Dolls House

Dolls House Comparing the Views on Womens Position in Jane Austens Pride and Prejudice and Henrik Ibsens A Dolls House Abstract The research conducted in order for this essay to be written wasnt like that which would be conducted during a science experiment or a mathematical problem solving. The research undertaken for this essay was very analytical. It delved deeply into two famous literary works of the nineteenth century. The research was mainly carried out because of the interesting difference between the two works and the extremely strong female protagonists. What the main idea of this research essay was was comparing the views on womens positions in Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen and A Dolls House by Henrik Ibsen. The literary works are only seventy years apart, yet societys views changed so drastically in those seventy years that it is difficult not to be interested in studying the two works. To truly understand the views of women in these two publications, one must read the two thoroughly as well as research what kinds of events were occurring at the times of the publications. When Pride and Prejud ice was published, society in the book was identical to society in real life. When A Dolls House was published, womens rights were beginning to become more prominent in society. Of course, even then, there were still some old fashioned minds. Torvald Helmer was the epitome of what Ibsen disapproved of. As many people analysed, Ibsen wrote this play to make the world move forward quicker. It is unknown whether or not his play actually made a huge impact; however, womens position in society has changed drastically since. Even between the two publications, there was a dramatic change. Nora Helmer was an inconceivable character to Jane Austen. By the time Ibsen had his play performed, women were beginning to think independently and seek independence. The findings evident in this essay will not change the world or stop global warming. However, they do make a person think how differently life was lived in the nineteenth century. Introduction For a period in history, the only thing that seemed to plague women was the prospect of marriage. Even if a woman didnt necessarily want to marry she would be forced into thinking of it because it was all that surrounded her. In the early 19th century, it was not hard to understand that women in society were believed to be simple creatures, who didnt want more than a lovely home to sit in and neighbouring women to gossip with. In 1813, Pride and Prejudice, a novel that supported all these social thoughts, was introduced to the world. This novel was written by Jane Austen and is probably one of the most famous love stories of all time simply because all women love to read about a love that survived the good and bad times. Jane Austen was a woman in the time where marriage was all one should think of as a young lady. Not seventy years later, a play was performed for the first time, titled A Dolls House. This play was written by playwright Henrik Ibsen and illustrated strongly contrasting themes to those present in Pride and Prejudice. Whilst Pride and Prejudice centres on a woman in want of a husband, A Dolls House focuses on the other side of marriage; the side of marriage nobody wanted revealed when it was first performed. Ibsen wrote his play at the time when women were beginning to be thought of in society as something more than just females. In his play, Ibsen created a character that began seeing past the prettiness of marriage with her husband. She began to think for herself and understand that there is more to learn about the world and one cannot know it unless one seeks it. Two writers, less than seventy years apart, with entirely different attitudes as to how the world should be seen, in the eyes of a woman. Both existed in the same century, yet they were worlds apart when it came to societys views on women and their position. Jane Austen believed it only natural for marriage to be on a young lady of marriageable ages mind. Henrik Ibsen, on the other hand, thought it inappropriate to show marriage as always being a traditional destiny. Ibsen portrayed women as independent or, at the very least, seeking independence. He succeeded when attempting to portray women as more than hopeless young ladies whose life goals were to be married. Both are entirely conflicting stories; both are incredibly successful. Character Comparisons Two very different stories would obviously have two very different protagonists. Pride Prejudice and A Dolls House are no exception; the former, Elizabeth Bennet; the latter, Nora Helmer. They are vastly different but are not the only characters that are comparable in the two novels. Elizabeth Bennet compared to Nora Helmer Elizabeth lives with her mother who is a lady who badgered and pestered her five daughters about marriage. Elizabeth, being a woman in the times when marriage and economy was everything to a woman, has differing views to her society. Elizabeth does not believe in betrothing herself to someone she is not compatible with. Elizabeth is a unique woman. Compared to all other women in that time, she is intellectual and cares about more than money and worldly possessions. She does not want