English Essays Pride and Prejudice

English Essays Pride and Prejudice Introduction Jane Austens much loved novel Pride and Prejudice was first published in 1813 at a time when family relationships in Britain were governed by rather rigid societal rules. Male and female roles were very clearly defined, and in the more wealthy families in particular, great effort was spent on maintaining moral respectability and financial security. This essay examines the various ways that Jane Austen depicts the related topics of love and marriage in the novel. It explores both the pressures upon different characters to behave in certain traditional ways, and the choices which are open to them, and explains how the author cleverly steers the reader towards an understanding of love and marriage which challenges some of the prejudices of her time. The traditional marriage of convenience The novel opens with a comic scene in which the mature married couple Mr and Mrs Bennet discuss the arrival of a new neighbour, Mr Bingley. It is clear from the start that the society in which the novel takes place is rather refined, since the house in question is called Netherfield Park and Mr Bingley is described as a young man of large fortune from the north of England (Austen, 1918, p. 1). The conversation is dominated by Mrs Bennet, who holds forth on the exciting prospect that this new neighbour might fall in love with one of their five daughters, while Mr Bennet exhibits a long-suffering tolerance of his wifes domestic chatter. The narrator maintains an ironic distance from the two speakers, illustrating Mr Bennets lack of comprehension for the social niceties of formal visits, and Mrs Bennets lack of comprehension of her husbands character: She was a woman of mean understanding, little information, and uncertain temper (Austen, 1918, p. 4) whose main focus in life was to find a husband for her five daughters. This introductory chapter serves as a vignette of traditional marriage in upper class British society at the start of the nineteenth century since the Bennets belong to the ruling class by virtue of income, residence and manners (Downie, 2006), even though some critics such as Tuite (2002) persist in classifying Austens characters as bourgeois. According to Zimmerman (1968, p. 66) these two characters embody the salient qualities implied by the title of the novel: Mr. Bennet exhibits the detachment of pride and Mrs. Bennet the total involvement of prejudice. Greenfield (2002, p. 149) has more understanding for Mrs. Bennets obsessions, describing her as being plagued by realistic concerns about womens economic disadvantages. This means, in effect, that they are in many ways opposites, since the husband is clever, urbane and often silent, while the wife is rather foolish, provincial and prone to engage in gossip at very available opportunity. The pair appear to have found an accommodation with each other, but they are clearly not at all well matched in terms of their character, interests or intelligence. The family is clearly of modest means, and it is the dilemma of finding a suitable husband for all five girls which sets up the starting point for the rest of the novel. After setting the scene through this entertaining dialogue in the Bennet sitting room, the author then proceeds to introduce a series of characters and trace their different approaches to the resolution of this fundamental problem. One potential suitor presents himself in the form of the clergyman Mr Collins. He is first mentioned by Mr Bennet as a gentleman and a stranger (Austen, 1918, p. 62), whom he has invited to dine with the family. Significantly this news is greeted first with excitement, since these qualities might make him a suitable match for one of the daughters, and then horror, since it turns out that he is due to acquire through the legal process of entailment, the family home upon the death of Mr Bennet, thus giving him power over the fate of the rest of the family (Macpherson, 2003). The somewhat pompous Mr Collins comes with the express intention of marrying one of the five sisters. He is interested in Jane, the eldest and most beautiful sister, and a deal is struck between himself and Mrs Bennet that he should concentrate on the second daughter, Elizabeth, since the eldest daughter is already spoken for. The narrator indicates the business nature of this transaction with an ironic reference to the speed with which he agrees to change his mind and the indifference which he and Mrs. Bennet have for the feelings of the young women in question: Mr. Collins had only to change from Jane to Elizabeth and it was soon done done while Mrs. Bennet was stirring the fire (Austen, 1918, p. 72). Love plays no part in this transaction, and so the proposed marriage between Mr. Collins and Elizabeth is set to mirror the traditional fate of her parents. The two individuals would have little in common when they start out married life, and it would be their