Essay #1 Cheating Essays - Cheating, Human Behavior, Behavior

Essay #1: Cheating The definition of cheating is to a ct dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination. In other words, cheating is doing something wrong and against the rules to give yourself an advantage you had not worked for or earned. I believe that cheating in a college class would be situations like: copying another students work, copying information from the internet without using proper citation (pl agiarism), using the internet and/or notes on an assignment when you aren't allowed to, and sharing your assignments with other students. I am sure there are plenty more situations that would be classified as cheating in a college class, but these are just the few main and obvious examples of cheating, in my opinion. There can be many different consequences from cheating, despite if you get caught or not. One of the first things that comes to my mind when thinking about the consequences of cheating is the negative personal affects it can have on an individual. Even if you are not caught in the act of cheating, you still face consequences. The main personal consequence an individual faces after cheating is that they did not gain any knew knowledge or learn what they were meant to by completing the task honestly. Now, not only has the individual broke the rules and risked getting disciplined, t hey have also given up their oppo rtunity to learn somet hing through honestly completely the task on their own. Another major consequence of cheating is in college, it can cause you to be completely dropped from the class you're caught cheating in. Cheating can ruin a teach/professors trust in you, it will make them question a lot from you because it proves you to be dishonest. Cheati ng is not worth its consequences. It is not worth risking being kicked out of a class, making your self have a reputation of being dishonest, and preventing yourself from learning what you need to by completing an assignment on your own in an honest manor. An experience I have had with cheating would be the time that I, myself, attempting cheating on a test I had not studied for in middle school. I had procrastinated studying for this test for a good bit of time, and eventually it was test day. I tried to memorize the study guide in the few minutes I had but it wasn't possible. So , in the spare of the moment, I decided to take pictures of the study guide on my phone and place it in my lap to look at during my test. As I finished my test, I thought I had gotten away with it, but as the teacher was collecting papers, he asked for my phone. He had seen me cheating and allowed me to finish my test before taking my phone. I was given a score of zero for the test, given in school suspension, and my (very unhappy) parents had to pick my phone up from the school. Cheating may seem like "the easy way out", but it is not worth the consequences that come along with it. You will be thought of more highly and will be a more honest and dependable person if you complete all tasks honestly and abiding by the rules. Cheating is lazy, dishonest, and makes an individual seem untrustworthy. You will always achieve more in the long run by doing things correctly, honestly, and with a good conscious. Everyone has cheated in some way at least once in their life, whether it be on a test, quiz, assignment, game, or anything else. Most should learn from the negative effects and consequences of cheating that it is always better to do your best, in an honest manner.

The Catcher in the Rye - the Importance of the Title

The Catcher in the Rye - the Importance of the Title The Catcher in the Rye  is a 1951 novel by American author  J. D. Salinger. Despite some controversial themes and language, the novel and its protagonist  Holden Caulfield  have become favorites among teen and young adult readers. In the decades since its publication, The Catcher in the Rye  has become one of the most popular coming of age novels.  Below, we’ll explain the meaning of the title and review some of the famous quotations and important vocabulary from the novel. The Meaning of the Title: The Catcher in the Rye The title of The Catcher in the Rye is a reference to Comin Thro the Rye,  a Robert Burns poem and a symbol for the main characters longing to preserve the innocence  of childhood.   