Romeo And Juliet Essays (641 words) - Characters In Romeo And Juliet

Romeo And Juliet The tragedy of Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare is the most famous love story ever written. But this love had a fatal flaw, it had to end with death. Now people can argue either way why they died, was it fate of free will. But maybe a more important question is . . . . . .why they had to die? In the death of Romeo and Juliet it's true that free will did have a remarkably small part. The fact that they decided to get married in the first place presented many problems. A chose that Juliet made was to take the sleeping potion given to her by Friar Laurence. It was supposed to make sleep for 42 hour, but it was also going to give the elution that Juliet was dead. Romeo was going to hear about the whole plan form Friar Laurence through a letter (558). Another account of free will during the play was when Romeo decided to go to Juliet in Verona after being banished. He decided to go to Verona because of the news he received form Baltasar about Juliet lying dead in the Capulet tomb. When Romeo hear the news he responded with the following, "Well Juliet, I will lay with thee tonight." (572). The fact that free will didn't kill these two star - crossed lovers leaves fate as the murder. Fate first kicked in when their eyes first met at the Capulet party. They spoke, they wooed contentment was flouting through the air (503). But that happiness didn't last long, the reason for this was the fight that sparked between Mercutio, Tybalt and Romeo. During the course of the fight Tybalt killed Mercutio, then Romeo killed Tybalt in anger. Benvolio explains what happened that afternoon to the Prince. "Underneath whose arm an envious thrust from Tybalt hit the life of stout Mercutio, and then Tybalt fled, but by and by came back to Romeo, who had newly entertained revenge, and to 't they go like lightning. For ere I could draw to part them was stout Tybalt slain, and as he fell, did Romeo turn and fly (534). But an even larger set back occurred when Lord Capulet decided that he would marry his daughter (Juliet) to Paris. He changed the date from a few years to a few days. This created a problem because Juliet was already married to Romeo and was quite happy. The other half of the problem came in with the fact that Juliet couldn't tell her father of the marriage, and when she wouldn't consent to marrying Paris he became outraged (545). Problems grew after Juliet took the sleeping potion, and the letter informing Romeo about what was going on, never made it to Mantua. The letter stated that Juliet wasn't dead and that she would wake in 42 hours. The reason the letter never reach Romeo was that Friar John, who was supposed to deliver couldn't because he was quarantined after visiting some ill people. At that point no one would come and get the letter from him to deliver it because they did want to get sick aswell. (573). The final argument for fate killing Romeo and Juliet was Romeo killed himself before Juliet woke up. Romeo's lasted word were, "Here's to my love [drinks the poison] O true apothecary! Thy drugs are quick. Thus with a kiss I die." (578). While Juliet's look at death was quite similar with her last words were, "Yea, noise? Then I'll be brief. O happy dagger! [Snatching Romeo's dagger] This is my sheath. [Stabs herself] There rust, and let me die. [Falls on Romeo's body and dies.] (579). The whole idea that Romeo and Juliet were killed by fate was summed up in this statement that the Prince made at the end of the play. "A glooming peace this morning with it brings, the sun for sorrow will not show his head. Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things, some shall be pardoned and some punished. For never was a story of more woe than this of Juliet and her Romeo." (584).