to marry a man she cannot converse with. Even though Elizabeth is a different woman who fancied more than the average woman in the early 1800s, she still wanted to marry a man she could live with. If she didnt, she would have to be married to him for life in misery. Divorce was not ever thought of in the times of Elizabeth Bennet and her sisters. Therefore, if you were betrothed to somebody, you would be betrothed to them for the whole of eternity. It was considered completely unladylike and ungrateful, a lso, to leave your husband. If a woman was married to a man who was supporting her well and who was giving her all she wanted and she decided to leave him, society would look at her as an unappreciative wife who is not satisfied with anything. It was not understood in those old times that two people were not compatible. All that was thought of when marriage was brought up was if hes a man who can support this woman with whatever happens. Consequently, Elizabeth wanted to marry but she wanted to marry someone she was compatible with, someone she could spend the rest of her life with and not regret it. Marriage is what she wanted but it wasnt the marriage that her mother or the rest of society would ever understand. Nora Helmer is a house-wife. She knits and shops, just as a house-wife should. She never complains that her life isnt satisfying. However, Ibsen was clever enough to conceal her true feelings until later on in the play. As the audience analyses Nora, it is realised that her life was never pleasing; there was always something lacking in everything she ever did and never did she realise it until it was almost too late. Nora is tired of living in a home where she is treated as a doll would be treated pampered and adored for her physicality. Eventually, she realises that living with Torvald Helmer is not the way she wants to live. There is so much to see out there in the world; so much to learn about; and here she is, living in a dolls house, confined to a town that is not wide enough for her mind, nor exciting enough. Finally, she leaves her dismal life in the dolls house, to live her own life, to learn things shes never known before, to travel to places she has only ever heard of. She wanted to experience life, as shed never seen it before and she could not do that whilst living under the same roof as Torvald Helmer. Both these women are of great depth and intrigue. Both Elizabeth and Nora have different thoughts to those of the normal flow of their surroundings. Elizabeth didnt want to marry for money and end with a husband who couldnt even converse with her, unusual as it was in her time. Nora did not want to be imprisoned in a home, which offered no comfort, no excitement, no learning opportunities. Both characters are similar in the ways that they both went against the usual course of those around them. However, they are different in the things they wanted ultimately. Elizabeth wanted to marry someone compatible. Nora wanted to stay away from marriage life and learn more about the world and herself before committing to anything more. Pride and Prejudice ends with both Elizabeth Bennet and Jane Bennett celebrating their marriages to Fitzwilliam Darcy and Charles Bingley. A Dolls House, on the other hand, ends with Nora walking to the world, ready to embrace whatever the world has to offer. In less than seventy years, the stories written about women and their position changed drastically. Women were beginning to be seen as more capable and as more equal. It was also known that marriage was not all that would cross their minds. After all, it isnt that women are desperate to get married the society and the situation society put women in only made it seem that way and by the time Henrik Ibsen wrote his play, those types of thoughts were beginning to waver. Torvald Helmer compared to Nils Krogstad and Dr. Rank Torvald Helmer is a man who believes in particular positions for men and women. He doesnt believe women should provide, as Kristina Linde is planning to do for Nils Krogstad. He is a traditional man with an outdated way of thinking living in a society, which is rapidly changing. Torvald Helmer is stuck in the times, which Austen described in her novel. He is, however, only joined by a few. In A Dolls House there are two other male characters whose way of thinking was definitely changing with that of society. Nils Krogstad and Dr. Rank both believe in equality of men and women. Ibsen created these two characters as a way of contrasting to Torvald. Both Krogstad and Rank have different views. Krogstad completely agrees with the idea of Ms. Linde working to provide for her family. â€Å"I ran a little shop, then a small school, and anything else I could turn my hand to.† (Ibsen, H. A Dolls House. Act one; page 157). Rank also would sit and have many discussions with Nora, treatin g her like an equal adult. Torvald never once had a serious conversation with her, which proves how little he thought of the supposed equality between them. In the beginning of the play, it seems to the audience that everybody thinks as Torvald does when Kristina states, â€Å"A wife cant borrow without her husbands consent† (Ibsen, H. A Dolls House. Act 1, page 160). From this statement, it seems as though the society Nora is living in is just like the society Elizabeth Bennet was living in. Nora also states, â€Å"I was lucky enough to get a lot of copying to do†¦it was tremendous fun sitting there working and earning money. It was almost like being a man.