The first reference in the text to catcher in the rye is in Chapter 16. Holden overhears: If a body catch a body coming through the rye. Holden describes the scene (and the singer): The kid was swell. He was walking in the street, instead of on the sidewalk, but right next to the curb. He was making out like he was walking a very straight line, the way kids do, and the whole time he kept singing and humming. The episode makes him feel less depressed. But why? Is it his realization that the child is innocent- somehow pure, not phony like his parents and other adults? Then, in Chapter 22, Holden tells Phoebe: Anyway, I keep picturing all these little kids playing some game in this big field of rye and all. Thousands of little kids, and nobodys around- nobody big, I mean- except me. And Im standing on the edge of some crazy cliff. What I have to do, I have to catch everybody if they start to go over the cliff- I mean if theyre running and they dont look where theyre going I have to come out from somewhere and catch them. Thats all I do all day. Id just be the catcher in the rye and all. I know its crazy, but thats the only thing Id really like to be. I know its crazy. Holdens interpretation of the poem centers around the loss of innocence (adults and society corrupt and ruin children), and his instinctual desire to protect children (his sister in particular). Holden sees himself as the catcher in the rye. Throughout the novel, hes confronted with the realities of growing up- of violence, sexuality, and corruption (or phoniness), and he doesnt want any part of it. Holden is (in some ways) incredibly naive and innocent about worldly realities. He doesnt want to accept the world as it is, but he also feels powerless, unable to effect change. The growing-up process is almost like a runaway train, moving so fast and furiously in a direction thats beyond his control (or, even, really his comprehension). He cant do anything to stop or stall it, and he realizes that his wish to save the children is crazy- perhaps even unrealistic and impossible. Through the course of the novel, Holden is forced to come to terms with the reality of growing up- something that he struggles to accept. The Catcher in the Rye: Key Quotes What I was really hanging around for, I was trying to feel some kind of a goodbye. I mean Ive left schools and places I didnt even know I was leaving them. I hate that. I dont care if its a sad goodbye or a bad goodbye, but when I leave a place I like to know Im leaving it. If you dont, you feel even worse.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 1I dont even know what I was running for- I guess I just felt like it.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 1It was that kind of a crazy afternoon, terrifically cold, and no sun out or anything, and you felt like you were disappearing every time you crossed a road.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 1People always think somethings all true.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 2People never notice anything.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 2Im the most terrific liar you ever saw in your life. Its awful. If Im on my way to the store to buy a magazine, even, and somebody asks me where Im goi ng, Im liable to say Im going to the opera. Its terrible.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 3 When I really worry about something, I dont just fool around. I even have to go to the bathroom when I worry about something. Only, I dont go. Im too worried to go. I dont want to interrupt my worrying to go.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 6All morons hate it when you call them a moron.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 6In my mind, Im probably the biggest sex maniac you ever saw.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 9Its really too bad that so much crumby stuff is a lot of fun sometimes.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 9There isnt any night club in the world you can sit in for a long time unless you can at least buy some liquor and get drunk. Or unless youre with some girl that really knocks you out.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 13Goddam money. It always ends up making you blue as hell.- J.D. Salinger,  The Catcher in the Rye, Ch. 15 The Catcher in the Rye: Vocabulary Holden speaks to the reader in the first person, using the common slang of the fifties, which gives the book a more authentic feel. Much of the language Holden uses is considered crass or vulgar but it fits the personality of the character. However, some of the terms and phrases Holden uses are not commonly used today. Understanding the words Holden uses will give you a greater understanding of the prose. Chapters 1-5 grippe:  influenza chiffonier:  a bureau with a mirror attached falsetto:  an unnaturally high-pitched voice hounds-tooth:  a pattern of jagged checks, usually black-and-white, on fabric halitosis:  chronic bad breath phony:  a fake or insincere person   Chapters 6-10 Canasta:  a variation on the card game gin rummy incognito:  in the act of concealing ones identity jitterbug:  a very active dance style popular in the 1940s Chapters 11-15 galoshes:  waterproof boots nonchalant:  unconcerned, casual, indifferent rubberneck:  to look at or stare, to gawk, especially at something unpleasant bourgeois:  middle-class, conventional Chapters 16-20 blasà ©:  indifferent or bored, unimpressed conceited:  having a high opinion of oneself, arrogant louse:  a contemptible person; it is also the singular term for lice Chapters 21-26 digression:  a deviation from a central theme in speaking or writing cockeyed:  askew, cross-eyed pharaoh:  ancient Egyptian king bawl:  to cry

