Literary Devices Essay Example for Free

Literary Devices Essay While attending my course on â€Å"War and Literature†, and listening to the conversation, I found myself struck by an intellectual question presented by another student. This student asked, â€Å"When does paradox become hypocrisy?† Immediately afterwards I wrote the response, â€Å"A good war is a war that teaches it’s mistakes without one having to live with them.† At first I didn’t know if I had truly responded to the question. I analyzed both the question and response carefully through the literary devices and found myself satisfied with the responses standing. When analyzing the response I first had to return to the question. â€Å"When does paradox become hypocrisy?† Referring to this question I had to ask if my response held a paradox. â€Å"A good war is a war that teaches it’s mistakes without one having to live with them.† Considering that a paradox is a statement that seems self-contradictory, and that â€Å"a good war† is the introduction to the response, suggested that â€Å"a good war† is a paradox. However, why is it that â€Å"a good war† is a paradox? War can best be defined as active hostility. Good can also be best defined as being well behaved. Considering these definitions and the response, â€Å"a good war† would certainly be a paradox because active hostility is contradictory to being well behaved. However, most would assume that â€Å"a good war† was the responses paradox, and to assume otherwise would be insulting to someone’s intellect. So then one has to ask how it is so commonly understood that â€Å"a good war† is a paradox? To conclude this question, one must consider that most of everyone was raised with the developmental understanding of good and bad. Most of everyone also would commonly agree that war is not good. So why do people still go, and why do we not learn from â€Å"it’s mistakes without someone having to live with them†? From statistics taken in the year two thousand fourteen, seven percent of America’s society is a veteran, and in that year there were near three hundred eighteen million citizens. That means that over twenty two million American citizens are veterans of foreign war. So how is it that we can convince over seven percent of our citizens to go risk their livelihood? We determined that war is wrong so how do we replace the ideas of good and bad? To better answer that question, it is better to replace the employment of a soldier with a painter. In order to make someone who is not a painter become a painter, one would have to go through a series  of tasks. First, cut off access to other mediums. Do not allow that person to work with anything other then painting. If they want to write a letter home, they paint it. If they want to create something three dimensional, they paint it. If they want to tell a story, they again, will paint it. Now there is no difference between the painter with their paintbrush, and the recruit with their rifle. Second, apply influences to praise the ideals. The same recruited painter now needs to be surrounded with people who share the same ideals. The painter cannot have the influences of sculptors, graphic designers, or any other ambassador of other art form. The painter needs the overall support of peers with the subject matter. This again, is no different from the soldier and their peers. Third, discourage all other ideals. The facilitator, who is regulating the transition between non-painters to painters, needs to openly degrade the ideals of all other art forms. The facilitator needs to make sure that th e recruits hear their passionate opinions about how other art forms are â€Å"wrong†. This will guide the recruits to also share the same ideals. This relationship resembles the relationship between Drill Instructors and their recruits. Fourthly, revival the title has a distinguished history of renowned individuals. For a painter, there are many distinguished individuals that made a dramatically difference within the realm of art. For some examples, there is Vincent Van Gough, Pablo Picasso, and Leonardo De Vinci. It is up to the facilitator to idolize these individuals in front of the forth-coming painters. This will give the recruited painters the expectations they need to become idolized into their new profession. This will also make the recruited painters strive to achieve the same honor. For the recruited soldier, they hear about the selfless actions of the Medal of Honor, Prisoners of War, and Purple Heart recipients. For them, they also strive to achieve that honor. Lastly, provide the graduate with a quote that brands them with honor. For instance, EARTH, Semper Fi, or Army of One. This will give the graduate something to display as pride and unite them forever with the other individuals who also have endured the same training. Now returning back to the question, â€Å"when does a paradox become a hypocrisy†, the response needed to be evaluated for the literary device of hypocrisy. Is â€Å"a good war is a war that teaches it’s mistakes without one having to live with them†, a response of hypocrisy. Through the development of good and