What To Do If You Encounter Killer Bees

What To Do If You Encounter Killer Bees Even if you live in an area with African honeybees – better known as killer bees – the chances of your getting stung are rare. Killer bees dont look for victims to sting, and swarms of killer bees arent hiding in the trees just waiting for you to wander by so they can attack. Killer bees sting to defend their nests​ and do so aggressively. If you encounter aggressive bees around a nest or swarm, you are at risk for being stung. Heres what to do if you encounter killer bees: RUN! Seriously, run away from the nest or bees as quickly as you can. Bees use an alarm pheromone to alert other hive members of a threat, so the longer you hang around, the more bees will arrive, ready to sting you.If you have a jacket or anything else with you, use it to cover your head. Protect your eyes and face if at all possible. Of course, dont obstruct your vision if you are running.Get indoors as quickly as possible. If you arent near a building, get inside the nearest car or shed. Close the doors and windows to keep the bees from following you.If no shelter is available, keep running. African honey bees can follow you for as far as a quarter of a mile. If you run far enough, you should be able to lose them.Whatever you do, dont stay still if the bees are stinging you. These arent grizzly bears; they will not stop if you play dead.Dont swat at the bees or wave your arms to fend them off. That will only confirm that you are indeed a threat. Youre likely to be stung even more. Dont jump into a pool or other body of water to avoid the bees. They can and will wait for you to surface, and will sting you as soon as you do. You cant hold your breath long enough to wait them out, trust me.If someone else is being stung by killer bees and cannot run away, cover them with anything you can find. Do what you can to quickly cover any exposed skin or susceptible areas of their body, and then run for help as fast as you can. Once you are in a safe place, use a blunt object to scrape any stingers out of your skin. When an African honey bee stings, the stinger is pulled from its abdomen along with the venom sac, which can keep pumping venom into your body. The sooner you remove the stingers, the less venom will enter your system. If you were stung just once or a few times, treat the stings as you would regular bee stings and carefully monitor yourself for any unusual reactions. Wash the sting sites with soap and water to avoid infections. Use ice packs to reduce swelling and pain. Of course, if you are allergic to bee venom, seek medical attention immediately. If you suffered multiple stings, seek medical attention immediately. Sources: Africanized Honey Bees, San Diego Natural History Museum, accessed March 19, 2010Africanized Honey Bees, Ohio State University Extension, accessed March 19, 2010

Offensive and Otherwise Inappropriate German Words

Offensive and Otherwise Inappropriate German Words Warning: This article may contain  examples of the following language: unanstndig  dirty, obscene, indecent; improper, rude, ill-manneredunanstndige Wà ¶rter gebrauchen  Ã‚  to use four-letter words, bad languagedie Unanstndigkeit  (-en)  dirty joke, obscenityUnanstndigkeiten erzhlen  Ã‚  to tell dirty jokes You may find some of the words and expressions  contained in this German  glossary objectionable.  As with English, most should  only to be used when and if you really know what youre doing. This article isnt explicitly (ha) meant to promote the use of these expressions, but to arm you with information. As  Goethe  said, a lack of knowledge can be a dangerous thing.   Cursing and Swearing  (das Fluchen) While most swear words in English are sexual or have to do with your parentage, German leans more towards the scatological (having to do with excrement or feces). Although Germans sometimes borrow  the English f-word, the German version is rarely used in swearing. German terms roughly equal to American bullsh or British bollocks include:   der BockmistScheiß redenScheiße!Quatsch mit Soße Donnerwetter!  Darn it! Zum Donnerwetter!  , it depends on the tone of your voice and how it is said. As an interjection of acknowledgment, it is more like My word! You dont say. die Drecksau/der Dreckskerl  filthy swine, bastard die Hà ¶lle  hell   Ã‚  Ã‚  Fahr zur Hà ¶lle!   Go to hell!  Ã‚  Ã‚  Zur Hà ¶lle mit...   To hell with...  Ã‚  Ã‚  Sie machte ihm das Leben zur Hà ¶lle.   She made his life a living hell. NOTE: Avoid anglicisms like  was in der Hà ¶lle!  Most English hell expressions are Teufel expressions in German. Der Mist  is a mild German word meaning dung, manure, or rubbish/nonsense. However, when used in some compound words (der Mistkerl,  das Miststà ¼ck), it is no longer fit for polite society! der Mistkerl  bastard, dirty swinedas Miststà ¼ck  bastard (m.), bitch (f.) verdammt  damned, bloody Verdammt!   