Bring Your Own Device (BYOD Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Bring Your Own Device (BYOD - Case Study Example High numbers of employees in the current market organizations such as Russia and Brazil have developed their own way of making this strategy work. Bring Your Own Device initiative has been pointed out that businesses are unable to control their employees from bringing personal devices. However, this case study is divided in two ideologies. The benefits and risks involved in exercising Bring Your Own Device in workplaces (Wlech, 2015). The use of Bring Your Own Device at workplace has amplified substantially over the years. Hence, the use of paper and manual practices continues to diminish. For instance, schools have progressively used technology while studying through the use of gadgets such as tablets and personal computers. This type of learning assists students to be more cooperative and get involved in the learning process (Kelly, 2014). Bring Your Own Device has increased business productivity since organizations use green practices and positioning in a friendly environment. Bring Your Own Device saves money and creates peripheral support for employees’ hard work. However, Bring Your Own Device escalates productivity. This case study proves that employees are more productive if they are allowed to use their personal gadgets. There are numerous reasons for running a Bring Your Own Device strategy. One of these reasons is better satisfaction from the employees. Employees become more flexible while working. Bring Your Own Device saves cost expenditure in the workplace because it reduces spending on hardware maintenance and software licensing. While Bring Your Own Device increases motivation, the employees are more contented, more relaxed and often work efficiently with their personal devices (Evans, 2013). Though the use of Bring Your Own Device strategy is an advantage to a company as it makes employees more productive, the cost of this strategy is a great financial assurance to companies that procure many

Concept of Marriage Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Concept of Marriage - Essay Example People in many African countries continue to practice polygamy and according to scholars, incidents of polygamy or plural marriage are highest in West Africa, where Senegal and Ghana have the â€Å"highest level of polygamy† at between 30 and 50% of all marriages (Hayase & Liaw 300). Despite the statistics, on a global scale, the traditional marriage between one man and one woman is the most common form of marriage. Proponents of traditional marriage argue that marriage is an institution which has stood the test of time and is a fundamental social institution. They believe that marriage between one man and one woman serves a variety of social purposes including the procreation of children, the establishment of a â€Å"stable household for raising children† and the promotion of the nuclear family unit. They also establish that â€Å"children need both a male and female parent for proper development† (Kolasinski 3). Furthermore, many advocates for traditional marriage also argue that homosexuality is wrong and should not be encouraged by society. By conferring the right to marriage and the benefits of this union on same-sex couples, they argue that is exactly what society is doing. Advocates for gay marriage emphatically argue that it is a civil rights issue and since marriage bestows certain social benefits, denying gays the right to marry infringes on their rights to equality. They further argue that marriage is not intrinsically tied to procreation and point to examples of artificial insemination to prove that lesbian couples can also give birth and rear children. It is also argued that civil unions – in lieu of actual marriage – fall short of the equality standard and promote the idea that same-sex marriage is both separate and unequal. The Supreme Court in Canada recently struck down the Marriage Act on the grounds that it was unconstitutional and similar challenges are being made

Animal Testing is Wrong Essay Example for Free