bad, we have concluded that war is  wrong. To suggest otherwise would propose a state of insanity. Insanity is a derangement of the mind or not conforming. Since we have conclude that the popular choice is to say that war is wrong suggests that people who desire to go to war, miss war, or idolize war are insane. So are they insane? If the response, â€Å"war teaches it’s mistakes without one having to live with them† is true, than yes. However, the statement is hypocrisy and hypocrisy is the pretense of having. So reverting back to the practice of transitioning from non-painter to painter, the recruit became a painter. Now what if, during t he transition, the recruit never got the opportunity to paint. The entire time the recruit was given black ink to practice the techniques of painting, but never received oil or acrylic paints. The recruit sat through sessions where they viewed images of others painters and their colorful paintings, only to never receive color to paint with. After the transitions period, after the recruit was given the title of painter and hope to finally paint with color. However, the restriction continues and they again were never given oil or acrylic paints. They had practiced the trade for years without actual execution. The outcome is apparent. They will forever long to paint. This is the situation with the soldier. The soldier practices with blank ammunition for years, views images of warfare, practices the techniques of warfare, and never gets to execute their practices in war. The outcome is apparent. They will forever long for warfare. So in regards to the response, from the soldiers perspective, they would disagree because war cannot â€Å"teach itâ₠¬â„¢s mistakes without one having to live with them.† They themselves desire warfare. However, for sanities sake, they would suggest the response to be true in the company of other American citizens. This is the pretense of having and concludes the statement to be hypocrisy; at least from the soldiers perspective. So does the statement apply to other citizens of America? Again, the response to the initial question suggests that war is wrong and a sane response is to agree with the statement. This implies that American citizens do not see the statement as hypocrisy. However, how much money is accumulated over the showing of one Hollywood movie about warfare? How much money and time is spent reading through the stories about warfare? How often do people find excitement when sharing a conversation with a veteran where they can ask personal questions about their experiences? As peaceful people who agree with the statement,  American citizens curiously find something compelling about war. It is not my position to accuse the masses of being warmongers. However, to defend the integrity of my response, the response is hypocrisy. It cannot â€Å"teach it’s mistakes† if people live vicariously through the experiences of war. Without war that satisfaction is taken away and the entertainment lost, suggesting that the mistakes aren’t learned; they’re idolized. To propose other wise is the pretense of having or also known as hypocrisy. So can war teach â€Å"it’s mistakes†? Can the statement ever become true? Lets again look at the question, â€Å"when does paradox become hypocrisy?† and compare it to the response, â€Å"a good war is a war that teaches it’s mistakes without one having to live with them.† In order to make the response true we would have to rephrase the question. This time we will ask, when does paradox become integrity? We have concluded that the response to the initial question is both a paradox a nd hypocrisy, but we have overlooked one literary device. Personification. Personification is the representation of an abstraction in the form of a person. In the response we suggested that â€Å"a good war† is a paradox, and if â€Å"war teaches it’s mistakes without one having to live with them† is hypocrisy. However, the response also suggests that we have personified war. So in order to make the statement, â€Å"a good war is a war that teaches it’s mistakes without one having to live with them† true, we have to remove the personification and rephrase the response to â€Å"a good person is a person that teaches their mistakes without one having to live with them†. By removing the literary device of personification we have successful removed the other literary devices of paradox and hypocrisy, and gave the response integrity. If a good person were to teach others about their life’s mistakes, maybe others could learn from them. It is the gift from the veteran of foreign wars to express to others the mistakes of warfare. From that point forward, it is up to the recipient of the gift to learn from the veteran’s mistakes. War cannot teach it’s mistakes because war as a whole removes the personal aspect of warfare. It gives the individual a number instead of a valued story. However, the individual’s personal story, the veteran, includes the emotional toll of warfare. From that personal story, the audience can now begin to understand the dysfunction of warfare and that personal story can be identified as the gift.

