Irish Novels Essay -- Comparative Literature

."..for we have rights drawn from the soil and sky; the use, the pace, the patient years of labour, ... this is our country also, nowhere else; and we shall not be outcast on the world." John Hewitt, The Colony For many years the Big House in Ireland was very important. In an agrarian society, the estate system formed a backdrop for the economy and culture of the island. The Anglo-Irish Big House is a historical structure that has been employed for various purposes in the literature of a variety of Irish authors. The Big House as a symbol of wealth and social status in Ireland is associated pre-eminently with the Anglo-Irish. The Big Houses of Ireland are very important to gain any understanding of the political, economic and social developments in Ireland between the seventeenth and twentieth centuries. Some historical as well as literary interpretations are very controversial - because of the controversial role of the Anglo-Irish community in Ireland. In real life an Anglo-Irish Big House was the home of and represented the wealth and power of the Anglo-Irish community and their supreme authority over the local community. Anglo-Irish "big house" dwellers were the personification of the ch asm between the native Catholic Irish people and their colonizers, the Protestant Englishmen. The "big house" novel is not purely Anglo-Irish concept. Ireland has a long history - Celtic and Gaelic tribes lived in the island already centuries before the English or other occupants came. The same happened in many places in the world - America, Canada, Africa and even in the Baltic States. Conquerors came, saw and took the land and power. Occupants seem to adopt a similiar pattern of behaviour everywhere. When they come, they ... ...th an Introduction by Kathryn J. Kilpatrick. New York: Penguin, 1993 Graham, Colin.,,History, Gender amd the Colonial Moment: Castle Rackrent," in Irish Studies Review (No. 14: 1996, spring) Johnston, Jennifer. How many Miles to Babylon? London: Penguin Books, 1988 Kiberd, Declan. Inventing Ireland: The Literature of the Modern Nation. London: Jonathan Cape Ltd., 1995 Mcmanus, Karen.,,Prodding Republicanism," in Fortnight (1995, April): 36-37. http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/lawless/edgeworth/edgeworth.htm http://www.local.ie/literature/ http://www.irishwriters-online.com Irish Novels Essay -- Comparative Literature ."..for we have rights drawn from the soil and sky; the use, the pace, the patient years of labour, ... this is our country also, nowhere else; and we shall not be outcast on the world." John Hewitt, The Colony For many years the Big House in Ireland was very important. In an agrarian society, the estate system formed a backdrop for the economy and culture of the island. The Anglo-Irish Big House is a historical structure that has been employed for various purposes in the literature of a variety of Irish authors. The Big House as a symbol of wealth and social status in Ireland is associated pre-eminently with the Anglo-Irish. The Big Houses of Ireland are very important to gain any understanding of the political, economic and social developments in Ireland between the seventeenth and twentieth centuries. Some historical as well as literary interpretations are very controversial - because of the controversial role of the Anglo-Irish community in Ireland. In real life an Anglo-Irish Big House was the home of and represented the wealth and power of the Anglo-Irish community and their supreme authority over the local community. Anglo-Irish "big house" dwellers were the personification of the ch asm between the native Catholic Irish people and their colonizers, the Protestant Englishmen. The "big house" novel is not purely Anglo-Irish concept. Ireland has a long history - Celtic and Gaelic tribes lived in the island already centuries before the English or other occupants came. The same happened in many places in the world - America, Canada, Africa and even in the Baltic States. Conquerors came, saw and took the land and power. Occupants seem to adopt a similiar pattern of behaviour everywhere. When they come, they ... ...th an Introduction by Kathryn J. Kilpatrick. New York: Penguin, 1993 Graham, Colin.,,History, Gender amd the Colonial Moment: Castle Rackrent," in Irish Studies Review (No. 14: 1996, spring) Johnston, Jennifer. How many Miles to Babylon? London: Penguin Books, 1988 Kiberd, Declan. Inventing Ireland: The Literature of the Modern Nation. London: Jonathan Cape Ltd., 1995 Mcmanus, Karen.,,Prodding Republicanism," in Fortnight (1995, April): 36-37. http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/lawless/edgeworth/edgeworth.htm http://www.local.ie/literature/ http://www.irishwriters-online.com

Police Personality Revision Essay

A good police work lies on the concept of their personalities taking into consideration their traits hand in hand with their socializations and experiences. These decisive factors basically comprise what ideal personality of a police is necessary in order to completely exemplify their tasks. Perhaps, it is imperative to give emphasis on the notions of police character to give a strong hold on this subject matter. At any rate, there were instances that conflict arises as police render their services. â€Å"Part of this reflected broader social conflict over the just and equal distribution of opportunities and legal protections to all people; other sources of conflict included disparities between the symbolic role of the police, everyday social expectations about police services and behavior† (Vila & Morris, 1999). There is indeed a unique trait that flows in the blood of every police such as dedication, bravery, and conviction. The uniqueness of police’s trait can never be gamble away. Police’s compassion to the welfare of their people is on top priority. They are willing to surrender even their own lives in order to defend the people. It is tough but they chose to risk everything for the sake of their profession. Thus, this is the one that fulfills their personality; to serve the people at all costs. On the other note, socializations and experiences are important tools to be able to epitomize their character properly. Apparently, the police needs to know how to communicate with the people as well as to know how to address their demands in order to properly portray their roles. Socialization and experience are indispensable contrivance that makes the attitude of a police. They will be able to serve pertinently due to the fact that they have enough experiences. â€Å"What is important about socialization, then, is that people learn to behave according to the expectations of their culture and transmit that way of life from one generation to the next† (Kenney & McNamara, 1999). Weighing these two elements that encompass the personality of a police, it is on a certain note that their unique traits make them more trustworthy on their chosen field. It is in these traits also that they detached their profession far beyond all other field. â€Å"The profession is a moral unit positing certain values and ideals which guide its members in their dealings with laymen. This guide may be a set of unwritten norms transmitted through the professional educational system or it may be codified into written canons of professional ethics† (Glenn et al., 2003).   Certainly, as they socialized and experienced a lot of circumstances, it all boils down on having a good persona – unique trait – which make them build rapport with a lot of people in town and which also gives them the pride for the people to respect them and their line of work. Reference:    Glenn, Panitch, Barnes Proby, Williams, Christian, Lewis, Gerwehr & Brannan (2003). Training the 21st Century Police Officer: Redefining Police Professionalism for the Los Angeles Police Department. Rand    Kenney, dennis Hay & McNamara, Robert P. (1999). Police and Policing: Contemporary Issues. Praeger Vila, Bryan & Morris, Cynthia (1999). The Role of Police in American History. Greenwood Press