Animal Testing is Wrong Essay Animal testing is cruel and inhuman! It is morally wrong to toture animals for our own benefit. Over 3 million animals have been tormented all in the name of research. It has been found that only 5-25% of side effects caused by medicines are accurately predicted. This leads me to wonder what is actually being gained by animal experimentation. It’s bad science! The Food and Drug Administration reported that 92 out of every 100 drugs that pass animal tests fail on humans, making it wasteful. In recent years there has been the recognition that animals rarely serve as good models for the human body. Animal experiments prolong the suffering of people waiting for effective cures by misleading experimenters and squandering precious money, time, and resources that could have been spent on human-relevant research. In the name of science, animal experiments globally are around 100 million experiments each year. Cats, dogs, rabbits, mice and other animals, no different to those we have as pets, are used in experiments. Animals are force-fed harmful substances, infected with lethal viruses, subjected to brain damage, heart attacks, stokes, cancers and ultimately killed. Several cosmetic tests commonly performed on mice, rats, rabbits, and guinea pigs include:skin and eye irritation tests where chemicals are rubbed on shaved skin or dripped into the eyes without any pain relief. repeated force-feeding studies that last weeks or months, to look for signs of general illness or specific health hazards. widely condemned â€Å"lethal dose† tests, where animals are forced to swallow large amounts of a test chemical to determine what dose causes death. The fact that animals are used to study pain, depression, anxiety, and to test pain-killing drugs for human use, demonstrates that scientists recognize that animals are capable of suffering in many ways just like humans, but these sentient animals are unable to give their consent to participate in research. The fact that animals can suffer and experience pain is sufficient reason to refrain on moral grounds from harming them. Beyond pain, there is also persuasive evidence that animals, in particular mammals and birds, have thoughts, intentions, and memories. This means they can be harmed by confinement, frustration, fear, isolation, and loss of life experiences unavoidable for animals confined in Laboratories and used in experiments. The measurement of stress hormones, and presence of ulcers, immune suppression, abnormal behavior and brain dysfunction in laboratory animals, provide further evidence that animals commonly used in labs do suffer pain and distress. Some people claim that because animals do not have duties or responsibilities in the way humans do, they are not deserving of the same protection. However, some humans have no responsibilities or duties, such as babies, the mentally ill, or very infirm, yet they are not stripped of their rights in this way. Indeed, such individuals are usually considered more deserving of protection, not less. Others argue that the potential benefit to human society justifies experiments on animals. However this argument is a slippery slope, as this reasoning would also justify experiments on a few non-consenting humans for the ultimate benefit of human society a clearly unethical scenario. â€Å"If we didn’t use animals, we’d have to test new drugs on people. † The fact is that we already do test new drugs on people. No matter how many animal tests are undertaken, someone will always be the first human to be tested on. Because animal tests are so unreliable, they make those human trials all the more risky. What I have to wonder is why do we test on animals, or feel the need to have people volunteer for something potential dangerous with its unknown side effects when we have child molesters, rapists, and murderers in prison who are catered to three meals a day? I believe we should enact instead of animal testing, (which has been proven to be highly ineffective) testing on convicted criminals on death row, or prisoners looking to cut down some time in exchange for experimentation and observation.

Religious Influences on Stanley Spencers Art

Religious Influences on Stanley Spencers Art What influence did religion have on the work of Stanley Spencer and did this contribute the reference as a village innocent or avant garde genius? It is difficult to place Stanley Spencer into any of the ideological or theoretical movements of the period during which he painted his unique and deeply subjective paintings. By challenging the divinity of Christianity, and suggesting that Christianity could be seen and gathered from the everyday, Spencer challenges the hierarchy of the church, and of Christian orthodoxy in a way that was both deeply personal, and looked further toward a universality. However, Spencers views on Christianity were eccentric for the time. He believed in the last day as a time of orgiastic joy, and his views stood in sharp contradiction to the more standard and institutionalised views of Christianity being about monogamy and abstinence from sex. Thus, politically and religiously, Spencer stood in direct opposition to the religious views held in some esteem at the time, and this is shown by his explicit drawings that juxtapose sexual and religious imagery. In this sense Spencer was avant-garde, and chall enged the assumptions of the establishment in a direct and controversial way. But, also, Spencer was deeply