† (Ibsen, H. A Dolls House. Act 1, page 162). This line suggests that women were not to work as men did in that society. However, when Dr. Rank is introduced, these ideas change. When Rank enters the home intending to see Torvald, he does not go away when he hears he is busy. Rather, he sits with Nora and conve rses with her, like equal adults. â€Å"Bankrupt! In less than a month, perhaps, I shall lie rotting in the churchyard† (Ibsen, H. A Dolls House. Act 2, page 191). Rank discusses matters of seriousness with Nora, whilst Torvald does not. It is clear that Rank has a mind that is changing with the changing society. â€Å"Helmers too sensitive to be able to face anything ugly I wont have him in my sick room† (Ibsen, H. A Dolls House. Act 2, page 191). Rank explains that Torvald is very sensitive. It is understood that he does not even speak of serious things with people other than Nora. He is clearly the odd one in this novel because everybody else has the same frame of mind but he seems to be stuck in the days that were even changing in Pride and Prejudice. Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy compared to Mr. Charles Bingley Two other men that are contrasting characters are Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy and Mr. Charles Bingley of Pride and Prejudice. Both have distinct views on society and the ideas that society lives on. Both men are owners of a very large fortune Mr. Darcy slightly wealthier than Mr. Bingley. The two are the best of friends; however, their characters could not be more dissimilar. At the first ball at Meryton, each of their characters is decided by the surrounding society. â€Å"Mr. Bingley was good looking and gentlemanlike; he had a pleasant countenance, and easy, unaffected manners†¦he was lively and unreserved.† (Austen, J. Pride and Prejudice. Volume 1, chapter 3, page 12). Mr. Bingley is liked by everyone that was acquainted with him almost instantly. It was his lively disposition. â€Å"Mr. Darcy soon drew the attention of the room by his fine, tall person, handsome features, noble mein; and the report which was in general circulation within five minutes of his entrance, of his having ten thousand a year.† (Austen, J. Pride and Prejudice. Volume 1, chapter 3, page 12). He is looked at as handsome and even more handsome when theyve heard of his fortune. However, their views on Mr. Darcy soon change. â€Å"(He) danced only once, declined being introduced to any other lady, and spent the rest of the evening in walking about the room, speaking occasionally to one of his own party. He was the proudest, most disagreeable man in the world.† (Austen, J. Pride and Prejudice. Volume 1, chapter 3, page 12). The mens differences do not only go so deep as personalities. They are also different in what they want ultimately. Of course, as was the tradition at the time, they each want to marry; however, Mr. Bingley is not so fussy with who his future bride is to be. Mr. Bingley is much quicker to label a woman as ‘accomplished also, which adds to the differing views of him and his friend. â€Å"It is amazing to me how young ladies can have patienc e to be so very accomplished, as they all are,† quotes Mr. Bingley (Austen, J. Pride and Prejudice. Volume 1, chapter 8, page 35). Mr. Darcy, of course, scolds him for thinking such a thing. It is clear that Mr. Darcy has a much more different idea of what an accomplished woman is. After describing an accomplished woman, Mr. Bingley listens to Mr. Darcys words, â€Å"All this she must possess and to all this she must yet add something more substantial, in the improvement of her mind by extensive reading,† (Austen, J. Pride and Prejudice. Volume 1, chapter 8, page 35). To the reader, it is obvious that Mr. Darcy, intentionally or not, is describing Elizabeth Bennet as accomplished. It is even more evident what the two friends views on women are when they choose their wives. Mr. Bingley chooses Jane for her unmistakable beauty and kind nature and nothing more. His affection for her is not based on an intelligent mind or extensive reader. Mr. Darcy, on the other hand, favo urs Elizabeth. Although she is not as handsome as Jane, her mind is more developed. She takes pleasure in reading and having intellectual conversations. Mr. Darcy clearly wants this for a bride. By joining Mr. Darcy with Elizabeth and Mr. Bingley with Jane in matrimony in the end of the novel, it is clear what Austen wants the reader to learn: marry someone you are compatible with. Although Mr. Bingley marries Jane for her attractiveness, their marriage was compatible because each is kind natured and good spirited. The two are not intellectuals, like Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth. In fact, they are quite the opposite, yet their marriage still works. When comparing the two main men of this novel, it is possible to say that Mr. Darcy and Mr. Bingley are the male counterparts to Jane and Elizabeth Bennet, which is possibly why their marriages worked in the end. Writers Purpose As