task to make their marriage of convenience work. In the event, however, this plan is thwarted by Elizabeths spirited refusal of the proposal from Mr. Collins, an act which her mother calls her own perverseness (Austen, 1918, p. 145). It is Elizabeths older friend, Charlotte Lucas, who steps into the role of suitable wife for the faintly ridiculous Mr. Collins. Perhaps because she sees her own chances of marriage fading, Charlotte herself is convinced of the primary importance of finding a good match, regardless of how one might feel about the person. She is convinced of the value of obtaining a respectable and at least moderately wealthy husband, since she discusses the blossoming relationship between Mr. Bingley and Jane Bennet somewhat wistfully with the words Happiness in marriage is entirely a matter of chance (Austen, 1918, p. 21). One critic astutely highlights the bitter compromise that Charlotte Lucass marriage to Mr. Collins represents: the pathos of Charlottes marriage is that, because of her intelligence, her ignorance must be a pretense (Weinsheimer, 1972, p. 408). This is the price that many women had to pay in order to obtain material security and social respectability in early nineteenth century Britain. Marriage for love A very different type of marital relationship is modelled in the novel by the eldest Bennet sister Jane and her suitor Mr. Bingley. From the very beginning it is clear that they love and admire each other. Jane, as the eldest of the Bennet sisters, is assumed to be the first to marry, and her extraordinary beauty and even temperament make her an obvious choice for the wealthy Mr. Bingley. He is attracted to her for reasons that might appear to be rather superficial in the first instance. She does not have much money, but she has other advantages. Mr. Darcy and Mr. Bingley are both impressed by her appearance, since Darcy refers to her as the only handsome girl in the room and Mr. Bingley replies that she is the most beautiful creature I ever beheld (Austen, 1918, p. 10). Young women who are in possession of great beauty are, in the world of Jane Austen, usually well placed in the marriage stakes. It also helps that Jane is submissive and calm, unlike her more assertive sister Elizabeth, who does not attract nearly so many admiring glances from the men. Assured of her comfortable marriage based on mutual love, Jane firmly believes in the importance of affection in marriage, and advises Elizabeth to consider this matter very carefully before committing to marry Mr. Darcy: Oh, Lizzy! Do anything rather than marry without affection. Are you quite sure that you what you ought to do? (Austen, 1918, p. 385). The relationship between Jane and Charles Bingley is presented as something easy and natural, as they attend various social functions and gradually get to know each other. By happy coincidence Mr. Bingley has a suitably large fortune, and the Bennet parents are happy to see their eldest daughter marry such a gentle and even-tempered man. Marriage for love is thus presented as something idyllic, but rather rare, and only achievable when circumstances happen to arrange themselves in propitious ways. It is only imaginable as an outcome for Jane, for example, since all of the other Bennet sisters have characteristics which make them less than suitable for such a marriage: Mary is too plain, Lizzy and Lydia are too headstrong, and Kitty is too young to attract the attention of the highly suitable but ultimately rather dull Mr. Bingley. This marriage proves the point that in early nineteenth century Britain, happiness in marriage is a matter of chance, although it can sometimes make both parties very happy. Illicit love True love is evident also in the relationship between sixteen year old Lydia and the dashing officer Mr. Wickham. In this case, however, there is consternation within the family when it is discovered that the two have disappeared together, without first completing the mandatory social formalities of courtship, parental approval, engagement and marriage. There are two dimensions to the problem posed by Lydia and Wickhams love: the first is moral, and the second is social. The moral issue derives from the Christian value of obligatory chastity before marriage. The self-righteous Mr. Collins writes an odious letter to Mr. Bennet, condemning Lydias character and advising the poor man to throw off your unworthy child from your affection for ever, and leave her to reap the fruits of her own heinous offence (Austen, 1918, p. 304). He even goes so far as to say the death of your daughter would have been a blessing in comparison of this (Austen, 1918, p. 304). Writing a century later one critic endorses at least some of the moral outrage that is expressed in the novel, but suggests also that there might be a more charitable motivation for Lydias behaviour: There is something absolute in her selfish recklessness, her reckless pursuit of her own pleasure without the least