traditional in his views. His paintings draw heavily on classical and Pre-Raphaelite traditions, which could have been seen as the result of his artistic education as a draughtsman and a traditional painter, and the subject matter of his paintings often centre around the world of the village in which he was born and raised the small home counties village of Cookham. In this essay I will look firstly at how Spencer represents his religion in his paintings, by looking at how Cookham is displayed as a metaphor for all kinds of divine and religious imagery. Secondly, I will look at Spencers opinions on sex and how this made his work controversial and seemingly avant-garde with its jarring connection with Christianity and religion in general. Thirdly, I will discuss Stanley Spencers subjectivity and interrogate whether Spencers outsider status on his contemporary art world made it possible for Stanley Spencer to fit into any easily defined genre or movement. Stanley Spencer uses a great deal of biblical imagery in his work, often with references to biblical events such as the resurrection of Christ or the last day, seen by Spencer not as a horrific world, but as a world defined and brought together by love and by sexual and orgiastic bliss. What is particularly unusual about Spencers paintings is the way in which he juxtaposes the two worlds of the everyday and the religious into a single painting the everyday world of Cookham, the village in which he was born, becomes rich with divine imagery and miraculous, religious Christian light. It could easily be suggested that Spencer was not anti-Christian, as many of his avant-garde contemporaries such as Matisse and Picasso were, but that he was almost as fervently anti-institutional. In Christ Carrying the Cross (1920), the image of Christ is jarringly juxtaposed with the bland and traditionally ordinary world of Cookham. Also, the appearance of Christ with his cross merely blends in with t he actions of other people there is another man, given equal compositional prominence as Christ, who is carrying two sets of ladders behind Jesus. The mixing together of ordinariness and extraordinariness is further highlighted by the house, where people lean out. The curtains that flap out of the windows give the appearance, but the appearance only, of wings, suggesting that the people in the house are angels. This juxtaposition could be seen as both philosophically radical Christ is rarely seen in art as an ordinary figure, or one that could be assigned ordinary characteristics and also, judging from the immediately quaint surroundings of Cookham, as inherently traditional. By using his surroundings of Cookham and by combining grandiose biblical imagery and the everyday, Stanley Spencer manages to be both a painter of the avant-garde tradition, yet also one that is firmly attached to the traditional methods of portraying biblical imagery. Kitty Hauser suggests that: Spencer has painted the curtains so that they seem like wings, transforming the figures into angels at the moment that Christ walks past. But these figures are not quite angels, any more than the curtains are angels wings. Instead, just at this moment, they are both human and divine.[1] Indeed, it is this mixture between sublime and mundane, between the everyday and the miraculous, that Spencer draws upon heavily in his uniquely personal work. In Spencers wartime paintings, the mixture between biblical and everyday are used to similar effect, suggesting to the onlooker that divinity and divine love is everywhere, so long as we have the strength to look for it. In Patient Suffering from Frostbite (1932), a large man is seen nursing a victim of the Great War: the pails carried by the ward orderly miraculously transform him into a ministering angel, as they take on the appearance of wings.[2] So, it could easily be read that, according to Spencer, the lessons to be learnt from Christianity are no t that of obedience and subservience, but are that heaven is possible in the everyday, that love and God are essential components of the reality in which we all live. In Reveille (1929), mosquito nets erected by the war workers could be easily seen as death-shrouds, angels wings or winged insects. Stanley Spencers interpretations of the paintings are also important, as his writings offer insight into the deeply subjective and personal layers of meaning which he draws upon in the paintings. He suggests that the characters on the right of Reveille are announcing the Armistice, and that the mosquito nets represent a kind of chrysalis, from which the people will emerge into a world dominated by peace and by love. According to Hauser, Spencer does this in order to show the interpenetration of heaven and earth, where ordinary objects combine and momentarily take on a numinous appearance, without losing anything of their ordinariness.