Tallgrass Prairie

The tall grass prairie is an ecosystem native to central North America, with fire as its primary periodic disturbance. In the past, tall grass prairies covered a large portion of the American Midwest, just east of the Great Plains, and portions of the Canadian Prairies. They flourished in areas with rich loess soils and moderate rainfall of around 30 to 35 inches per year. To the east were the fire-maintained eastern savannas. In the northeast, where fire was infrequent and periodic wind throw represented the main source of disturbance, beech-maple forests dominated.Once this prairie covered approximately 140 million acres; now only isolated remnants exist. (Heat-Moon 261). The homesteaders saw it as a nuisance to be replaced as soon as possible with crops that paid their way. Within one generation a great majority of the native land was plowed under and developed. Currently, less than 4% remains, while the majority is located in the Kansas Flint Hills and surrounding areas. (Manning 76). Today, prairie is being brought back in places using a land management technique borrowed from the Plains tribes: controlled burning.Spring fires clear out non-native grasses before the later â€Å"sun-seeking† native grasses begin to grow. ( Heat-Moon 43-44). Fire also burns up dead plant debris on the ground, allowing the sun and rain to penetrate the soil, and releases nutrients, promoting growth and increasing seed yields. This and other prairie restoration methods help ensure that, at least in some places, we can look out over a sea of grass and feel the wonder of the first homesteaders.According to a long-term research study on tall grass prairies done at the Konza Prairie Research Natural Area by a trio of Kansas State University biology professors, bison grazing or mowing increases the species diversity or the number of plant species that exist at a particular site of grasses on the prairie. (KSU 1). Grazing and mowing keep plant diversity high even in annually burned or fertilized prairie where some plant species would otherwise be lost. Their research was published today in the journal Science.Alan Knapp, John Blair and John Briggs, along with two other colleagues have been conducting long-term studies on the effects of fire, grazing and climatic variability on tall grass prairies. This on-going research looks at these various factors alone and in combination. â€Å"One of the things we have learned in the past is that if you burn a prairie annually, species diversity tends to decrease,† Knapp said. â€Å"Grazing the prairie or removing part of the plant canopy, tends to offset the effects of frequent burning. Knapp said the re-introduction of bison, the prairie's native herbivores, over the past decade also has increased species diversity. (Cushman 13).â€Å"Bison, which were historically a very abundant herbivore on the tall grass prairies, played an important role in maintaining the plant species diversity in these systems,â €  Knapp said. â€Å"The increase in plant diversity we see at Konza Prairie after bison are re-introduced can be related to increases with bison grazing activities. (KSU 1). The bison that once roamed these prairies numbered close to 30 million, once settlers began to encroach on the area, and began to use the land for homesteading and agriculture the numbers dipped to nearly 500 individuals. As the bison left, the domestic cattle moved in with the homesteaders, once again disrupting the natural biodiversity of the land. In addition to the loss of the bison, fire on the prairie was a key element as well. (White 88).Typically, prairie fires were naturally occurring due to lightening strikes, and were in fact beneficial. As people began to settle and live in these areas these fires were seen as a hindrance, and were extinguished as quickly as possible. (Savage 124-26). These actions were not favorable for the grasses as these fires typically helped the natural species regenerate and helped to keep trees at bay as well. As time went on, the more human interaction that took place, the more it was destroying the natural tall grass prairie as it once was.

Franz Kline Biography

Franz Kline Biography Franz Klines life story reads like a movie plot: Young artist starts out with high hopes, spends years struggling without success, eventually finds a style, becomes an overnight sensation and dies too soon. Kline was best known for his role as an action painter of abstract expressionism, a movement that was popular in New York during the 1940s and 1950s and introduced the world to artists including Jackson Pollock and Willem de Kooning. Early Life Kline was born on May 23, 1910  Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. As the cartoonist for his high school newspaper, Kline was a good enough student to leave coal-mining country and attend Boston University. With budding artistic ambition, he went   to study at the Art Students League, and then Heatherly Art School in London. In 1938, he returned to the U.S. with his British wife and settled in New York City. Art Career It seemed New York really didnt care much that Kline had talent back in England and was ready to take on the world. He struggled for years as a figurative artist, doing portraits for two loyal patrons that won him a modest reputation. He also painted city scenes and landscapes, and occasionally resorted to painting barroom murals to pay the rent money. In the mid 1940s, he met de Kooning and Pollock, and began to explore his own growing interest in trying new styles of painting. Kline had been noodling around with black and white for years, creating small brush drawings and projecting them onto the wall of his studio. Now he got rather serious about creating the projected images using just his arm, brush and mental imagery. The pictures that began to emerge were given a solo exhibition in New York in 1950. As a result of the show, Franz became an established name in the art world and his large, black and white compositions- likened to grids, or Oriental calligraphy- achieved notoriety. With his reputation as a leading abstract expressionist secured, Kline concentrated on turning out his new passion. His new work had short, seemingly meaningless names, such as Painting (sometimes followed by a number), New York, Rust or the old stand-by Untitled. He spent his last years trying to introduce color back into the mix, but was cut down in his prime by heart failure. Kline died on May 13, 1962 in New York City. He couldnt explain what his paintings meant, but Kline left the art world with the understanding that explanation of his art was not its intended purpose. His paintings were supposed to make one feel, not comprehend. Important Works Chief, 1950Painting, 1952Painting Number 2, 1954White Forms, 1955Untitled, 1955Lehigh V Span, 1960Le Gros, 1961 Famous Quote The final test of a painting, theirs, mine, any other, is: does the painters emotion come across?