Damn!/DammitVerdammt noch mal!   Damn it all!/Damn it to hell!/Bloody hell! (Br.)Verdammter Mist!   Goddamn it!/Sod it! (Br.) verflucht!  damn! Verflucht noch mal!   For chrissake!/Goddamn it! der Scheiß  /  die Scheiße Variations of this German word [literally, sh, crap, damn, bloody (Br.)] are so ubiquitous as to warrant an entire section of its own.  It is important to know that the German and English versions of the s-word are not always equal. The English subtitles of German movies often mistranslate the German expletive  Scheiße!  Its use in German is frequently closer to English Damn! or Dammit! To say This town really sucks, you could say:  Diese Stadt ist echt Scheiße.  Although it sometimes isnt as strong a curse word as English Sh! that doesnt mean you should casually use  Ã¢â‚¬â€¹Scheiße!  in German. An expression such as  Dieses Scheißauto!  could mean This f-ing car! or This damned car! - depending on how it is said and by whom.   Scheiß-  prefix  lousy, shty, bloody (Br.), crappy, damned (thing).  This prefix, like its cousin above, often should be translated as damned (thing), or something more mild than you might think. For instance, when a German says  So ein Scheißwetter!, it only means that the weather is really bad: Such awful weather! By the same token,  Diese Scheißpolitiker!  means These damned politicians! (a universal complaint).   scheißegal  adj.  of no damned importanceDas ist mir  (doch)  scheißegal!  I dont (really) give a damn/f-/sh (about that)!scheißen  to sh, crapDu scheißt mich an!  Youre sh-in me!/Youre a pain in the ass!Ich scheiß drauf!  I dont give a damn/f-/sh (about that)!der Scheißkerl  bastard, son-of-a-bitch, motherf-er Obscene Hand Gestures While we dont include inappropriate gestures in this glossary, you should know that some hand signs or gestures are universal, but others are not. In some parts of the world, the American OK sign (finger and thumb forming an O) is an insult having to do with a body orifice. If a German taps his/her forehead with the index finger in someones direction, that is a bad thing (meaning the other person is an idiot), and punishable by a fine if a policeman sees it or someone files charges. Sexual Terms and Body Parts Many of the terms in this glossary relate to human sexuality. Some of them have a double meaning that you should be aware of. If you refer to an animals tail in German (der Schwanz), thats OK, but you should also know that the same term is a crude way of referring to the male sex organ. The German verb  blasen  can have many of the same multiple meanings that blow has in English. But if you want to enjoy a good German erotic novel, youll find some of that vocabulary here as well. blasen  Ã‚  to blow (fellatio) jemandem einen blasen   to go down on s.o., do fallatioSie hat ihm einen geblasen.   She gave him a... ficken  Ã‚  to fk, have sex (vulgar),  mit jemandem ficken   to fk s.o. NOTE:  The German forms of  ficken  are used only in a sexual sense. Most English fs: Fk him!   Der kann mich doch am Arsch lecken!; This f-ing car!   Dieses Scheißauto!; We were just f-ing with you.   Wir haben dich nur verarscht.; Fk off!   Verpiss dich! geil  horny.  This word (along with  supergeil) has become slang for cool or great in German.  Das ist ja geil!   Thats really cool! die Eier  (pl.)  balls, nuts (lit.  eggs) einhandsegeln  (teen slang)  to jerk off, wank, spank the monkey einparken  (teen slang)  to have sex, get laid, bang die Kiste  boobs, tits; (big) buttDie hat ne große Kiste.   Shes got big tits.Note: In some regions, this can mean a big butt rather than boobs. knallen  to bang, screw der Knutschfleck  (-en)  hickie, love bite The Bottom Line der Arsch   ass, arse; butt.am Arsch der Welt in the middle of nowhere, in a Godforsaken holeam/im Arsch sein to be screwed upDas geht mir am Arsch vorbei! I dont give a sh (about that)!in den Arsch gehen to get screwed upDu kannst mich! (am Arsch lecken) You can kiss my ass!Leck mich am Arsch! Kiss my ass!/F- off!Setz deinen Arsch in Bewegung! Get your ass in gear!er Arschkriecher/der Arschlecker (-)  ass-kisser, brown-nosedas Arschloch  a-holeder Po  bottom, behind, butt kommen  to come, have an orgasm der/das Kondom  condom.  Also known by many slang terms:  Gummi,  Pariser, etc. die Mà ¶pse  (pl.)  tits, boobs pissen  to piss, pee.   sich verpissen   to piss off, f- off der Sack  (Scke)  bag, sac, sack; scrotum, balls (testicles); bastard, bugger, sod ein fauler Sack  a lazy bum, lazy bastard/bugger (degree of harshness depends on circumstances/tone of voice)eine faule Socke  a lazy bum (less harsh than fauler Sack) die Sau  sow, bitch, bastard.  alte Landsau  stupid old bitch, dumb bastard (lit., old country sow).  Also see Schwein below!  In German, words related to the pig (sow, swine) fill in for English terms of illegitimacy (bastard, son-of-a..., etc.).   