[3] Thus, it is this interpenetration that, in a sense, makes Spencer extremely hard to define as an artist of that particular period. Although he took on many of the concepts of dominant post-impressionist artists (Gauguin is a stylistic influence, for instance, with his paintings of simple, round figures and the displacement of biblical themes onto a fairly ordinary world), he also pushed them further. Spencer could also be seen as being akin to Symbolism, by assigning everyday objects a greater meaning, but their actual purpose in the paintings for instance, the mosquito net is never not a mosquito net in Reveille can be interpreted as something more divine. Thus, Spencer is both a visionary in the sense that he approached, subjected and challenged the central issues of Christianity, the conflict between human and divine, but he also did so in a way that would challenge the viewer into interpreting the world around him differently. By refusing to place anything with actual divine properties into his work by simply taking Christ an d putting him in the context of an ordinary scene in Cookham; by taking the idiom of realist, war painting and organising it in such a manner that suggests biblical qualities, Spencer is in turn subverting the standard views of dominant ideologies as the avant-garde of the period sought to achieve, but also did so in a way that didnt threaten compromise his position as a British, village painter or indeed a painter of commercial landscapes that he used to make money from in order to continue painting his more artistically advanced work. In Shipbuilding on the Clyde (1946), Hauser suggests that: the various labours of welders, burners, riveters and riggers were choreographed by Spencer into a sequence of images in which the mundane tasks of the factory-worker take on an epic, almost religious aspect.[4] Indeed, the presence of the Inferno certainly can allude to Dante, and the ways in which all workers conjoin in harmony, tugging on a piece of sheet metal, suggests a certain unity i n human endeavour that, considering the nature of Spencers other work, could also arguably allude to a greater theme of universal love and harmony. In Spencers sexual period, he becomes more akin to the more controversial and challenging aspects of the avant-garde of the time, challenging assumptions about the institutions in which we live, albeit in a slightly less aggressive and extroverted manner than say, the Surrealists or the Futurists. But in his more overtly sexual (and visionary) work, he paints a unique and very idiosyncratic view of Christianity, more akin to the 1960s sexual revolution than to the traditional and stuffy world of religion and churches. Spencer failed to see how Christianity and monogamy needed to be intertwined, and believed that sexual ecstacy was a means of achieving heaven on earth. His visions of the last day were again juxtaposed onto the quaint and pastoral landscape of Cookham, and the orgiastic rites of the last day were catapulted onto the village green in Cookham. In A Village in Heaven (1937), the last day is seen as a time when all sexual and social difference will disappear and all will l ive under the world of God and of love. Everybody, people of all ages and social status engage in orgiastic bliss. All body types, ages, races, genders are combined. And the fact that it engages with religious themes makes it all the more controversial. Hauser suggests that: Spencer could not see why orthodox Christianity should be so puritanical about sex. At his most enthusiastic, he saw sex as an essential part of his religious vision.[5] Indeed, in his personal life, the bigamous relationship he indulged with both Hilda Carline and Patricia Preece got him into serious trouble with the establishment, and eventually forced him to break from the Tate Britain at the time. Sunflower and Dog Worship (1937), plays on the even more controversial themes of bestiality. Dogs lick men and men lick them back, suggesting a bestial play between the two. However, the transcendent quality of love and sex reach their metaphorical apex in Love Among the Nations (1935), as vehement an anti-war stat ement that has ever been imagined. In this painting, world leaders and people from different cultures and social groups engaged in orgies regardless of social background. Hauser suggests that: Love Among the Nations (1935) is an extraordinary image in which physical love breaks down the barriers between representatives of the nations of the world. Spencer himself is represented in the painting: two nubile half-naked Africans pull on the buttons of his tweed jacket, with amorous intent.