Ross Barnett, Segregationist Governor of Mississippi

Ross Barnett, Segregationist Governor of Mississippi Ross Barnett (January 22, 1898–November 6, 1987) served one term as Mississippis governor, but he remains as one of the states most well-known chief executives due in large part to his willingness to imprison civil rights protesters, defy federal law, incite insurrection, and function as a mouthpiece for the Mississippi white supremacist movement. Despite the jingle used by his supporters during his anti-integration years (Ross is standing like Gibraltar; / he will never falter), Barnett was, in reality, always willing to harm others to advance his own political interests when it was safe to do so, but surprisingly docile and submissive when the possibility emerged that he might himself have to spend time in prison. Fast Facts: Ross Barnett Known For: 53rd governor of Mississippi who clashed with civil rights activists and tried to bar James Meredith, an African-American, from enrolling at the University of MississippiBorn:  January 22, 1898, in Standing Pine, MississippiParents: John William, Virginia Ann Chadwick BarnettDied: November 6, 1987, in Jackson, MississippiEducation: Mississippi College (graduated, 1922), Mississippi Law School (LLB, 1929)Awards and Honors: Mississippi Bar Association president (elected 1943)Spouse: Pearl Crawford  (m. 1929–1982)Children: Ross Barnett Jr., two daughtersNotable Quote: I have said in every county in Mississippi that no school in our state will be integrated while I am your governor. I repeat to you tonight: no school in our state will be integrated while I am your governor. There is no case in history where the Caucasian race has survived social integration. We will not drink from the cup of genocide. Early Years and Education Barnett was born on January 22, 1898, in Standing Pine, Mississippi, the youngest of 10 children of John William Barnett, a  Confederate  veteran, and Virginia Ann Chadwick. Barnett served in the U.S. Army during World War I. He then worked a series of odd jobs while attending Mississippi College in Clinton before earning a degree from the school in 1922. He later attended the University of Mississippi Law School and graduated with an LLB in 1929, the same year he married schoolteacher Mary Pearl Crawford. They eventually had two daughters and a son. Law Career Barnett started his law career with relatively minor cases. I represented a man in a replevin case for a cow and actually won it, he told the University of Southern Mississippis Center for Oral History Cultural Heritage. He paid me $2.50. (Replevin refers to a legal action whereby a person seeks to have his property returned to him.) In his second case, Barnett represented a woman suing for the cost of a side saddle ($12.50), which had been taken by her ex-husband. He lost that case. Despite this early setback, during the course of the next quarter-century, Barnett became one of the states most successful trial lawyers, earning more than $100,000 per year, funds that would later help him launch his political career. In 1943, Barnett was elected president of the Mississippi Bar Association and served in that post until 1944. Early Politics Barnetts older brother Bert actually sparked Ross Barnetts interest in politics. Bert Barnett was twice elected to the position of chancery clerk of Leake County, Mississippi. He then successfully ran for a state senate seat representing Leake and Neshoba counties. Ross Barnett recalled the experience years later: I got to liking politics pretty well, following him around- helping him in his campaigns. Unlike his brother, Barnett never ran for any state or local offices. But with the encouragement of friends and former classmates- and after decades of practicing law and a successful stint overseeing the states bar association- Barnett ran, unsuccessfully, for governor of Mississippi in 1951 and 1955. The third time was a charm, though, and Barnett was elected governor of the state after running on a white separatist platform in 1959. Governorship Barnetts single term as governor was marked by conflicts with civil rights activists who protested in the state. In 1961, he ordered the arrest and detention of approximately 300 Freedom Riders when they arrived in Jackson, Mississippi. He also began secretly funding the White Citizens Council with state money that year, under the auspices of the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission. Meredith Crisis In 1962, Barnett tried to prevent the enrollment of James Meredith at the University of Mississippi. On September 10 of that year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the university must admit Meredith, an African-American, as a student. On. Sept. 26, Barnett ordered state troopers to prevent Meredith from entering the campus. Between Sept. 30 and Oct. 1, riots erupted over Merediths pending enrollment. President John F. Kennedy ordered U.S. marshals to Mississippi to ensure Merediths safety and allow him to enter the school. Barnett relented on Oct. 1 after the marshals threatened to arrest him, and Meredith became a student at the school known as Ole Miss. Barnett left office at the end of his term in 1964. Later Years and Death Barnett resumed his law practice after leaving office but stayed active in state politics. During the 1964 trial of Mississippi NAACP field secretary Medgar Evers murderer Byron de la Beckwith, Barnett interrupted the testimony of Evers widow to shake Beckwiths hand in solidarity, eliminating whatever slim chance there might have been that jurors would have convicted Beckwith. (Beckwith was finally convicted in 1994.) Barnett ran for governor a fourth and final time in 1967 but lost. Years later, in 1983, Barnett surprised many by riding in a Jackson parade commemorating the life and work of Evers. Barnett died on Nov. 6, 1987, in Jackson, Mississippi. Legacy Although Barnett is most remembered for the Meredith crisis, there were several significant economic developments during his administration, David G. Sansing writes on Mississippi History Now. Sansing notes: A series of amendments to the state’s workmen’s compensation law and the enactment of a right to work law, made Mississippi more attractive to outside industry during Barnetts term. Additionally, the state added more than 40,000 new jobs during his four years as governor, which saw the construction of industrial parks throughout the state and the establishment of a Youth Affairs Department under the Agricultural and Industrial Board. But it is the Meredith controversy that will likely forever be most closely linked to Barnetts legacy. Indeed, former