writers, both Austen and Ibsen had distinct purposes for writing what they did. When reading their works, it is clear to many that each wanted to encourage the public to begin to think differently to the society they lived in. Austen did agree with her society, essentially. She approved of marriage but wanted the reason for marriage to change in the mind of the public. Ibsen, however, promoted womens independence and ensured his audience went away with new ideas about the equality between the sexes. Jane Austen wrote Pride and Prejudice to allow woman the understanding that marrying for money, instead of compatibility, was never the correct path to walk on. Even though both Jane and Elizabeth did marry wealthy men, they did it for love rather than the money involved. They married for the important fact that they connected with their partners on a higher level than how highly they thought of the money they possessed. In the times when Austen published this novel, the thinking of Elizabeth and Jane were never believed to be possible. Austen took this to her advantage and publicized intellectual thinking and brought thoughts of compatibility into relationships. Other than Elizabeth and Jane Bennett in Pride and Prejudice, the characters mostly think about marrying for support and security more than anything else. Naturally, she disapproved of women marrying bad men. By creating a character like Elizabeth, the audience could understand that she most definitely found it quite inappro priate for a man and woman to marry without any love. However, Austen didnt completely disapprove of women marrying for money. She understood that there are certain circumstances, which cannot be avoided sometimes. In her novel, she wrote about Charlotte Lucas, who was a girl uncertain of her economic future. She married Mr. Collins for his apparent wealth and the belief that she would be financially secure with him as a husband. Although she understood her uncertain economic future, Austen used this comparison to her benefit. Charlotte and Mr. Collins marriage became one of comfort, not one of love and affection. Austen did not forget to remind the reader that their marriage was anything but successful because Charlotte married for money. She also disapproved of marriage based solely on attraction, as was Mr. and Mrs. Bennets relationship. â€Å"Her father captivated by youth and beauty, and that appearance of good humour, which youth and beauty generally give, had married a woman whose weak understanding and liberal mind, had very early in their marriage put an end to all real affection for her† (Austen, J. Pride and Prejudice. Volume 3, chapter 42, page 194). Their marriage was all that Austen was against. What she disapproved of, also, was the reality that women could not inherit fortunes. For example; in the case of Mr. Bennett who had four daughters and no sons, he would have to pass his fortune on to the next male in the family, who was Mr. Collins, who hadnt even been acquainted with the Bennet family. Austen did not understand why Mr. Bennetts daughter couldnt take over his fortune, when they obviously deserve it much more so than Mr. Collins. She showed her disapproval of this by using the voice of Mrs. Bennet. â€Å"I do think it is the hardest thing in the world, that your estate should be entailed away from your own children,† (Austen, J. Pride and Prejudice. Volume 1, chapter 15, page 54). In the end, what could be said about Austen s purpose to write such a deep and meaningful novel is that she meant great things for it. She wrote to teach women of the world that they should find their place in the world. Their minds should not constantly revolve around marriage and finding marriage. They should learn to be comfortable with their surroundings and themselves and only think of marriage when a man that is compatible with them comes along and steals their heart with what he does and says, and not with how much money he possesses. Henrik Ibsen wrote his play in a time when womens rights were starting to become noticed. Womens right to independence played a magnificent role in Ibsens A Dolls House. That is essentially what he was building towards, right from the commencement of the play. The entire purpose for his writing of this play was to broadcast the fact that women should begin thinking for themselves. He wanted women to believe they could make it on their own; that they did not need a man to help them along the way. Henrik Ibsen wrote this play not seventy years after Jane Austen wrote her novel. Immediately as the first few pages are read, it is quite obvious that Ibsen is looking in to the future. His construction of Nora is quite fantastic. As a reader, it is interesting to note that Nora Helmer is a completely inconceivable character for Jane Austen. Never would Austen even think that a woman could leave her husband in order to learn more about herself and the world. Nora is an excellent model of wha t many women thought about in the late 19th century. Marriage was beginning to lose its rose-coloured magic. The stories speaking of happy marriages were slowly beginning to melt away to reveal much less pretty images. Ibsen succeeded when attempting to write these thoughts down as a play. He succeeded in the fact