Internet and Technology :: essays research papers

Opportunities and Challenges of the Internet In a world of light-speed data transmission, any individual with little training and expertise can make a fortune from the Internet. Many companies, like E-bay or Amazon.com, thrive from business done only through Internet transactions. As computer technology progresses, data transmission becomes faster, and as high level encryption becomes available for public use, the amount of Internet consumers also grows. Technology advances also allow employees to work from home faster and safer. A manager's first challenge is to create a presence on the web. With a phone line, computer, and HyperText Markup Language (HTML) authoring tools, a business can advertise or do business over the Internet. HTML authoring tools can be freeware, like Sausage Software's Hot Dog, or advanced and expensive utilities like Microsoft Front Page. Any computer user familiar with a word processor can effectively use these applications with minimal training. Putting the HTML and graphic files on an Internet service provider's (ISP) servers is sufficient for relatively low traffic sites. Some online businesses, like Amazon.com, handle hundreds of thousands of people, or hits, everyday. They require specialized hardware and cabling to control the vast amount of traffic on there site per day. A manager's second challenge is to make the business's web site visible on the Internet. The first step in this process would be registering a domain name. Every computer connected to the Internet has a unique number attached to it called an IP address. To simplify finding specific computers on the 'Net, the numbers where substituted with alias called domain names. The names come in two levels, before and after the dot. Fees are generally a $70 startup cost then $35 per year to hold the license of the name. Network Solutions Inc. is the official registrar of domain names. Individuals in the past have registered company names, like Coca-Cola, to themselves and th en sold the domain license to the company for thousands of dollars. There are currently more than four million domain names registered with Network Solutions. Domain name registration is not required but makes your site much easier to find. Another way to make your site visible is to register certain keywords with the most popular search engines like Yahoo! and Alta Vista. Keywords are a small number of words that describe your site and business. These are the words web surfers will most likely type in to find your page.

To What Extent Was Cavour the Architect of the Italian Unification?

To what extent is it fair to refer to Cavour as the architect of the Italian Unification? After the failures of the 1848 revolution, Count Camillo Benso Di Cavour stepped in as the Prime Minister of Piedmont as the state was considered to be agitation concentration for those who still aimed and fought for the independence and unison of Italy. His liberal leadership philosophies enabled him to contribute in the movement towards the Italian Unification. However, is it fair to consider him an Italian Nationalist who always worked with his eyes on a unitary state?Cavour certainly aimed to get rid of Austrian interference in Italy so that Piedmont would grow into the Italian leading state. To accomplish this goal, he had to modernize Piedmont and extend its influence. Yet, he was aware that success would only be achieved by gaining foreign aid as Piedmont itself lacked strength to fight Austria alone. An opportunity to ally and get support from other nations rose during the Crimean War. P iedmont took the French and British sides on a war against Russia, which got defeated in 1856.As well as gaining the sympathy of France and Britain, Piedmont got the chance to attend the Paris Peace Conference where Cavour had the opportunity to share his intentions on ending with all Austrian domination over Italy. Although his plans were not much acclaimed, he did establish friendly relations with the French Emperor, Napoleon III. The two men met at Plombieres on July 20th and an agreement was made stating that if Austria attacked Piedmont, France would send in troops to help the fighting in return for the lands of Nice and Savoy.According to the historian Mac Smith, â€Å"Britain however, mistrusted Cavour and never planned war against Russia†. But still, with the French support, Cavour now tempted Austria into war, and when an ultimatum was issued, he rejected it declaring war. Austria was defeated provoking turbulences and commotions throughout Italy. Napoleon, however, was surprised by the rate at which events were moving and concluded an armistice with Austria causing Cavour to resign, as without France, Piedmont had to hope to grow.Still, the revolutionary movements in Italy while Cavour was still in power had motivated people from Tuscany, Parma, Modena and parts of the Papal States who were calling for annexation to Piedmont. Cavour came straight back to power in 