Sau-  prefix  bloody, damn, lousydie Sauarbeit  damned/bloody/lousy workdas Sauwetter  damned/bloody/lousy weather die Scham  shame; private parts, genitals, vulva (fem.) das Schamhaar  pubic hair scharf  hot, horny, sexually aroused Ich bin scharf auf ihn.  I have the hots for him. die Scheide  Ã‚  vagina.  The  Rammstein  song lyric bis der Tod der Scheide is a play on this word and the phrase bis der Tod euch scheidet (till death you do part) in their song Du hast. See  full lyrics. der Schwanz, die  Schwnze, das  Schwnzchen (diminutive)  tail, slang for penis das Schwein  pig, bastard, son of a bitch, swine.  This is one of the worst words in German! NEVER use it (or its compounds) unless you know what youre doing, and probably not even then! Ironically,  Schwein haben  means to be lucky:  Wir haben Schwein gehabt.   We were lucky. (We came out smelling like a rose.) Schweine:  So eine Schweinerei!  How disgusting!/What a dirty trick! der Strich  prostitution; red-light district.  auf den Strich gehen  to be a prostitute, ply her / his wares der Teufel  devil Zum Teufel!   Dammit!  Ã‚  Ã‚  Wer zum Teufel hat das gemacht?   Who the hell did that?  Ã‚  Ã‚  Der Teufel soll mich holen, wenn...   Ill be damned if...  Ã‚  Ã‚  Geh zum Teufel!   Go to hell!  Ã‚  Ã‚  Hol dich der Teufel!   Go to hell!  Ã‚  Ã‚  Scher dich zum Teufel!   Go to hell!  Ã‚  Ã‚  Der Teufel wird los sein.   The sts gonna hit the fan. All hells gonna break lose. ​die Unaussprechlichen  (pl.)  ones unmentionables (humorous) die Zuckerstange  (slang)  penis (candy cane) German Slang Terms for Masturbation Lest you think that German has an abnormally large number of terms for masturbation,  let me point out that English does as well. sich abzapfenaus dem Handgelenk schà ¼ttelnden Fleischtopf rà ¼hrenden Schimmel schà ¼ttelnden Trumpf in die Hand nehmendie Hnde in den Schoß legendie Ladung là ¶schen, entsaftendie HandmassageHuptling Schnelle Vorhauthobelnkrumme Finger machenOld Schà ¼ttelhandsein eigenes Sà ¼ppchen kochenselbst ist der Mannsich einen runterholensich einen von der Palme schà ¼ttelnsich entschleimensich Luft machenTaschenbillarddas ÃÅ"bel an der Wurzel packenwichsen Derogatory Terms for  Other People  (Xenophobia,  der Auslnderhass) Like English and other languages, German  has many derogatory and insulting terms for groups of people most of which, not surprisingly, should be avoided at all times.  Some Germans, Austrians, and Swiss, particularly members of right-wing (rechtsextreme), neo-Nazi, or other hate groups, express their dislike of foreigners and other enemy categories (leftists, women, gays) with derogatory German slang terms. Because of their inflammatory nature, we have included only a few terms here, but others are easy enough to find elsewhere online. Of interest, the simple German phrase Im proud to be a German â€Å"Ich bin stolz, ein Deutscher zu sein.† is considered a typical German right-wing slogan.  While in many countries, such a statement is considered normal and patriotic, in Germany it has overtones going back to the Nazi era.   Other phrases associated with right-wing extremist groups include the following: der Hitlergruß: Nazi salute (Hitler salute).  A right-wing symbol of neo-Nazi groups such as the skinheads in Germany. Any display of Nazi symbols, the swastika, Nazi flags, or Nazi-related regalia is against the law in Germany.Unarische  non-AryansUndeutsche  un-GermansRotfaschisten  red fascistsZecken  ticks, blood-suckersRechte  (Rightists)Faschos  fascistsGlatzen  skinheads (baldies)Neonazis  neo-NazisRechtsextremisten  extreme right-wingersSkinheads  skinheadsUnrechtssystem  unjustice systemUnterrassen  sub-racesweißer Spiesser  WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) More Insults Subkulturen  (Subcultures, e.g., Punks, Goths, etc.)Dekadente  decadentsAsseln/Assis/Asoziale  asocialsVertreter der Wirtschaft  (Business People)Kapital- und Politbonzen  capitalistic and political fat-catsLinke  (Leftists)der Piefke  (PEEF-kah)  Kraut, Heini, Jerry (German person).  Austrians use this word as a disparaging term for a German, somewhat like the Mexican use of gringo for an American. Even in Germany, a  Piefke  is a pompous idiot, so it is not a word to be used lightly.  Ein kleiner Piefke  is a little pipsqueak. Bodily Functions der Pups  fartfurzen  to fart, cut onepupsen  to cut one, fartdie Kacke  caca, crap, sh. Example:  dann ist aber die Kacke am Dampfen.  | Then the sh will really hit the fan.die Flitzerkacke  (teen slang)  the shs, diarrhea (der Durchfall)kacken  to crap, poop, sh