that when the audience watched as Nora walked to the world, a new woman, they all cheered and agreed with all her reasoning. Because Noras action provoked this reaction, it is apparent that his mission was fulfilled. His mission to rid the minds of all people of the inequality between men and women was accomplished. By employing the use of Kristina Linde, who worked and provided for her family for many years, Ibsen showed that it was not a bad thing. Kristina learnt more about herself and the cruel world she lived in. Evidently, it might have worn her out and tired her however, she came out of it a better, more-rounded and more experienced woman who could take on anything and not back down. Unlike Nora, who was frustrated all her life because she was missing something she desperately wanted. She moved from her fathers home, where she was treated like a doll, to her husbands home, where she received the same treatment. She never worked a day in her life, and because of this, she never stopped dreaming of it. When she did work, behind her husbands back (for that was the only way she could), she commented that they were the three most enjoyable weeks of her life. Ibsen used Noras character to show that a woman who has been treated as though she is a fragile porcelain doll for all of her existence will not ever know how to truly think for herself. He used this character to show that having everything done for you and never knowing truly what the world around you is about is something one should never hope for. Even though Ms. Linde was awfully weary, Ibsen made his audience believe that this is the life, which should be sought after. In Pride and Prejudice, the society that Elizabeth Bennett lived in was not one which questioned a lot of things. Whatever is put in front of them, they believe it. They did not question things that seemed unusual to them. They did not question for fear their thoughts and beliefs would be confused and proved wrong. Desire for society did not exist in Austens Pride and Prejudice, unlike in A Dolls House. Nora wanted to learn more about the society and world she lived in. Elizabeth Bennett and the people she knew really only cared for the people they were already acquainted with. They would not go out of their way to learn more about what is happening in other parts of the world, or even the country. In A Dolls House Ibsen made it clear that Nora wanted to see as much of the world as she possibly could. In Pride and Prejudice, Austen only wrote about marriage and the never-ending quest to find the right person to marry. Whilst Austen showed that marriage was what all women wanted ultim ately, Ibsen showed that marriage life could be restricted. Ibsen also showed that traditional husbands implement several restrictions on their wives, which eventually denies the women the ability to grow, emotionally and physically. Ibsen attempted to tell the audience that if a man did everything for his wife and protected her from everything, there is no possible way she could grow into a more developed, more experienced, more agreeable person. Conclusion Two novels: different in purpose but equally great. Jane Austen lived in a different society to Henrik Ibsen. She agreed with the most part of her society, except that women shouldnt marry for financial security they should marry those that are like them. Her novel ended in two compatible marriages. Marriage was still the ultimate destination for women as well as men but it wasnt the kind of marriage that her society looked at. Women then were expected to marry for security and a fine house. Austen wanted to change these ideas and ensure that women believed that the fortune of a man is not what should be looked at when looking for a potential husband. Ibsen did not agree with his society. In fact, he wrote his play in order to change the society he lived in. His play went against everything the society believed in. Women were not allowed to leave their husbands whenever they wanted to. That is why he wrote the play he wanted womens positions to change and they did. When Nora wal ks to the world, she received cheers from the crowd. Independence, from then on, was desired and thats what Ibsen wanted. Both of the novels are fantastically written and the message is printed loud and clear. As the years go on, it is evident that each of these literary works has made an enormous impact on society. Ibsen helped womens fight for independence move more rapidly, whilst Austen made women all over the world seek a man that was like them, not just had a fortune that could buy them a home big enough for one hundred. Bibliography Books 1. Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. England: Penguin, 1996. 2. Ibsen, Henrik. A Dolls House. England: Penguin, 1965 3. Spence, Jon. Becoming Jane Austen. 2nd ed. London: Continuum, 2007. Websites 1. Cummings, Michael. J. A Dolls House by Henrik Johan Ibsen: A Study Guide. Retrieved: 18/07/09. 2. Haker, Ann. Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen. Retrieved: 18/07/09. 3. Pride and Prejudice: Jane Austen. Retrieved: 13/07/09. 4. Pride and Prejudice. Retrieved: 13/07/09. 5. Pride and Prejudice. Retrieved: 05/02/10. 6. Yurgaitis, Daniel. A Dolls House. February 16, 2004. Retrieved: 18/07/09.