regard not only to others but even to herself he contributes to her comfort and enables her to realize her quite childish ideal of worldly importance as a married woman (Howells, 1918, p. xv). It seems that in her rush to achieve the status of a married women, Lydia forgets her duty to her parents and sisters and most seriously of all, puts her own future at risk by breaking all the rules designed to preserve her own value as a respectable woman. If Mr. Darcy had not stepped in to ensure that the roguish Mr. Wickham then things would have ended very badly indeed. While Elizabeth Bennet has some sympathy for her sisters folly, Mary Bennet spells out the awful consequences: Unhappy as the event must be for Lydia, we may draw from it this useful lesson: that loss of virtue in a female is irretrievable that one false step involves her in endless ruin that her reputation is no less brittle than it is beautiful (Austen, 1918, p. 295). These sentiments reflect the harsh moral code of the times, the expectations of the community (Deresiewicz, 1997) and incidentally also the double standard that allows men all sorts of indiscretions but judges women by a single instance of immoral conduct. The second problem that Lydias elopement causes is a social one. The scandal caused by one sister will automatically have a detrimental effect on the reputation of the whole family, including the other sisters. It is no coincidence that this disaster is averted by the actions of a wealthy and powerful male: Mr. Darcy. In this period women did not have the right to decide upon their own fate, and they were dependent upon the actions of fathers, brothers, husbands, or in this case, husbands-to-be. By stepping in to aid the family, Mr. Darcy presents himself in the role of dashing hero. Elizabeth Bennet, who herself would no doubt be too proud to accept acts of charity on her own behalf, is bound to be mightily impressed by her suitors gallant behaviour. In this period women did not have the freedom to engage in communications that would increase their wealth or power, since meetings with the opposite sex were strictly chaperoned, and there was even an unwritten rule which forbade correspondence between marriageable persons not engaged to be married (Le Faye, 2002, p. 114). The author uses this critical incident to turn the readers attention towards the increasing likelihood of a match between Elizabeth Bennet and the dark and difficult Mr. Darcy. The ideal marriage The relationship which takes central place in the novel is that between Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy. A great deal of suspense is created through the initial animosity that is expressed between the two, and the growing attraction that they experience towards each other. Several of the minor characters, including the haughty Lady Catherine de Bourgh, seem to think that Elizabeth is not a suitable match for Mr. Darcy because of her relative poverty, her lower social status, and her rather unfeminine tendency to make witty and sometimes highly critical remarks. Elizabeth does not fit the profile of the ideal gentlewoman of this time. In similar ways, Mr. Darcy defies the definition of a gentleman, at least in the eyes of the young women he encounters in polite English society. He possesses some of the attributes of a romantic hero, such as good looks and great wealth, but his manners leave something to be desired, and he does not go along with all of the social niceties of dancing and visiting which most ladies expect of him. The story of Elizabeth and Mr. Darcys gradual acquaintance is a motif that is often used by Austen and represents the common novelists fantasy of a poor girl who meets, and after a series of vicissitudes marries, the rich young man (Butler, 2001, p. 139). The twists and turns of love and hate which Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy experience are the necessary preamble to an ultimately happy ending. In Austens skilled and often ironic narrative, the reader is pushed and pulled into viewing different facets of both characters, appreciating their faults as well as their virtues, and developing a growing awareness of their mutual attraction. It is made clear by both characters that in fact they are romantically attracted to each other. Darcy declares his position in the middle of the novel when he boldly tells Elizabeth You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you (Austen, 1918, p. 195) while Elizabeth at the end of the novel assures her father about her feelings for Mr. Darcy: I do, I do like him, she replied, with tears in her eyes; I love him. (Austen, 1918, p. 389). In the end, when the marriage is finally agreed, and the two are set to launch into a lifetime of happiness together, a final word is left to Mr. Bennet, who writes to Mr. Collins, firing off a comic opposite to the earlier letter received from Mr. Collins, with the words: I must trouble you once more for congratulations. Elizabeth