Unit 4 Group Project Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Unit 4 Group Project - Essay Example The top priority goes to factors like availability of career opportunities, nature of climatic conditions, status of crime rates, cost of living, educational, healthcare, transportation and entertainment facilities etc. These days, people are much conscious of the environmental concerns also and, therefore, like to live in cities that are pollution free. If one analyses the conditions in the city of San Diego from these perspectives it will come to fore that this wonderful city not only fulfills most of the conditions that make it a good dwelling option, but also has several other features that enhances it livability. Economic aspect is the first consideration for a person before taking a decision about the city he or she chooses to live in. People usually perceive economic stability as the criteria towards a better way of life. Therefore, a city that offers ample career opportunities will attract people who are talented, and they in turn will contribute to its progress. San Diego’s status as a blend of prospering industries like biotechnology, biosciences, computer and electronics, wireless cellular, submarine and shipbuilding, financial business etc make it a hot favorite of skilled workforce. This aspect enhances its acceptance as one of the most livable cities in the US. Next basic consideration for a person while choosing a city to live in is the educational avenues available there. In this context, San Diego features the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), which offers high quality education with state of the art technological support. Apart from this, there are several other accredited schools and colleges, including law schools and museums. Located in beautiful Balboa Park, the Museum of San Diego History presents the colorful and diverse history of the region, interpreting San Diegos growth since the 1840s. (Museum

Fire Protection Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3750 words

Fire Protection - Research Paper Example To understand fire, there is need to analyze the paradigms, which revolve around the origin of fire in eth living world, and the significance of fire to the human race. It is important however to note that these different paradigms are different and coherent on their own, but significantly insufficient on their own self. Thus, fire may assume many definitions, which is only suitable for the specific discipline framed by the condition outside the phenomenon (Fire Research Report). Such broad definitions introduce questions relating to the real fundamentals of fire, and the characteristics that people should undertake to control and use it. This paper seeks to define and analyze the fire problem, explore some of the potential solutions to the problem, and review the first steps that will initiate the solution to the problem. Introduction Fire is among the fundamental basics in the world, both for personal and industrial use. The phenomenon is commonplace and among the elements that sus tain humans in earth. Picture a world with no fire, which means there would be no cooking and other necessary processes that result from combustion or burning. Fire has numerous definitions depending on the discipline of concern. Essentially, fire is the process of burning or combustion in which chemical combination of components with oxygen takes place to produce light, smoke, and heat. However, it is common for most disciplines to have their own definition that conforms to their condition frame that lie outside the fire itself, and which seemingly poses no intrinsic intellectual identity. Such a wide and varying definition of eth phenomenon raises certain questions, which include the real fundamentals of fire and the characteristics that people should undertake to use and control it (Pyne 271). Such founding concerns seemed like illogical arguments in the initial studies on fire and its management. Then, fire was simply there, flaring and smoldering across the earth, and there was need to determine its direction, its fierce, and its speed, and subsequently devise means to stop its spread. With time, other questions emerged, especially concerning economical and ecological, though with reference to the conception that fire was embedded in physical sciences. Fire had similar impacts to the society and biota as windstorms and floods did, yet this did not provide an answer to the question of fire management. To understand fire and perhaps achieve a viable fire protection strategy, there is need to understand the three paradigms of fire: physical, cultural, and biological. Nevertheless, here is a discussion on the basics of fire (Coon 127). The Triangle of Fire Fire requires three elements to initiate. This essentially refers to the triangle of fire. If any of the elements is missing, then fire will not ignite, or if already burning, will quench the flames. These three elements are fuel, oxygen, and heat. Fire needs some consumable elements to ignite or to continu e burning. This consumable material or element is the fuel, which may be a gas, a liquid, or a solid. Furthermore, fire requires oxygen to burn. Removing oxygen from the fire will put off the flames. In technical terms, this is what experts call ‘quenching’ a fire. In atmospheres with less than 16% of oxygen, fires will not burn or combust (Coon 164). Heat refers to the energy that the fire requires to burn, without which the flames dies. The fire triangle simply shows the elements that must be present before a fire starts. Fig 1: The

