A Room with a View essays

A Room with a View essays A Room with a View by E. M. Forster is an excellent novel that depicts various significant historical aspects that concerns the 20th century. The author skillfully conveys his message through his characters by emphasizing on their constant desire to travel, contradicting the individuals of two social classes and illustrating the importance of the supreme power, i.e. the God and the Church. Forster clearly states that the fascinating world is getting smaller by traveling. Firstly, the novel itself is set in two different countries: England and Italy. The setting is established by British travelers at Bertolini, Italy, who make their way back-home to Surrey, England and finally, end up back in Italy. The Alan sisters amongst others have traveled to far off places across the world, including Greece, Rome, Athens, Delphi, Acropolis, Blue Sea, Parnassus, Constantinople, etc. Queen Victoria makes her journey to Ireland unwillingly, indicating that the Parliament has a higher power than the monarchy. Ms. Lavish on an account explains that due to a catastrophe in Venice, she fled to Venice in the past. She further adds that she travels around the world to get inspiration for her novels whereas other individuals opt for commercial studies for their love of tourism. Hence, Forster demonstrates through his amusing characters that it is an era of new ideas, questioning , deducing truth for themselves by exploring, freedom and personal satisfaction. The Victorian society is very rigid based on various social classes. Unrefined Emersons are most frequently victims of the snobbery due to the fact that they work hard for a living and are not socially acceptable. Upon arrival in Italy, Charlotte does not agree to exchange rooms with them because of the social pressure imagining what other people are going to think. She is also concerned about Lucy as she does not want her to feel obliged from a young, poor man, George t ...

Texas State Laws on Flag Burning, Desecration

Texas State Laws on Flag Burning, Desecration In Texas, it is a misdemeanor if someone intentionally or knowingly damages, defaces, mutilates, or burns the flag of the United States or the State of Texas. A flag includes any emblem, banner, or other standard or a copy of an emblem, standard, or banner that is an official or commonly recognized depiction of the flag of the United States or of this state and is capable of being flown from a staff of any character or size but does not include a representation of a flag on a written or printed document. Source: 42.11 Analysis of the Law Texas was the source of the infamous Texas v. Johnson Supreme Court decision which upheld peoples right to burn American flags. At the time, the law made it a misdemeanor for someone to knowingly desecrate a state or national flag, where desecrate was defined as deface, damage, or otherwise physically mistreat in a way that the actor knows will seriously offend one or more persons likely to observe or discover his action. There isnt much difference between the law that was held unconstitutional in 1989 and the law which currently sits on the books in Texas. Now, as then, the crime is located not so much in the act as it is in causing negative reactions in others. You arent guilty of flag desecration in Texas if you burn a a flag and no one is offended; you only become a criminal when others take offense.

Social Thought and Social Change Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Social Thought and Social Change - Essay Example 6). For Enlightened thinkers, the desirable direction and final destination they aim for is a place where everyone lives in â€Å"a perfectly happy existence,† free from religious control, aristocratic discrimination and monarchical oppression (Bury 1920, p. 6). This idea is oftentimes criticised by modern thinkers as a naive belief in man’s capability for achieving perfection (Israel 2001, p. 3). However, Israel (2001, pp. 3-4) argues that â€Å"Enlightenment progress breathed a vivid awareness of the great difficulty of spreading toleration, curbing religious fanaticism, and otherwise ameliorating human organization, orderliness, and the general state of health.† Concurrently, even though famous Enlightened thinkers have opposing ideas about how to go about achieving progress, it cannot be denied that they share the same principles and morals. For instance, while Voltaire did not believe in the notion of equality and moved to educate and enlighten aristocrats i nto bettering the world, Rousseau detested them and lobbied for equality through revolution. However, both detested the Church and absolute monarchy and sought to change the status quo (Brians 2000). It is unquestionable, then, that the Enlightenment—though ripe with strife and conflicting ideas—moved towards the same destination; and that is, the achievement of progress through positive societal changes. The Enlightenment symbolizes civilisation’s actual forward movement towards a desirable direction. It is progress personified. Both supporters and critics of the Enlightenment and even opposing Enlightened thinkers show that its end-all and be-all is achieving progress through reason—progress that aims to create a better society at a time when religious tyranny and absolute monarchy and aristocracy ruled the world. II. Stages of History and Revolution Karl Marx views human history as a series of stages wherein man struggles to deal with and control the e conomic benefits of the resources of the world in order to achieve power and position (Weiner 2008, p. 42; Cohen 2004, p. 23). â€Å"The growth of human power is the central process of history. The need for that growth explains why there is history† (p. 23). Hence, Marx evaluates history as the process of man’s struggle for control over the developing system of production (Shaw 1978, p. 152). Marx (1904, p. 28) states the first stage of history as primitive communism where goods and property are shared and the means of production include hunting and gathering; the second stage is slave society where a class society based on private ownership is established (pp. 285-286); third is feudalism (p. 216); fourth is capitalism (p. 19); fifth is socialism (p. 10); and the final stage is pure communism exhibited through a classless society and the abolition of private ownership (Marx and Engels 1858 qtd. in Schumaker 2010, p. 46). This is a history of class struggle, as â€Å" new forms of society arise appropriate to the new forms of production when the new classes win power† (McCarthy 1995). It can be seen here how each historical stage moves on to the next only with the destruction of a socio-economic system through the uprising of the lower classes. For instance, feudalism evolved into capitalism after the landed aristocrats was challenged by craftsmen and merchants (Bowen 2011).