U.S. Attorney General Robert Kennedy, who talked by phone more than a dozen times with Barnett before and during the crisis, drew a crowd of 6,000 students and faculty when he gave a speech at The University of Mississippi in 1996. After poking fun at Barnetts response at the time, Kennedy received a standing ovation. Historian Bill Doyle, the author of  American Insurrection: The Battle of Oxford, Mississippi, 1962, says that Barnett knew integration was inevitable but needed a way to let Meredith enroll in Ole Miss without losing face with his white, pro-segregation supporters. Doyle said: Ross Barnett desperately wanted the Kennedys to flood Mississippi with combat troops because thats the only way Ross Barnett could tell his white segregationist backers, Hey I did everything I could, I fought them, but to prevent bloodshed, in the end, I made a deal. Sources John F. Kennedy, The Mississippi Crisis, Part 1: The President Calling. American Public Media.Learn About Ross Barnett. Famousbirthdays.com.McMillen, Dr. Neil. â€Å"Oral History with the Honorable Ross Robert Barnett, Former Governor of the State of Mississippi.† The University of Southern Mississippi Center for Oral History and Cultural Heritage.AP. â€Å"Ross Barnett, Segregationist, Dies; Governor of Mississippi in 1960s.†Ã‚  The New York Times, 7 Nov. 1987.â€Å"Ross Robert Barnett: Fifty-Third Governor of Mississippi: 1960-1964.†Ã‚  Mississippi History Now.

12 Angry Men Analysis 2

In the first part of the film when the stage of forming, as it is claimed by the Tuckman’s Team Model, occurs, we notice the main characteristics of this group(David A. Buchanan Andrej Huczynski, 2010). The group consists of 12 male middle aged white men probably coming from the middle class. Even from this first impression, admiring the effort of the film to achieve diversity, signs of prejudice appear. Specifically, the fact that all of them are men and moreover white men represents main biases of that period. Additionally, as it is mentioned to Sheldon’s Theory about the biases, the somatotype of each person declares in a certain way its character and this can be noticed by the selection of the characters and their match with the roles (Big guy is the tough one, smaller and thinner is the most innocuous, the handsome is the sensible and sensitive one etc. ) (David A. Buchanan Andrej Huczynski, 2010). Despite the fact that the movie is trying to accuse such biases (which will be underlined later) certain ways of projection of that period could not be avoided. This is one of the reasons why in the remake of the film in 1997 black actors participated as well and later there even women were introduced in the team for certain theatrical versions. (Eirini Flouri Yiannis Fitsakis 2007). The existence of a â€Å"one-off† situation like this in the movie leaves space for less inhibition for conflicts. Moreover, specific factors like the size, the external-internal environment and the definition of the process play a crucial role in the structure of the group. Obviously, the size of this group is 12, but the question is: why so many? The reason is that by having a greater number of juries the system of justice achieves higher levels of democracy with less possibilities of getting unfair decisions combining the memory, the knowledge and the experience of each member and eliminates any prejudiced behaviors. On the other hand as Social Impact Theory mentions the more members there are, the less responsibility they feel (Latane and Nida, 1980). In the external environment we could enclose the time of the procedure, which is unlimited at first but with a deadline coming up afterwards, and the conditions of the place of action, which is characterized by the humidity and the high summer temperatures, the broken air-conditioning, the unavailability of space. Such details could become the cause of stress, aggressiveness and as it was shown desire for fast result (just finish the procedure). In the internal environment issues like experience of previous similar situations, cultures, personalities, knowledge, mood, health, personal schedule and specialization could affect the result. Ending, a matter of significant importance is the definition of the procedure. In this case, we observe that after the release of the 2 alternatives there are 12 juries left. The juries have to decide if the boy is guilty or not guilty but there must be a full agreement (12 to 0) in each case; A democratic method which proves the importance of the situation. Alternatively, if they cannot reach an agreement they can decide a hung jury and then another trial will take place with different juries this time. The role of the foreman is usually for the most experienced person in this field or the first jury or for anyone who claims the desire and gets accepted by all. In the movie, juror1 supports this role setting the basic norms of the procedure. It is worth mentioning that nowadays, in the selection of the juries there is a specific procedure that is called â€Å"Voir Dire† procedure that clarifies the capability of the juries (Michael T. Nietzelt and Ronald C. Dillehayt 1982). Undoubtedly, the conviction of the biases of any kind is one of the main objects of this film. Primarily, in the first scheme, the judge seems really ninterested about the outcome and he seems to be sure about the result. The Halo Effect is â€Å"a judgment based on a single striking characteristic† and is being remarked in many cases during the film (Edward Thorndike, 1920). Moving to the main part of the film and the central procedure we can emphasize on the juror3 and juror10 who are the main rep resentatives of such prejudiced behaviors. Both of them were trying to fill the gaps of their knowledge using selective attention in certain facts and their personal experience (â€Å"Principle of closure† by Max Wertheimer 1880-1943). Everyone has his stereotypes and if we imagine stereotypes as pictures in our head, jurors 3 and 10 have the image of a dangerous criminal for the defendant, raised to act in certain ways (Lippmann, 1922). More specifically, juror3 expresses, from his first lines in the film, his perception against the young boy (â€Å"I ‘d slap those kids before†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ). But as the movie goes on, he expresses again and again his personal beliefs connecting them with his personal disappointment from his own son (â€Å" it’s these kids they are these day†, â€Å"I used to call my father Sir†). Even more he presents his cultural stereotype against the elderly (â€Å"How could he be positive about anything? †) Eventually, juror3 stands alone with his perceptions, believing