will soon be the wife of Mr. Darcy. Console Lady Catherine as well as you can. But, if I were you, I would stand by the nephew. He has more to give (Austen, 1919, p. 395). According to Newman (1983), this letter is an attempt by the Jane Austen to distance herself from the cliched ending of the romantic novel and to insert a little comedic irony. Mr. Bennet is poking fun at the miscalculations of Mr Collins, including his earlier condemnation of the Bennet family and his affectation in cultivating a connection with Lady Catherine. The affiliation of the Bennet family with Mr. Darcy removes the familys financial and reputational difficulties in one fell swoop. As it happens, Lydia and Mr. Wickham also escape the dire fate predicted by Mr. Collins, which all goes to prove that the merciless rules and restrictions of polite Christian society do not always end in the outcomes predicted by their most fanatical supporters. Courtship is a seductive, often illusory process with uncertain results (Hinnant, 2006). Spinsters, bachelors, widows and widowers Although Pride and Prejudice revolves mainly around the progress of various love and marriage relationships there are a number of other characters who are presented in isolation, and without an obvious partner. Two of the younger Bennet sisters, Mary and Kitty, fall into this category but the author presents their prospects very differently, Mary is described in terms of qualities which more usually would be used to refer to a man since she is fond of books, and of strict moralising. Distant cousins, uncles, and widows are presented as outsiders, apart from the interesting mainstream of society where the machinations over love and marriage preoccupy all of the women and most of the men. Jane Austen criticises some of the silliness that goes on in the centre of upper class society but she does not go so far as to recommend these isolated positions for any of her main characters. Only the stern and awkward sister Mary seems destined for this fate, and her role in the novel seems to be to act as a foil for Elizabeth. Without Elizabeths charm and wit, Mary will be left in the dreaded role of spinster, always looking on while others enjoy the benefits of marriage, and if they are lucky, also of romantic love. Conclusion This brief essay has shown that Jane Austen presents a witty and varied range of opinions on love and marriage in the early nineteenth century. The men have by far the greater range of choices, while younger women must remain constrained in mostly female company, awaiting rare opportunities to encounter eligible young men. The fact that the women are so easily interchangeable in the eyes of men, and so often resigned to their fate, highlights their role as little more than items of property in this patriarchal society. Each of the types of marriage outlined above are presented as viable choices for the Bennet sisters. The novels focus on Elizabeth, however, and the more interesting and nuanced path toward marriage that she travels, suggests that this alliance of two highly intelligent and moderately rebellious characters may well represent the ideal marriage from a nineteenth century upper class perspective. The novel plays with stereotypes in the minor characters, and stretches the limits of acceptable masculinity and femininity in the two main characters. Thus the novel challenges some, but not all, of the prejudices of the time and leaves the reader with a detailed and nuanced overview of love and marriage in this period. References Austen, J. (1918) [1813] Pride and Prejudice. New York: Scribner. Butler, M. (2001) The Juvenilia and Northanger Abbey. In S. Regan (Ed.), The Nineteenth-Century Novel: A Critical Reader. London: Routledge, pp. 136-143. Deresiewicz, W. (1997) Community and Cognition in Pride and Prejudice. ELH 64 (2), pp. 503-535. Downie, J. A. (2006) Who Says Shes a Bourgeois Writer? Reconsidering the Social and Political Contexts of Jane Austens Novels. Eighteenth Century Studies 40 (1), pp. 69-84. Greenfield, S. C. (2002) Mothering Daughters: Novels and the Politics of Family Romance, Frances Burney to Jane Austen. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press. Hinnant, C. H. (2006) Jane Austens Wild Imagination: Romance and the Courtship Plot in the Six Canonical Novels. Narrative 14 (3), pp. 294-310. Howells, W. D. (1918) Introduction to Pride And Prejudice. New York: Scribner. Le Faye, D. (2002) Jane Austen: The World of Her Novels. London: Frances Lincoln. Macpherson, S. (2003) Rent to Own: or, Whats Entailed in Pride and Prejudice. Representations 82 (1), pp. 1-23. Tuite, C. (2002) Romantic Austen: Sexual Politics and the Literary Canon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Weinsheimer, J. (1972) Chance and the hierarchy of marriages in Pride and Prejudice. ELH 39 (3), pp. 404-419. Zimmerman, E. (1968) Pride and Prejudice in Pride and Prejudice. Nineteenth-Century Fiction 23 (1), pp. 64-73.