Helping to Save the Rainforest :: Environment Environmental Pollution Preservation

Helping to Save the Rainforest   Ã¢â‚¬Å"Save the Rainforest.†Ã‚   â€Å"Don’t bungle the jungle.†Ã‚   We’ve all heard these sayings time and time again, but when we are at the store, about to purchase a nice entertainment center for our TVs and stereos, â€Å"How can we be sure that our money is supporting our social and political concerns?†Ã‚   (Stark 1)   Our efforts to save the rainforest aren’t as clear as they may seem.   It is difficult to tell where wood comes from and where it is produced.   Ã¢â‚¬Å"There isn’t a way for the individual to identify a good wood from the bad, well-managed forests from ill managed, both domestically and tropically,† said Scott Landis, President of the Woodworkers Alliance for Rainforest Products (WARP), a non-profit organization of woodworkers, instrument makers and architects and designers.   Landis suggests that as consumers, we should educate ourselves about the sources of products they sell.   By looking around for signs and labels to see if they indicate responsible use of the rainforest and its products.   Without a better understanding of how the forest works, what influences it creates, dynamics and how resistant it is, there is little probability of any future for the few forests that still remain.   It will be very difficult to change public opinions or remove some of the pressures forests face without attending a program of education.   Some of the pressures on the rainforest, such as the rise of changing cultivation and population, come from hunger promoted by unequal ownership.   (Park 31)   I propose that the government in Brazil take nationalistic siege on all lumber exportation to foreign nations. Governments spend a lot of money trying to help the ecology if rainforests, but apparently there has been little luck.   According to Chris Park in Tropical Rainforests, â€Å"There have been numerous calls for major investment of time, money and trained personnel into research of rainforest ecosystems.   While scientific research in recent decades has revealed a great deal about this unique and highly complicated ecosystem, important questions are still unanswered.   There are still many gaps we need to know how to better understand the structure and ecology of rainforests.   About 93 percent of the land are owned by only seven percent of the landowners. (Park 130)   In Brazil, only one percent of the farms occupies over forty three percent of the total farmland, forcing half of the farms to be squeezed onto less than three percent of the land and leaving about seven million families without land.

How Does Kazan Convey Ideas About Good and Evil in ‘on the Waterfront’? Essay

Elia Kazan’s portrayal of good and evil in ‘On the Waterfront’ is more than it meets the eye. Good and Evil appear in seperate characters and also at different times on the same characters. More importantly, Elia Kazan gets an important message across; No character is truly evil. Good is symbolised in numerous ways throughought the film. The church is one such example of this. It represents the highest order of purity and goodness, yet it is always on the background of the film. During Edie and Terry’s walk through the playground, the Church could be seen in the background, yet unlike other structures in the film such as the docks, the Church cannot be seen prominently, but rather it is mostly present in the background. Elia Kazan had perhaps used the Church to depict goodness as something present in all the characters, yet, much like the Church it is not always so prominent. Johnny Friendly is the primary antagonist ‘On the Waterfront’, however a question to be considered is that is he purely evil? Friendly’s name is not as ironic as it seems. It is true he is wicked enough to order chilling homicides and remain unperturbed afterwards, however he has a affection towards his underlings. After Friendly observes Terry being deeply shaken by his role in Joey’s death, he hands Terry a note of cash as a â€Å"present from your uncle Johnny. † This shows that Friendly has some level of compassion over his minions and appreciates their ‘good’ work. Despite some goodness inside him however, Friendly is still clearly a cold-blooded killer. Johnny Friendly’s menacing figure represents dictatorship in â€Å"On the Waterfront†. With a whole community of thousands working for him, Friendly still finds the need to murder the minority who disobey him despite having â€Å"the fattest piers and the fattest harbour in the world. † Although he has â€Å"two thousand deuce paying members: at his disposal, Friendly’s overpowering evil