in the boy’s guiltiness and through a psychological outburst admits that all his statements were based on biases. Similarly, juror10 uses his own belief to create his racial prejudice against the defendant (â€Å"I‘ve expected that†, â€Å"You know what we are dealing with†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ) as well as his past experiences (â€Å"I’ve lived with them†¦ they are born liars†). Adding to this, juror10 weights the value of the young boy less than the cost of a trial. Finally, his â€Å"explosion† made the apocalypse of his real personality and the group’s mechanism accused his behavior through a visual isolation and oral prohibition. The existence of biases in each group can create an unpleasant internal environment for each member and be the reason of conflicts. The productivity or the effectiveness of the group is in danger if such behaviors are being tolerated. Apart from the complexity which is created there is also a matter of fairness of the group’s function. As the movie flows, the influence of the group to each individual separately is obvious but a vice versa phenomenon is noticed as well. In this part, the different roles of the jurors and their influence on each other through the communication style of all-channel are being presented, as well as with some strategies followed by the leader-juror8. One thing that is common for most of the jurors is that they have common BATNA(Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) and this is the hung jury. However, this is not the case for jury8 claims that his only purpose is the delivery of the justice (Fisher and Uri, 1981). Starting with juror1 we can notice signs of leadership in the early beginning but he ends up being more like a manager, organizing the procedure. Excluding the moment he reaches his breaking point and suggests if anyone would like to take his place, juror1is the one who sets up the norms, accepts propositions, guides the conversation and the voting procedure, avoids conflicts and respects privileges keeping a democratic way of thinking. Being the foreman can be characterized as the â€Å"co-ordinator† (Beldin’s Team Role Theory 1996, 2007). Many of the jurors (2, 5, 6, 7, 11, and 12) seem to have low self-esteem not only because of their character but also because of the number of the team that forces them to get lost in the crowd or just finish the procedure and leave (â€Å"I just think he is guilty†, â€Å"Can I pass? †, etc) This is obvious from the first vote where only 5 of the 11 votes come directly and the rest are raised slowly just to avoid being pointed out. They are becoming followers(2, 5, 6 and 11) or entertainers (7) or just dreamers (12). Of course most of them are open to hear more and accept different opinions (2, 5, and 7). The rest just do not care so much about the result and these â€Å"free riders†, as Frohlich and Oppenheimer called them in 1970, are the proof that social loafing (or Ringelmann Effect) is a common phenomenon in big teams. The role of juror9 has a vital meaning for the outcome because he takes part in all the breaking points of the process. Firstly, he is the first supporter of juror8, secondly it is him who explains the old witness’s psychology (â€Å"Attention†) and lastly he is the fire starter for the fall of the woman’s testimony. The main opponents to the boy’s exoneration are jurors 3, 4 and 10. As was mentioned previously jurors 3 and 10 are mostly based on biases and stereotypes for children from slums. They are all concentrated on general facts and obvious details. The extensive use of loud voice is frequently the main argument of jurors 3 and 10, which could never strengthen their position. Alternatively, juror4 is using his logic and cleverness to support his facts and admits his fault proving his maturity, once he is convinced. Focusing on juror8 we can claim that he owns the position of the leader as his bargaining power is unique. Max Weber (1947) claimed that â€Å"bargaining power is the ability someone has to achieve his goals no matter of the resistance he faces†. Juror8 follows a series of strategies in order to be flexible and adapt to the needs of each occasion. In the beginning, as it is shown from Jo-Hari’s Window, everyone has a bigger unknown-black side, so juror8 wants to get information as an input. Eventually, he adopts the strategy of a listener in order to get knowledge from the others without revealing himself. Afterwards, in the first vote he stays neutral mentioning his points aiming to make some of the rest see the facts from a different angle avoiding any conflict. The brainstorming procedure just began. In order to wake up their consciousness he uses specific words like â€Å"maybe†, â€Å"supposing†, â€Å"possible† and â€Å"assume†. In the main part he listens carefully and argues with all the elements one by one. There is also an extensive use of rhetorical questions and irony just to make his point clear. The first action scheme is when he places the similar knife on the table. The leader breaks the law in order to prove his point. He becomes more active for the first time and gets the whole team upset. Eventually, he creates the first doubts. At this specific time he calls for a new vote. Apparently, the timing is not random. Probably he recognizes some voices like his and decides that it is time to set up a coalition strategy. He needs just one vote which will strengthen amazingly his arguments and he gets it. The fact that he uses his emotional intelligence to point out his views, while he realizes that some other jurors are playing, proves once again his leading abilities. The next step is to create personal relations with some of the jurors. So, he finds the weakest of the group who are about to change side and ask for their opinions. It is not by accident that these jurors were mainly followers until this time. Having established these connections, he uses logic and science as well as the experience and the knowledge of the group in order to persuade the others. As soon as he realizes that one of his main opponents (juror3) loses his self-control, juror8 becomes aggressive and pushes him to the limits using the technique of the irony to apocalypse the existence of his personal prejudice against the defendant. After completing his task, he shows his sympathetic character and supports the worried opponent. Based on Moscovici (1976) and his 5 Aspects juror8 is loyal to his beliefs(Consistency), responsible for his acts(Autonomy), flexible whenever it is appropriate(Rigidity), risky in the first secret vote(Investment) and willing to bring justice(Fairness). The impact of this movie in our modern