Bungee Jumping :: essays research papers

Bungee Jumping Bungee jumping is a sport that has dramatically evolved over the past couple decades. Bungee jumping has evolved into a sport of art and thrill. As a tribal tradition, the ritual was soon incorporated with a bungee cord. Bungee jumping spread rapidly throughout the world, ever-growing in popularity. Detailed designs and engineering have helped to take bungee jumping to all new limits. An array of prices depicts a variety of heights, harnesses, and locations of sites. Bungee jumping offers many diverse medical advantages. New innovations in the bungee field have led to all new rides and adventures. Bungee jumping is a sport that enables a person to prove something to themselves, regardless of age, sex, religion, or race. Bungee jumping is based on an age-old ritual practiced by the â€Å"land divers† of Pentecost island in the South Pacific archipelago of Vanuatu. Young men proved their courage by plummeting off giant towers. Every spring villagers there collect liana vines and wind them into long cords. The men then scale six story wooden towers, attach the vines around their ankles and jump. A successful leap is considered a demonstration of courage. In 1979, a bungee cord was incorporated with this tribal ritual. Members of the Oxford University's Dangerous Sports Club read about and designed a safe form of the practice. Atop the Golden Gate Bridge, dressed in tuxedos and top hats, the first form of bungee jumping came to existence. In 1987, bungee jumping moved to the American commercial scene. Two brothers, John and Peter Kockelman, began jumping from bridges over river gorges in the Sierras. Recognizing the sport's commercial potential, they opened Bungee Adventures in 1988. Bungee jumping spread rapidly throughout the world, ever-growing in popularity. Bungee jumping became national crazes in many areas. After the use of a bungee cord was thought of, the idea first spread through New Zealand. From here, Australia and France soon caught on and joined the sport. This new hobby, predominantly known and practiced only by skydivers, rock climbers, and other extremists caught the world's attention and spread like a wild fire. In America, bungee jumping was also proving popular. The first commercial bungee business began thirty minutes outside San Diego, CA. Commercial sites in Colorado and Utah soon began to pop up. Expansions of these businesses now help to cover almost every western state. Bungee Jumping's popularity has helped it to become an officially recognized sport. National Freestlye Bungee Championships are held each year and are broadcasted on a number of channels including â€Å"ESPN 2." Detailed designs and engineering have helped to take bungee jumping to

Price Control

Price Controls Econ 360-002 Sonia Parsa [email  protected] edu G00509808 Word Count: 1540 Abstract This paper examines how, in the United States, the government imposes several forms of taxes and price controls and how all individuals are required to pay direct and indirect taxes. It looks at how the approach of taxation and how the constraints of taxation on goods and price controls affect the U. S. economy. Introduction Regulations have played a huge role in the political and economic world for centuries. There are various different types of regulation. One regulation that the government imposes under its tax policy is price control, which is not considered to be voluntary. Price control can play two different roles, a price ceiling or a price floor. A price ceiling is the maximum price that can be charged in the market for a certain good, causing shortages, and a price floor is the minimum price that can be charged in the market, which then causes surpluses. Measures are usually taken by a government under its regulatory policy to control wages and prices in an attempt to check cost-push inflation and wage-push inflation[1]. However, these policies never help the economy. Instead, it worsens the situation. Governments also impose price controls as an indirect mechanism for taxation. The most well-known price controls enforced by the United States government today are: the policy of minimum wage, rent control, and oil price control. Having enforced price controls generate opportunities for economy failure, i. e. shortages and surpluses, as well as opportunities within the black market, and international arbitrage. The Economic Philosophy