[6] Thus his Christian vision of love transcends racial boundaries, and in turn suggest that he is not so much anti-Christian, but remains anti-institutional, in the sense that it was the structural corruption that caused war among nations, rather than the inherent flaws of humanity itself. This juxtaposes the radical view of his religion, and the uncompromising vision of religion and sex combined in his orgy scenes with his position as quaintly optimistic about human nature and about the nature of lov e that allows us to see him as an optimistic innocent caught amid religious dogma that dominates the essential message of Christianity namely that God is everywhere, and for everybody, that heaven on Earth is a possibility, and that this is to be achieved through the expression of love through sex and unrestricted copulation. Of course, this view remains controversial and radical even today, and, arguably this presents a view of Christianity more akin to Paganism than to the practically constructed versions of Christianity practised at the time and since. Stanley Spencer manages to juxtapose opposing views by presenting a vision that is so eccentric, that it is easy to regard him as an outsider in the art world. His vision of sex and religion, as placed in the everyday certainly labels him as an avant garde pioneer in some respects certainly his views were controversial at the time, especially considering his place as a villager, and the placing of his biblical narratives in the small town of Cookham. His religious views are reconciled to some extent by their idiosyncracies, and their glaring difference from orthodoxy, which may save him from any criticism regarding their political or ideological importance. Indeed, the innate subjectivity of the artists work tends to subvert the original message, as people tend to regard his paintings, and the optimistic light in which they are drawn, as harking back to the Romantic vision of the painter as recorder and of the medium of painting being more important than the actual subject matter. C ertainly, religion had an impact on the view that Spencer was a village innocent his placing of biblical scenes, along with the more conservatively executed landscapes, the dead paintings that he did for money, certainly describe the landscape of Cookham in quaint terms, and with an air of realism that other modernist painters tended to ignore. Hauser suggests that: Cosiness was what modernist painting all too often lacked.[7] Certainly, Spencers work jars with the harsh and abstract world of modernist painters, insofar as he regarded his work as layered with a certain sense of personal meaning. Gormley suggests that: Spencers position is radical. If the modernist trajectory was concerned with the development of perceptual language that, in order to be objective and finally sublime, ended up by being anonymous, he stands for the absolute subjectivity of the artist as a point of view (recorder) and a point of experience.[8] Indeed, the subjectivity of Spencer allows him to reconcil e his role as a quaint village Romantic with the more avant-garde elements of his subject matter. Spencer tended to regard form less as a means for experimentation than most modernist painters tended to. For instance, the play with texture and form as seen in other modernist artists like Picasso have no role in Stanley Spencers artwork. In fact, judging from the last unfinished piece that he produced, and the bitpiece, painting-by-numbers style with which his work was being painted, his paintings seem more architectural than singular. His Church House project, which was something he was working on as a testament to his life with God, the relationships hed drawn between sex and religion, certainly provided Spencer with the ideal blueprint with which to direct his work, even if the grandiosity of the architectural vision tended to complicate and stifle his desire to experiment. Also, his need to make money from his landscapes tended to subvert his overall vision, and thus tends to put him more in the category of low art, or popular art, as opposed to the high art of modernism, which in turn, problematizes his connection with the avant-garde, and places him more in the tradition of Romantic or quasi-Impressionist painter. Overall, Stanley Spencer was a religious painter, insofar as his works are littered with references to biblical imagery, and took heavily from the Pre-Raphaelite and the classical modes of religious painters. Of course, this conservatism would definitely place him in the Neo-Classical school far away from the avant-garde of the time, and, at best, as a competent but essentially uninspired village painter. However, what is original about the paintings of Stanley Spencer was that he provided through his paintings and his writings, an insight into his unique world view, and speculated controversially that religion and orgiastic sexual practices neednt be kept separate. Both in his actual life and in his paintings, Spencer attempted to demonstrate his vision that monogamy neednt be synonymous with God, and also that the biblical vision of God and heaven was easily attainable, and available in the everyday world. In his selection of Cookham biblical paintings, Spencer synthesises biblica l imagery with everyday imagery, and this desire to perceive the transcendental and the heavenly in the everyday was a subject that he stuck at for his entire artistic career. Hauser suggests that: Spencers early paintings of biblical subjects still have the capacity to startle and enchant, fusing mythical narratives with specific and apparently unremarkable locations. [] This concatenation of biblical and local produces some strange effects.