times is initially proved by the fact that after so many years it is still being taught in courses not only in Law schools but also in Business and Psychology schools. Definitions like brainstorming, social loafing, diversity, team-working, biases and preconceptions, attribution, personality, leader’s abilities, democratic voting and many others are part of any organization nowadays. This movie is the omen for the evolutionary development of a team structure, a team-worker’s behavior and a leader’s characteristics. References Atkinson G. 1990 â€Å"Negotiate the best deal† Director Books, Cambridge Barkan, Steven E. , Steven Cohn, 1994, ‘‘Racial Prejudice and Support for the Death Penalty by Whites’’ in â€Å"Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency† pp. 202–209 Buchanan A. David Huczynski A. Andrej, 2010, â€Å"Organizational Behaviour†, seventh edition, Pearson Ed ucation Limited, Harlow Cialdini R. B. , 1993 â€Å"The psychology of persuasion†, Quill William Morrow, New York Ellsworth C. Phoebe, 1989, â€Å"Are Twelve Heads Better Than One? † in â€Å"Law and Contemporary Problems†, Duke University School of Law Fisher R. Ury W. 1981 â€Å"Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without gining in† Penguin, New York Flouri Eirini Fitsakis Yiannis, Oct 2007, â€Å"Minority Matters: 12 Angry Men as a Case study of a successful Negotiation against the odds† in â€Å"Negotitation Journal† pp. 449-461 Hackley Susan, 2007 â€Å"One Reasonable and Inquiring Man:12 Angry Men as a Negotiation-Teaching Tool† in â€Å"Negotiation Journal† pp. 463-468 Hall M. Eisenstein (Eds. ), 1980, â€Å"Voir Dire and jury selection†, Clark. B. M. , in â€Å"Criminal Defense Techniques†, New York: Mathew Bender Hay B. L. 2007 â€Å"Fiftieth anniversary 12 Angry Men† Kent-Law Review 82(3) Chi cago Heuer L. Penrodt St. , Sep. 1988, â€Å"Increasing Jurors’ Participation in Trials A Field Experiment with Jury Notetaking and Question Asking† in â€Å"Law and Human Behaviour† Vol. 12 No. 3 Janis I. , 1972 â€Å"Victims of groupthink† MA: Houghton Mifflin, Oxford Kaplan M. , Jones Christopher S. , 2003 â€Å"The Effects of Racially Stereotypical Crimes on Juror Decision-Making and Information –Processing Strategies† in â€Å"Basic and Applied Social Psychology† pp. 1-13 Kew J. Stredwick J. , 2010, â€Å"Human Resource Management in a business context†, CIPD, London Martin R. , 1992 â€Å"Bargaining Power† Clarendon Press, Oxford Moscovici S. , 1976 â€Å"Social influence and social change† Academic, London Nietzelt T. Michael Dillehayt C. Ronald, 1982, â€Å"The Effects of Variations in Voir Dire Procedures in Capital Murder Trials†, in â€Å"Law and Human Behaviour† Vol. 6 No. 1 Rojot J. , 1991 â€Å"Negotiatation: From theory to practice† Macmillan, London Scheepers, Daan, et al, 2006, ‘‘Diversity in In-Group Bias: Structural Factors, Situational Features, and Social Functions,’’ in â€Å"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology† pp. 944–960 Weber M. , 1947 The theory of social and economic organization† Oxford University Press, New York 12 Angry Men Analysis 2 In the first part of the film when the stage of forming, as it is claimed by the Tuckman’s Team Model, occurs, we notice the main characteristics of this group(David A. Buchanan Andrej Huczynski, 2010). The group consists of 12 male middle aged white men probably coming from the middle class. Even from this first impression, admiring the effort of the film to achieve diversity, signs of prejudice appear. Specifically, the fact that all of them are men and moreover white men represents main biases of that period. Additionally, as it is mentioned to Sheldon’s Theory about the biases, the somatotype of each person declares in a certain way its character and this can be noticed by the selection of the characters and their match with the roles (Big guy is the tough one, smaller and thinner is the most innocuous, the handsome is the sensible and sensitive one etc. ) (David A. Buchanan Andrej Huczynski, 2010). Despite the fact that the movie is trying to accuse such biases (which will be underlined later) certain ways of projection of that period could not be avoided. This is one of the reasons why in the remake of the film in 1997 black actors participated as well and later there even women were introduced in the team for certain theatrical versions. (Eirini Flouri Yiannis Fitsakis 2007). The existence of a â€Å"one-off† situation like this in the movie leaves space for less inhibition for conflicts. Moreover, specific factors like the size, the external-internal environment and the definition of the process play a crucial role in the structure of the group. Obviously, the size of this group is 12, but the question is: why so many? The reason is that by having a greater number of juries the system of justice achieves higher levels of democracy with less possibilities of getting unfair decisions combining the memory, the knowledge and the experience of each member and eliminates any prejudiced behaviors. On the other hand as Social Impact Theory mentions the more members there are, the less responsibility they feel (Latane and Nida, 1980). In the external environment we could enclose the time of the procedure, which is unlimited at first but with a deadline coming up afterwards, and the conditions of the place of action, which is characterized by the humidity and the high summer temperatures, the broken air-conditioning, the unavailability of space. Such details could become the cause of stress, aggressiveness and as it was shown desire for fast result (just finish the procedure). In the internal environment issues like experience of previous similar situations, cultures, personalities, knowledge, mood, health, personal schedule and specialization could affect the result. Ending, a matter of significant importance is the definition of the procedure. In this case, we observe that after the release of the 2 alternatives there are 12 juries left. The juries have to decide if the boy is guilty or not guilty but there must be a full agreement (12 to 0) in each case; A democratic method which proves the importance of the situation. Alternatively, if they cannot reach an agreement they can decide a hung jury and then another trial will take place with different juries this time. The role of the foreman is usually for the most experienced person in this field or the first jury or for anyone who claims the desire and gets accepted by all. In the movie, juror1 supports this role setting the basic norms of the procedure. It is worth mentioning that nowadays, in the selection of the juries there is a specific procedure that is called â€Å"Voir Dire† procedure that