When a price control is forced by the government, it’s usually imposed to help or protect particular parts of the population which would be treated inequitably by the unfettered price system. But one must wonder which part of the population, the consumers or the producers? Is it not true that the consumers always feel as if the prices of a good are much higher than their actual value, while producers always feel as if the prices are too low? Price controls are usually justified as a way to help consumers, but whether they actually do is open to debate. Imposed price controls by the government are not only an absolute disaster, but have resulted in dislocating many economies in the past. The key is to recognize that when governments impose price controls; it does not only affect their nation, but also affects parallel imports with their trade partners because of a price â€Å"discrimination,† in regards to tariffs. The Economic Logic The effect of taxation and price controls on the economy vary from the decrease of the supply of goods to an increase in costs and can be demonstrated by a supply-demand analysis (Figure 1). In a free market, the equilibrium selling prices are shown by an upward sloping supply curve (S) with respect to price. The maximum buying prices on the part of the consumer is then shown by a downward sloping demand curve (D) with respect to price. After a quantity of a good is acquired by a consumer, the less important the desire is than before. Therefore, the supplier has to lower the price for each unit as it is sold. Where the supply and demand curve intersects at the margin is called the equilibrium price. In a maximum price control, a deadweight loss occurs in the triangle of a, b, c. pic] For example, when there is a tax imposed on a good like tobacco, there is an increase in the price of the product. This is called minimum price control and the price is not legally allowed to fall below the minimum. This shifts the supply curve of the product to the left. In other words, there are fewer goods available at the same prices than there were before. There is then a decline in the quantity demanded and a new equilibrium between demand and supply is reached. On the other hand when price controls are imposed there is an artificial decline in the prices. At the lower prices, a higher quantity is demanded but the production is insufficient to fulfill that demand and causes a shortage. We can also use the supply-demand analysis to dissect the labor market when a wage-control is placed by the government (shown in Figure 2). By establishing a minimum-wage law, it mandates a price floor above the equilibrium wage; therefore, the rate of unemployment among unskilled workers increases. When wages increase, a greater number of workers are willing to work while only a small number of jobs will be available at the higher wage. Companies can be more selective in whom they choose to employ causing the least skilled and inexperience to be excluded. [pic] Figure 2 assumes that workers are willing to work for more hours if paid a higher wage. We graph this relationship with the wage on the vertical axis and the quantity of workers on the horizontal axis. Combining the demand and supply curves for labor allows us to examine the effect of the minimum wage. We will start by assuming that the supply and demand curves for labor will not change as a result of raising the minimum wage. This assumption has been questioned. If no minimum wage is in place, workers and employers will continue to adjust the quantity of labor supplied according to price until the quantity of labor demanded is equal to the quantity of labor supplied, reaching equilibrium price, where the supply and demand curves intersect. Evidence- Minimum Wage Basic theory says that raising the minimum wage, which is a type of price-control, helps workers whose wages are raised, and hurts people who are not hired because companies cut back on employment. The very first federal minimum wage laws were imposed under the National Recovery Administration. The National Industrial Recovery Act, which became law on June 16, 1933, established industrial minimum wages for 515 classes of labor. Over 90 percent of the minimum wages were set at between 30 and 40 cents per hour. [2] C. F. Roos, who was the director of research at the NRA at that time, estimated that â€Å"by reason of the minimum wage provisions of the codes, about 500,000 