lusts for more dominance and this leads to the ultimate act of evil – the murders of multiple people. Although there is a flicker of goodness in him, Friendly remans a major source of evil in ‘On the Waterfront’. To the observant viewer, the presence of good and evil may be clear to see, yet it is the struggle between good and evil influence that is the platform of the film. The protagonist Terry Malloy is the tragic hero is entrapped in a battle between good and evil forces. The pure hearted Father Barry ad Edie Doyle attempt to rescue Terry from his conscience which constantly torments him by urging him to speak out the truth while the mob on the other hand attempt to influence him by providing threats and intimidating him. The mob goes so far as to murdering his brother in an attemt to break his spirit and also lure him to end his life too. In the end, the influence of good prevails and Terrt finally gives witness to the crimes of the mob. With his conscience cleared, Terry is now fianlly able to speak out against Friendly and the mob without loathing himself as he is no longer a â€Å"bum† in his own eyes. â€Å"On the Waterfront† is no film about Angels against Demons, but rather sheds light on the fact that good and evil are out there, yet is is upto us to allow either one to influence us. Similar to Edie, an individual may allow good forces such as the desire to uncover truth to affect them or they may allow evil forces such as greed to manipulate them and cause them to carry out needless, henious acts like Johnny Friendly. As viewers witness through Terry’s actions, in the end, ‘good’ and ‘evil’ are simply options. It is ultimately our choice to pick one to allow it to influence us. The choice is always ours to make.

Business Law - 614 Words

MEMO TO: Professor Michael E. Rychel FROM: Harmanpreet Kaur DATE: March 26 2014 SUBJECT: Difference between tax evasion, tax avoidance, and tax fraud? The times when taxes were first imposed on American Citizens, from that day people have been trying to find different ways to escape from taxes. While some taxpayers continue to find legal ways to avoid taxes on the other hand some choose to evade taxes, or not to pay at all. Three ways to avoid taxes are tax evasion, tax avoidance, and tax fraud. The distinguishes are: Tax Evasion It is an illegal practice where a person, organization, or corporation intentionally avoids paying their tax liability. However, typically tax evasion schemes involves an individual or†¦show more content†¦Even the use of loopholes which named because they provide legal means to legislative intent is not punishable by law. An example of Tax Avoidance is: Big Four accounting firms Ernst Young agreed to pay Federal prosecutors $123 million to settle criminal tax avoidance charge stemming from $2 billion in unpaid taxes from about 200 wealthy individuals advised by For Ernst Young senior patterns between 1999 and 2004. Tax Fraud It occurs when an individual or business entity willfully and intentionally falsifies information on a tax return in order to limit the amount of tax liability. Tax fraud essentially entails cheating on a tax returns in an attempt to avoid paying the entire tax obligation. There are many ways to do tax fraud, some of them are, including deliberately under reporting or omitting income, making false accounting entries, taking deductions that the taxpayers is not entitled to, claiming personal expenses as business expenses, or hiding assets. Tax fraud cheats the Government out of millions of dollars each year. It is illegal and punishable by fines, penalties, interest, or prison time. However, it is important to note that tax fraud is generally requires willful and intentional activity for the purpose of lowering a tax liability, not mistakes, or accidental misreporting. An example of Tax Fraud is: On September 2012 in Oklahoma City,Show MoreRelatedBusiness Law And Ethics : Ba ckoffice Business Brief1862 Words   |  8 Pages Running head: BACKOFFICE BUSINESS BRIEF 1 Business Law and Ethics BackOffice Business Brief Patten University BACKOFFICE BUSINESS BRIEF 2 Constitutional Rights and Guarantees BackOffice is a new startup business that will provide potential clients with an application (app) that woul d automate certain business functions. BackOffice will be selling the app to certain business clients that will use it to facilitate their customers’ transactions. It is important that the owner of this companyRead MoreLegal Underpinnings of Business Law Essay609 Words   |  3 PagesLegal Underpinnings of Business Law OMM 670: Legal Environment February 25, 2013 Legal Underpinnings of Business Law Business | Type of Business | Liability Exposure | Compare | Contrast | Tinker’s Home Security Service | Sole proprietorship | Unlimited | Monetary rewards are from both the Proprietor amp; business | Sole Liability | Tinker amp; Tailor’s Home Security Service | General partnership | Unlimited | All partners are responsible whether silent or active | If you areRead MoreLaw 531 Business Forms Worksheet1386 Words   |  6 Pagesï » ¿University of Phoenix Material Business Forms Worksheet There are seven forms of business: sole proprietorship, partnership, limited liability partnership, limited liability company (including the single member LLC), S Corporation, Franchise, and Corporation. 