clarifies the capability of the juries (Michael T. Nietzelt and Ronald C. Dillehayt 1982). Undoubtedly, the conviction of the biases of any kind is one of the main objects of this film. Primarily, in the first scheme, the judge seems really ninterested about the outcome and he seems to be sure about the result. The Halo Effect is â€Å"a judgment based on a single striking characteristic† and is being remarked in many cases during the film (Edward Thorndike, 1920). Moving to the main part of the film and the central procedure we can emphasize on the juror3 and juror10 who are the main rep resentatives of such prejudiced behaviors. Both of them were trying to fill the gaps of their knowledge using selective attention in certain facts and their personal experience (â€Å"Principle of closure† by Max Wertheimer 1880-1943). Everyone has his stereotypes and if we imagine stereotypes as pictures in our head, jurors 3 and 10 have the image of a dangerous criminal for the defendant, raised to act in certain ways (Lippmann, 1922). More specifically, juror3 expresses, from his first lines in the film, his perception against the young boy (â€Å"I ‘d slap those kids before†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ). But as the movie goes on, he expresses again and again his personal beliefs connecting them with his personal disappointment from his own son (â€Å" it’s these kids they are these day†, â€Å"I used to call my father Sir†). Even more he presents his cultural stereotype against the elderly (â€Å"How could he be positive about anything? †) Eventually, juror3 stands alone with his perceptions, believing in the boy’s guiltiness and through a psychological outburst admits that all his statements were based on biases. Similarly, juror10 uses his own belief to create his racial prejudice against the defendant (â€Å"I‘ve expected that†, â€Å"You know what we are dealing with†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ) as well as his past experiences (â€Å"I’ve lived with them†¦ they are born liars†). Adding to this, juror10 weights the value of the young boy less than the cost of a trial. Finally, his â€Å"explosion† made the apocalypse of his real personality and the group’s mechanism accused his behavior through a visual isolation and oral prohibition. The existence of biases in each group can create an unpleasant internal environment for each member and be the reason of conflicts. The productivity or the effectiveness of the group is in danger if such behaviors are being tolerated. Apart from the complexity which is created there is also a matter of fairness of the group’s function. As the movie flows, the influence of the group to each individual separately is obvious but a vice versa phenomenon is noticed as well. In this part, the different roles of the jurors and their influence on each other through the communication style of all-channel are being presented, as well as with some strategies followed by the leader-juror8. One thing that is common for most of the jurors is that they have common BATNA(Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) and this is the hung jury. However, this is not the case for jury8 claims that his only purpose is the delivery of the justice (Fisher and Uri, 1981). Starting with juror1 we can notice signs of leadership in the early beginning but he ends up being more like a manager, organizing the procedure. Excluding the moment he reaches his breaking point and suggests if anyone would like to take his place, juror1is the one who sets up the norms, accepts propositions, guides the conversation and the voting procedure, avoids conflicts and respects privileges keeping a democratic way of thinking. Being the foreman can be characterized as the â€Å"co-ordinator† (Beldin’s Team Role Theory 1996, 2007). Many of the jurors (2, 5, 6, 7, 11, and 12) seem to have low self-esteem not only because of their character but also because of the number of the team that forces them to get lost in the crowd or just finish the procedure and leave (â€Å"I just think he is guilty†, â€Å"Can I pass? †, etc) This is obvious from the first vote where only 5 of the 11 votes come directly and the rest are raised slowly just to avoid being pointed out. They are becoming followers(2, 5, 6 and 11) or entertainers (7) or just dreamers (12). Of course most of them are open to hear more and accept different opinions (2, 5, and 7). The rest just do not care so much about the result and these â€Å"free riders†, as Frohlich and Oppenheimer called them in 1970, are the proof that social loafing (or Ringelmann Effect) is a common phenomenon in big teams. The role of juror9 has a vital meaning for the outcome because he takes part in all the breaking points of the process. Firstly, he is the first supporter of juror8, secondly it is him who explains the old witness’s psychology (â€Å"Attention†) and lastly he is the fire starter for the fall of the woman’s testimony. The main opponents to the boy’s exoneration are jurors 3, 4 and 10. As was mentioned previously jurors 3 and 10 are mostly based on biases and stereotypes for children from slums. They are all concentrated on general facts and obvious details. The extensive use of loud voice is frequently the main argument of jurors 3 and 10, which could never strengthen their position. Alternatively, juror4 is using his logic and cleverness to support his facts and admits his fault proving his maturity, once he is convinced. Focusing on juror8 we can claim that he owns the position of the leader as his bargaining power is unique. Max Weber (1947) claimed that â€Å"bargaining power is the ability someone has to achieve his goals no matter of the resistance he faces†. Juror8 follows a series of strategies in order to be flexible and adapt to the needs of each occasion. In the beginning, as it is shown from Jo-Hari’s Window, everyone has a bigger unknown-black side, so juror8 wants to get information as an input. Eventually, he adopts the strategy of a listener in order to get knowledge from the others without revealing himself. Afterwards, in the first vote he stays neutral mentioning his points aiming to make some of the rest see the facts from a different angle avoiding any conflict. The brainstorming procedure just began. In order to wake up their consciousness he uses specific words like â€Å"maybe†, â€Å"supposing†, â€Å"possible† and â€Å"assume†. In the main part he listens carefully and argues with all the elements one by one. There is also an extensive use of rhetorical questions and irony just to make his point clear. The first action scheme is when he places the similar knife on the table. The leader breaks the law