Negro workers were on relief in 1934. † Roos added that â€Å"a minimum wage definitely causes the displacement of the young, inexperienced worker and the old worker. [3] By imposing minimum wage rate, free contract in the labor market is shattered. A firm is no longer allowed to pay below the minimum and the laborer cannot accept anything below the minimum that has been set as well. The free-market allows inexperienced workers to obtain entry-level positions, which gives them on the job training, by working for less. With the imposed wage-control, if the monetary compensation falls below minimum, th e trade-off becomes illegal which is a direct violation of a workers liberty to free contract. Thomas Rustici, in his book about minimum wage, makes an excellent point when he states: â€Å"In virtually every case it was found that the net employment effects and labor-force participation rates were negatively related to changes in the minimum wage. In the face of 50 years of evidence, the question is no longer if the minimum wage law creates unemployment, but how much current or future increases in the minimum wage will adversely affect the labor market? †[4] For years we have witnessed the effects of what minimum wages execute, yet we continue to conduct the same mistakes. Conclusion Obligatory price controls by the government are not only an absolute disaster, but have resulted in dislocating many economies all over the world for thousands of years[5]. As economic history has shown us, price controls being effective in a free competitive market are very rare. We either experience shortages or surpluses as a result. Who wins and who loses with an imposed price control? Setting a price control in one country affects other countries around it as well due to parallel imports and personal trafficking. Prices are not just numbers to a free competitive market; they are the expression of the value the supplier sets, no matter how subjective it may be. To regulate or to impose a price control, like any form of regulation, is unconstitutional. In some cases, it either violates the 5th amendment and/or 14th amendment. Price controls, wage controls, and money controls are really people controls. Regimentation at its worst- that is what a socialist dictatorship is all about. I believe that the free market has its own way of equalizing the economy and when the government interferes and sets price ceiling or price floor, it causes a chaos within our economy. Regardless if it results in a dead weight loss or a shortage, the consequences can sometimes be more destructive in the long run. Even if a government believes that price controls are set and affect only their country, it does not; it affects every nation that does any trade with them, exports or imports. The appeal of price controls is understandable. Even though they fail to protect many consumers and hurt others, controls hold out the promise of protecting groups that are particularly hard-pressed to meet price increases. However, when the government has proposed a control, there is a lag in time, causing an economy to become more impaired. References Barfield, C. E. and Groombridge, M. A. â€Å"The Economic Case for Copyright and Owner Control over Parallel Imports. † Journal of World Intellectual Property, Vol. 1 (1998), pp. 903-939 Benjamin M. Anderson, Economics and the Public Welfare: A Financial and Economic History of the United States, 1914-1946 (Indianapolis: Liberty Press, 1979), p. 36. Cambridge Pharma Consultancy. Pricing and Reimbursement Review 2003. Cambridge, UK: IMS Health-Management Consulting, 2004. â€Å"Gas Fever: Happiness Is a Full Tank. † Times Magazine 18 Feb. 1974. 19 June 2009 . Grossman, Gene M. , and Edwin L-C Lai. â€Å"Parallel imports and price controls. † RAND Journal of Econ omics 2nd ser. 39 (2008): 378-402. Princeton. Web. 8 Dec. 2009. . Richard M. Alson, J. R. Kearl, and Michael B. Vaughan, â€Å"Is There a Consensus Among Economists in the 1990’s? † American Economic Review 82, no. 2 (1992): 203–209. Rustici, Thomas. â€Å"Public Choice View of Minimum Wage†. Cato Journal, 5. 