[9] Indeed it is this mixture, done in a subtle, rather than an ostentatious and baroque fashion, that makes Spencer unique, and it is his blending of normal events with divine events that gives these works their redemptive power. However, Spencers opinions on Christianity are fairly unorthodox, if not completely unique, and it is this uniquely religious angle that allows us to entertain certain notions that Spencer was avant-garde, and revolutionary. Certainly, Spencer failed to fit into any other genre or category of painter around at the time , and his seclusion as an artist, away from the establishment, certainly allowed him to entertain his highly subjective vision as an artist. Structurally, Spencers work remains quite conservative, and his later work especially reflects this conservatism, as he worked exclusively to construct The Church House. His work during the 1950s loses the intensity and the warmth of his previous work, and certainly there was an element whereby Spencer was simply painting by numbers rather than generating pieces based on actual inspiration or the desire to experiment. So, it is definitely the controversial religious content that tends to mark him as an avant-garde pioneer, but it is much. Certainly, to Spencer, Cookham and biblical imagery are interlaced, but it would be difficult to see his controversial religious views being popularly held in the small, conservative home county village where he drew inspiration for his work. Certainly, the village and the divine are intertwined in Spencers wo rk, and, arguably the rural quaintness of his free love concepts have granted his work a fresh popularity in later years. Although it is easy to see the avant-garde concepts behind his work, it is more difficult to reconcile the effects of religion on the notion that Spencer was a village innocent certainly, his sexual paintings of village green orgies seem anything but what is traditionally held as innocent. Bibliography Hauser, K., Stanley Spencer, Tate Publishing, London: 2001 MacCarthy, F., Stanley Spencer: An English Vision, Yale University Press, Washington DC: 1997 Tate Gallery Liverpool, Stanley Spencer: A Sort of Heaven, Tate Gallery, Liverpool: 1992 1 Footnotes [1] Hauser. K., Stanley Spencer, Tate Publishing, London: 2001, pp. 35-6 [2] ibid. p. 66 [3] ibid. [4] ibid. p. 69 [5] ibid. p. 44 [6] ibid. p. 50 [7] ibid. p. 29 [8] Gormley, A., Cookhams Present, from Stanley Spencer: A Sort of Heaven, Tate Gallery, London: 1992, p. 7 [9] Hausen K., p. 33

Iron Curtain

Q. 1: what did Churchill mean in May 1945 by the term â€Å"Iron Curtain†? A. 1: When Churchill stated â€Å"An Iron Curtain is being drawn upon their front. † He means that during 1945 when the war was over, he was talking about an imaginary line drawn between communism in the East and the democratic governments in the West. This was to prevent more fighting over the systems; Churchill knew that the Soviet Union were dangerous. Churchill wanted the allies to get to Berlin and take it before the Russians would.He claims in his speech â€Å"Nobody knows what Soviet Russia intends to do in the immediate future. † This shows he knew they were a threat he just didn’t know when they were going to pounce. By making this â€Å"Iron Curtain† it would provide safety. Q. 2: what happened to the Iron Curtain countries of East Europe? A. 2: The Iron curtain countries included: Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Yugosla via.The actions taken in these countries were: in Bulgaria the communists executed leaders of other parties. In Czechoslovakia the USSR purged civil service, Security Police moved in. East Germany: industrial machinery and resources were moved to the USSR. The scientists and technicians moved to USSR. More actions were taken in other countries, the whole strategy of different countries had changed, this speech was inspirational and made countries feel like they could be independent instead of relying on others.Q. 3: Explain Stalin’s reply to Churchill’s â€Å"Iron Curtain Speech† A. 3: Stalin’s reply to Churchill’s speech was weird, Stalin didn’t really state the truth and made up figures to make people feel sorry for him, how USSR had been hit harder than any other country. This was the reason why Churchill was suspicious of Stalin because he wasn’t being truthful; he had become more independent more powerful so his response to the s peech mad Churchill even more suspicious. By Massimo Furness