1860 offering Napoleon the states of Nice and Savoy in return for the states of Central Italy. Some historians agree that at this point Cavour even hindered the Unification process as by giving Italian states away to France he was breaking down territorial integrity.Napoleon held a plebiscite and a devastating number of voters wished for the unification to the Piedmontese-Sardinian Kingdom. At this point, Cavour had reached all he aimed for. Piedmont was now a strong constitutional monarchy, which acted as a leader over the other Italian Sates. Through war, Cavour aimed to gain nation al glory only and his idea of foreign assistance never had the intention to help Italy achieve unification, it only meant to empower Piedmont. He was able to initiate the economic transformation of the state, enlarge the merchant fleet, treble foreign trade and develop the railway network.Cavour also established a political partnership, the Cannubio, in which he was able to resist pressure from the clerical right and the revolutionary left as he had his own centre-right party and Ratzzi’s centre-left group. This indicates that he that he focused on methods to modernize and develop Piedmont, and only Piedmont. He was satisfied with what he had achieved and had no intention to expand his kingdom into the southern states. He thought that by joining Naples and Sicily he would be taking the unification idea too further away and that it would provoke foreign opposition. The historian D.Beales says, â€Å"Cavour never talked of Unification but Piedmontese Domination† and LCB Seaman agrees when he states: â€Å"All that can be safely said is that Cavour wanted to get as much as could reasonably be obtained (for Piedmont), but no more†. Later in 1860, a new Italian figure appears. Giuseppe Garibaldi, an Italian Patriot, who had been a republican under the power of Giuseppe Mazzini in 1831, steps in. He had always been very determined about uniting Italy and had spent his entire life fighting for Austrian expulsion off Italy. A contrasting figure, with its ambitions set very clear, when compared to Cavour.Garibaldi was passionate for his country and wanted to make it all into one. When a revolution broke out it Sicily, he saw the opportunity to assist it. He soon took over the capital and prepared to attack the mainland. Garibaldi entered through Messina, struck north for Naples and made plans to enter Rome. Cavour immediately sent troops south in order to prevent Garibaldi from entering Rome, as it could be a great threat to incite war with France. The fact that Cavour did not support Garibaldi’s views and aims suggests that he undoubtedly did not want the whole unification of Italy.Cavour had no sympathy for Garibaldi, as he believed he was taking the idea of unification to another level and even ordered his arrest. Cavour made it very clear that he concentrated on the affairs of Northern Italy only and did not want the Southern part to join in. The Southern Italian states, however, demanded to unify with Piedmont and Cavour held a plebiscite. A massive majority was in favour of annexation to Piedmont and Garibaldi was forced to hand in over Sicily and Naples to Victor Emmanuel II who was than proclaimed King of Italy. Later in 1870, a plebiscite was held at Rome, which was also united to Italy.The Italian Unification was never under Cavour’s policy. The fact that the Italians aimed to unify altogether made them want to unify with Piedmont beforehand as they saw it as the first step to Unification. Cavourâ€⠄¢s intention to simply achieve Piedmontization failed due to the favourable factors that made the Italian Unification so successful. It is evident that Cavour was not the architect of the Italian Unification as he even tried to hinder the process. If he had not tried to stop Garibaldi in 1860 when he tried invading Rome, the unification process might had been completed before 1870.The historian LCB Seaman says that â€Å"For him (Cavour) the idea was tainted with radicalism, and his diplomat’s sense of realities told him there were too many insurmountable obstacles in the way†. Cavour did however, to a certain extent, enable the Italian Unification, as he was the one who began fighting for it (eventhough for him it only meant Piedmontese unification). He opened the door for Garibaldi. Without him, Garibaldi would have not been able to take over Sicily and move to the mainland so easily.Cavour was able to do what Mazzini couldn’t, he was able to reach every Ital ian and motivate them with the idea of unification. However, his intentions of unifications were very limited and the people of Italy wanted more than what he proposed. When Garibaldi stepped in, he knew he had massive support as a result of what Cavour had originally suggested. We can, therefore, say that Cavour enabled and contributed to the Italian Unification, but it would a falsity to refer to him as the Architect of the Italian Unification as he made it very clear that his intentions were never to reach this point.