1. Research and provide three advantages and three disadvantages for each business form. 2. Provide a 100- to 200-word summary in which you provide an example business that you would start for each form. What is legally necessary toRead MoreBusiness Law3143 Words   |  13 Pages2012 – OCTOBER SEMESTER 2012 STUDENT NAME: CHU THI HONG TUYEN ID No.: 2448481 BMLW5103 – BUSINESS LAW ASSIGNMENT Question 1 Discuss the enforceability of an agreement which lacks consideration. Using legal authorities (relevant statutes and cases) to support your discussion. Answer: A valid contract is an agreement made between two or more parties that creates rights and obligations that are enforced by law. What does the consideration mean? And what does it effect to the agreement? ConsiderationRead MoreBusiness Law : Labor And Employment Law891 Words   |  4 PagesBusiness Law: Labor and Employment Law Each and every day business throughout the United States are met with challenging situations that are centered around labor and employment law. As the director of human resources for Company X, I have been tasked with analyzing three situations that may or may not violate any federal acts. The federal acts that will be considered are the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), and the Americans withRead MoreBusiness Law762 Words   |  4 PagesB Bai 1 : Business Law: 40. Principle of Law: In this case, Esposito hired Excel Construction Company to repair a porch roof. All terms of the agreement were specified in a written contract. And the dispute occurred when Excel had repaired the rear porch roof because in the agreement failed to specify whether it was the front or rear porch that needed repair. Under civil law, two parties here had signed a civil contract in writing. Because the contract failed to specify clearly front or rearRead MoreBusiness Law Development Of Mongolia2212 Words   |  9 PagesCourse Paper Myagmarsuren Jargal International American University BUS 540: Business Law for Managers Flavia LLoyd June 28, 2015 Business Law Development Issues in Mongolia Mongolia is a developing country, which is encountering challenges to develop modern business law. During the twentieth century, Mongolia had been a socialist country and developed almost fifty years of non-private property regime. However, the end of the twentieth century, the country changed its regime to democraticRead MoreBusiness Law1345 Words   |  6 PagesQn 1: Whether James can hold the Happy Holiday Hotel for the loss of his property under the common law? The issue of this case will be whether James can hold Happy Holiday Hotel responsible for the loss of his property notwithstanding the exemption clause found in the hotel rooms. Under the Exemption Clauses in Common Law, it states that in order for this clause to be valid, the clause must be included in the contract when the contract is made. If there is any attempt to include it in after theRead MoreBusiness Law1088 Words   |  5 Pagesconditional constitute consideration? Yes, such a promise consideration even if the condition is unlikely to occur. 3. What is the general rule about the adequacy of consideration? The adequacy of the consideration is irrelevant because the law does not prohibit bargains. 5. Is there consideration when a secured note for a lesser amount is given and accepted in discharge of an unsecured note for a greater amount? Explain. No, because if a secured not for a lesser amount is given andRead MoreBusiness Law2474 Words   |  10 Pagesnature of liability in negligence amp; (3.3) Explain how a business can be vicariously liable 4 (4.1) Apply the elements of the tort of negligence and defences in the above different business situations for the legal officer who is assigned to VJSC amp; (4.2) Apply the elements of vicarious liability in above different business situations for the legal officer who is assigned to VJSC 8 Conclusion 11 References 12 Introduction Law plays important roles to protect benefits, obligations and