boy is on a mission to be educated and be successful. Richard Wright is determined to succeed in life. Richard's success is based on his determination and drive to overcome obstacles that he would face on a day to day basis in all aspects of his life. Richard was growing up in a time period that was both discouraging and hostile to blacks attempting to obtain an education and become successful. Through all of his hardships and obstacles, Richard continued to have a positive outlook on life. A positive outlook kept Richard focused on his dream to leave the south and eventually be free from all racial and prejudice matters. During the early twentieth century, racial issues, along with very strong prejudice feelings ran throughout the south. The Jim Crow laws separated the blacks from the whites and led the blacks to believe they were not important. Seating arrangements on busses, drinking from different water fountains, and even the arrogance of not being allowed to eat at counters in public restaurants were examples of some of these laws. Therefore, very little emphasis was placed on the education and success of a young black boy. In order for Wright to be successful, he had to pursue an education and overlook the strong prejudiced feelings he was faced with. These were hard times for blacks, but he worked hard to overcome his obstacles and reach for what he believed in. He did this during a time when there was no desire to see a colored person overcome the chances and be successful. Richard Wright's determination to succeed, and to overcome the social forces fighting against him was facet of southern culture that was familiar to all who lived, or even passed through the South during this time. The races showed no initiative of coming into contact with one another. However, there was a fear among them. Although he had fear, his curiosity about the races was not eliminated. For example, Richard once ventured into a white neighborhood attempting to sell his dog for money to buy food. On that day, he saw a glimpse of a world he had never seen before. Wright saw things such as I tucked her under my arm and went for the first time alone into a white neighborhood where there were wide clean streets and big white houses. Finally a young white woman came to the door and smiled. I waited on the porch, marveling at the cleanliness, the quietness of the white world. (69) Richard now understood that whites lived so much better and he wondered why he and his brother had spent so many days doubled over in pain from the hunger they had come to know so well. Wright uses prejudice and racism throughout his autobiography to encounter some of the most ludicrous moments that he had to experience while growing up in the South. For example, when Wright responded to the question on what he wanted to do in life, the lady turned to him and told him he was wasting his time trying to become a writer, knowing he was a Negro as stated in this quote: â€Å"Then why are you going to school?† She asked in surprise. â€Å"Well, I want to be a writer,† I mumbled, unsure of myself; I Had not planned to tell her that, but she had made me feel so Utterly wrong and of no account that I needed to bolster myself. â€Å"To write stories,† I mumbled defensively. â€Å"You†ll never be a writer,† she said. â€Å"Who on earth put such Ideas into your head nigger head?† â€Å"I didn†t think anybody ever would,† she declared indignantly (Wright 147). It was unheard of being someone of importance and being black at the same time. Another good example of the prejudiced lifestyle of Wright was when he accepted his first job as a porter for a in a clothing store. Wright was forced into washing floors and was not allowed to come into contact with people who entered the store. In Richard's early life, many social roadblocks threatened to make it more difficult for him to hold on to his dream. Race and prejudice created challenges, but the true challenge came in an entirely different form. The true challenge was to become an accepted black man in a white mans society. Richard Wright became successful in a country that did not encourage him or to create opportunities for blacks. He succeeded in spite of personal hardships, racial adversity, constant hunger, and the lack of educations. Richard Wright fought the battle and came out victorious. Wright became a man who was not defined by his color, but by his talent. His talent was recognized because his strength and determination led him to succeed.