About Short-Term Homeschooling

There are many reasons a family might begin homeschooling on a temporary basis. Some are excited about the idea of home educating their children, but they arent sure homeschooling will really work for their family. So, they opt to homeschool for a trial period, knowing that they will evaluate the experience and make a permanent decision at the end of their trial.   Others know from the start that their foray into home education  is only temporary. Temporary homeschooling may be the result of illness, a bullying situation, an impending move,  an opportunity to travel for an extended time, or a myriad of other possibilities. Whatever the reason, there are some steps you can take to make your homeschool experience a positive one while ensuring that your students transition back into a traditional school setting is as seamless as possible. Complete Standardized Testing Homeschooling parents who return their children to public or private school may be asked to submit standardized test scores for grade placement. Test scores can be particularly crucial for students re-entering public or private school after 9th grade. Without these scores, they will likely have to take placement tests to determine their grade level. This may not be true for all states, particularly those who offer assessment options other than testing for homeschoolers and those  that don’t require assessments. Check your state’s homeschool laws to see what may be expected of your student. If you know or are relatively confident that your student will be returning to school, ask your school administration precisely what will be required so that you can make sure you have what you need. Stay on Target If you know that homeschooling will be temporary for your family, take steps to stay on target, particularly with concept-based subjects like math. Many curriculum publishers also sell materials for homeschooling families. You may be able to use the same curriculum your child would be using in a traditional school setting. You might also inquire about the learning benchmarks for your student’s grade level and the topics that his or her peers will cover in the upcoming year. Perhaps your family would like to touch on some of the same topics in your studies.   Have Fun Don’t be afraid to dig in and enjoy your temporary homeschool situation.  Just because your child’s public or privately schooled  classmates will be studying the Pilgrims or the water cycle doesn’t mean you have to. Those are topics that can be easily covered on a need-to-know basis when your child returns to school. If you are traveling, take advantage of the opportunity to explore first-hand the history and geography of the places you’ll be visiting, something that would be impossible if you weren’t homeschooling. Visit historical landmarks, museums, and local hot-spots. Even if you aren’t traveling, take advantage of the freedom to follow your child’s interests and customize his education during your foray into homeschooling. Go on field trips. Delve into topics that captivate your student. Consider ditching the textbooks in favor of historical fiction, biographies, and engaging non-fiction titles on topics of interest. Study the arts by incorporating visual arts into your homeschool day and by attending plays or symphony performances. Take advantage of classes for homeschoolers at places such as zoos, museums, gymnastics centers, and  art studios. If you’re moving to a new area, make the most of  learning opportunities as you travel and take time to explore your new home. Get Involved in Your Local Homeschool Community Even though you won’t be homeschooling long-term, getting involved in your local homeschooling community can be an opportunity to forge life-long friendships for parents and kids alike. If your student will be returning to the same public or private school at the end of your homeschool year, it makes sense to  maintain school friendships. However, it’s also wise to give him or her  the opportunity to foster friendships with other homeschoolers. Their shared experiences can make homeschooling feel less awkward and isolating, particularly for a child who may feel caught between two worlds in a temporary homeschooling experience. Getting involved with other homeschoolers can be especially helpful for a child who isn’t particularly excited about homeschooling and who may think homeschoolers are weird. Being around other homeschooled kids can break the stereotypes in his mind (and vice versa). Not only is getting involved in the homeschooling community a good idea for social reasons, but it can be helpful for the temporary homeschool parent, too. Other homeschooling families can be a wealth of information about educational opportunities that you may wish to explore. They can also be a source of support for the difficult days that are an inevitable part of homeschooling and a sounding board about curriculum choices. If needed, they can offer tips for tweaking your curriculum to make it work best for your family since completely changing any ill-fitting  choices probably isn’t feasible for short-term homeschoolers. Be Prepared to Make It Permanent Finally, be prepared for the possibility that your temporary homeschooling situation may become permanent. Even though your plan may be to return your student to public or private school, its okay to entertain the possibility that your family might enjoy  homeschooling so much that you decide to continue. Thats why its a good idea to enjoy the year and not be too rigid in following what your child would be learning in school. Create a learning-rich environment and explore different educational experiences than your child might have in school. Try hands-on learning activities  and look for everyday educational moments. Following these tips can help your child be prepared for his re-entry into public or private school (or not!) while making the time that you do spend homeschooling something that your whole family will remember fondly.