1) Spring/Summer 1985: 114. ISSN: 0273-3072 Steenhuysen, Julie. â€Å"Drug price controls may shorten lives: report | Reuters. † Business & Financial News, Breaking US & International News | Reuters. com. 16 Dec. 2008. Web. 8 Dec. 2009. . The Power of Oil: The Arab Oil Weapon and the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, and the United States Roy Licklider International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 2 (Jun. , 1988), pp. 214 ———————– [1] Grossman, Gene M. , and Edwin L-C Lai. â€Å"Parallel imports and price controls. † RAND Journal of Economics 2nd ser. 39 (2008): 378-4 02. Princeton. Web. 8 Dec. 009. . [2] Leverett Lyon, et al. The National Recovery Administration: An Analysis and Appraisal (New York: Da Capo Press, 1972). pp. 318-19. [3] Benjamin M. Anderson, Economics and the Public Welfare: A Financial and Economic History of the United States, 1914-1946 (Indianapolis: Liberty Press, 1979), p. 336. [4] Rustici, Thomas. â€Å"Public Choice View of Minimum Wage†. Cato Journal, 5. (1) Spring/Summer 1985: 105. ISSN: 0273-3072 [5] Barfield, C. E. and Groombridge, M. A. â€Å"The Economic Case for Copyright and Owner Control over Parallel Imports. † Journal of World Intellectual Property, Vol. 1 (1998), pp. 903-939

Dirk Van der Elst’s “Culture as Given, Culture as Choice” Essay

In this text, anthropologists Dirk Van Der Elst and Paul Bohanan discuss the concept of multiculturalism. The text states that an entirely different view of culture is needed in the intellectual discourse of society. Elst analyzes culture using the example of analyzing sex. Elst makes it clear in his analysis that pluralities of identity are the norm, that everyone is multi-ethnic and multi-racial in some fashion Even when discussing the contemporary mainstream political debate over what constitutes ‘multiculturalism,’ it is common cultural phrasing to view culture as a stagnant unit. Multiculturalism is defined in this text as the manner in which more cultures are incorporated into the framework of the dominant discourse., rather than being a way of deconstructing notions of how culture itself is perceived and misperceived.. Elst suggests that nothing really exists as ‘culture,’ instead culture itself is a â€Å"constructed, socially produced norm.† After reading this book I got the feeling that the authors purpose was mainly to advise each individual to study and redefine his own culture. So with that said, I dug down deep and asked myself, what does culture mean to me? And how does culture influence my person, political and social life? The book says that culture means â€Å"everything that human beings have created and transmitted socially across time and space (32).† He also states on page 33 that people are said to â€Å"carry† culture, to bear it from one person or generation to another.† My parents passed their culture on to me, and I will do the same for my children. I was raised a Roman Catholic, and in my family, our heritage plays a huge part. My Irish culture gives me a sense of pride. My parents started me in step dancing when I was five and I loved it. Saint Patty’s Day is bigger than Christmas in my family. We like to talk, we like to tell stories, and we like to drink, of course. But as much as I identify myself with being an American, a woman, a twenty something, elementary education major at Rowan University, or even a Catholic, I  identify with being Irish more. Like I said, I grew up in my heritage, much in the same way many people may have grown up in theirs. My culture has always been a big part of my personal life, but I never really paid much attention as to how it affected my political and social life. As far as my social life goes, I do not associate only with other Irish people. I have a very culturally diverse group of friends. I think that this also adds to who I am. I consider myself to be well rounded and open to many things and ideas. However, my fiancà © is an Irish catholic, and when I think about it, most of my exes were Irish Catholics too. I couldn’t tell you if I choose a partner consciously or not. It could be due to the fact that we have common interests, like drinking. Politics does not interest me at all. So with that said, at this moment my culture does not affect my political life because I don’t have one. Perhaps what is most unique about this book is that it moves cultural anthropology from being this subject of strange behavior that is out there by others and makes it close and personal by repeatedly challenging the reader to use anthropology to identify with and appreciate ones self and ones own choices. It is a clear statement of why people should study anthropology. Mainly, in my own opinion, it makes you think and that is what is most important when you read.