in order to prove his point. He becomes more active for the first time and gets the whole team upset. Eventually, he creates the first doubts. At this specific time he calls for a new vote. Apparently, the timing is not random. Probably he recognizes some voices like his and decides that it is time to set up a coalition strategy. He needs just one vote which will strengthen amazingly his arguments and he gets it. The fact that he uses his emotional intelligence to point out his views, while he realizes that some other jurors are playing, proves once again his leading abilities. The next step is to create personal relations with some of the jurors. So, he finds the weakest of the group who are about to change side and ask for their opinions. It is not by accident that these jurors were mainly followers until this time. Having established these connections, he uses logic and science as well as the experience and the knowledge of the group in order to persuade the others. As soon as he realizes that one of his main opponents (juror3) loses his self-control, juror8 becomes aggressive and pushes him to the limits using the technique of the irony to apocalypse the existence of his personal prejudice against the defendant. After completing his task, he shows his sympathetic character and supports the worried opponent. Based on Moscovici (1976) and his 5 Aspects juror8 is loyal to his beliefs(Consistency), responsible for his acts(Autonomy), flexible whenever it is appropriate(Rigidity), risky in the first secret vote(Investment) and willing to bring justice(Fairness). The impact of this movie in our modern times is initially proved by the fact that after so many years it is still being taught in courses not only in Law schools but also in Business and Psychology schools. Definitions like brainstorming, social loafing, diversity, team-working, biases and preconceptions, attribution, personality, leader’s abilities, democratic voting and many others are part of any organization nowadays. This movie is the omen for the evolutionary development of a team structure, a team-worker’s behavior and a leader’s characteristics. References Atkinson G. 1990 â€Å"Negotiate the best deal† Director Books, Cambridge Barkan, Steven E. , Steven Cohn, 1994, ‘‘Racial Prejudice and Support for the Death Penalty by Whites’’ in â€Å"Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency† pp. 202–209 Buchanan A. David Huczynski A. Andrej, 2010, â€Å"Organizational Behaviour†, seventh edition, Pearson Ed ucation Limited, Harlow Cialdini R. B. , 1993 â€Å"The psychology of persuasion†, Quill William Morrow, New York Ellsworth C. Phoebe, 1989, â€Å"Are Twelve Heads Better Than One? † in â€Å"Law and Contemporary Problems†, Duke University School of Law Fisher R. Ury W. 1981 â€Å"Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without gining in† Penguin, New York Flouri Eirini Fitsakis Yiannis, Oct 2007, â€Å"Minority Matters: 12 Angry Men as a Case study of a successful Negotiation against the odds† in â€Å"Negotitation Journal† pp. 449-461 Hackley Susan, 2007 â€Å"One Reasonable and Inquiring Man:12 Angry Men as a Negotiation-Teaching Tool† in â€Å"Negotiation Journal† pp. 463-468 Hall M. Eisenstein (Eds. ), 1980, â€Å"Voir Dire and jury selection†, Clark. B. M. , in â€Å"Criminal Defense Techniques†, New York: Mathew Bender Hay B. L. 2007 â€Å"Fiftieth anniversary 12 Angry Men† Kent-Law Review 82(3) Chi cago Heuer L. Penrodt St. , Sep. 1988, â€Å"Increasing Jurors’ Participation in Trials A Field Experiment with Jury Notetaking and Question Asking† in â€Å"Law and Human Behaviour† Vol. 12 No. 3 Janis I. , 1972 â€Å"Victims of groupthink† MA: Houghton Mifflin, Oxford Kaplan M. , Jones Christopher S. , 2003 â€Å"The Effects of Racially Stereotypical Crimes on Juror Decision-Making and Information –Processing Strategies† in â€Å"Basic and Applied Social Psychology† pp. 1-13 Kew J. Stredwick J. , 2010, â€Å"Human Resource Management in a business context†, CIPD, London Martin R. , 1992 â€Å"Bargaining Power† Clarendon Press, Oxford Moscovici S. , 1976 â€Å"Social influence and social change† Academic, London Nietzelt T. Michael Dillehayt C. Ronald, 1982, â€Å"The Effects of Variations in Voir Dire Procedures in Capital Murder Trials†, in â€Å"Law and Human Behaviour† Vol. 6 No. 1 Rojot J. , 1991 â€Å"Negotiatation: From theory to practice† Macmillan, London Scheepers, Daan, et al, 2006, ‘‘Diversity in In-Group Bias: Structural Factors, Situational Features, and Social Functions,’’ in â€Å"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology† pp. 944–960 Weber M. , 1947 The theory of social and economic organization† Oxford University Press, New York

CHild abuse Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

CHild abuse - Research Paper Example It’s an underreported crime, usually due to family contingencies involved. Child abuse- A term that is associated with dire pain and agony for the child. It’s not just a harm that is inflicted on the individual or the familial basis, but if we go and look out of our â€Å"little world† scenario, we find that it’s a larger problem with a larger consequence base. Children who grow up having such experiences, in turn are more likely to inflict abuse on their own children. This becomes a vicious circle, which lingers on and on. It not just has its effect in the immediate family; it explodes and infects the society altogether with crime, drugs, disease and callousness. It’s a state of emotional, economic and sexual maltreatment meted out to a person below the age of eighteen and is globally prevalent phenomenon. According to WHO :† child abuse or maltreatment constitutes all forms of physical and/or emotional ill-treatment, sexual abuse, neglect or negligent treatment or commercial or other exploitation, resulting in actual or potential harm to the child’s health, survival, development or dignity in the context of a relationship of responsibility, trust or power† (World Health Organization, 1999). Different connotations may be attached with â€Å"child abuse† in different cultures and socio-economic background. There are majorly 4 types of child abuse inflicted upon children. The WHO defines them as: 1. Physical abuse – physical abuse is inflicting of physical injury upon the child. This may include burning, hitting, punching, shaking, kicking, beating or otherwise harming a child. The parent or the caretaker may not have intended to hurt the child. It may, be the result of over-discipline or physical punishment that is inappropriate to the child’s age. 2. Sexual abuse – sexual abuse is inappropriate sexual behavior with the child. It includes fondling a child’s genitals, making the