Understanding Leadership Styles Essay Example for Free

Understanding Leadership Styles Essay There are a number of factors that will influence the style of leadership a leader may choose, such as: The working environment, The task or project that is being tackled, The staff themselves and their preferred style of working, along with their personal traits and qualities How do you determine what is an appropriate style? Any leader uses a range of different styles at different times during the course of a single day. Decisions have to be made and it may be appropriate for different styles of leadership at different times, and for different situations during that day. Another factor that has to be considered when choosing a leadership style is that the leadership style at the beginning should be consistent with what people in the organization expect. Transactional leadership This is done by enticing staff with rewards such as bonuses, prizes, something that will be of benefit to the staff member; these are achieved by setting targets. The outcome of this will be that the target is achieved but the morale of the team may be affected with some doing very well and gaining great recognition, others not so well which can demoralise the staff and affect their enthusiasm for future tasks. Transformation leadership This is a beliefs and values type of leading getting the team to believe the vision of the final aim. This is done by talking and listening to the team and being positive and enthusiastic about the aim. One of the benefits of this type of leadership in comparison with Transactional leadership is that no one feels like they are being singled out for under achieving as they are all working together and believe in the leaders vision, this is done by encouraging individuals values and enthusiasm for the task. Authentic Leadership This is a leader who is extremely good at what they do whilst remaining grounded and in touch with their workforce, an assumed leader rather than elected. They can inspire their staff to achieve great things with their passion commitment and drive, whilst still connecting with their team by showing their appreciation and encouragement to team members. Autocratic Leadership Autocratic leaders insist on doing it all themselves. They have all the power, make all the decisions, and dont often tell anyone else about what theyre doing. An autocratic leader often maintains their authority by force, intimidation, threats, reward and punishment, or position. Although they may or may not have a clear vision, and may or may not be steering the organization in the right direction, they are not concerned with whether anyone else agrees with what them or not. One positive with autocratic leadership is that it allows quick decision-making, and eliminates arguments over how and why things get done. On the negative it may reduce the likelihood of getting a range of different ideas from different people, and can make people feel as though they are being treated badly, or as if they dont matter. If, as is often true, the leader is concerned with his own power and status, hell be looking over his shoulder, and moving to squelch any opposition to him or his ideas and decisions. Innovation or the use of others ideas is only permissible if its part of the leaders plan. Effects on the organization. Autocratic leaders often leave fear and mistrust in their wake. Others in the organization tend to copy their protection of their position, and their distrust of others ideas and motives. Often, autocratically -led organizations are not particularly supportive of personal relationships, but much more keyed to chain-of-command. Everyone has her own sphere, and protects it at all costs. Communication tends to go in only one direction up as a result of which rumor can become the standard way of spreading news in the organization. At its best (and there are decent autocratic leaders see the box directly below ), autocratic leadership provides a stable and secure work environment and decisive, effective leadership. All too often, however, it can sacrifice initiative, new ideas, and the individual and group development of staff members for the predictability of a highly structured, hierarchical environment where everyone knows exactly what hes supposed to do, and follows orders without  question. Although the above paints a pretty bleak picture, many autocratic leaders are not hated and feared, but rather esteemed, and even loved. It depends on their own personalities like anyone else, they can be nice people, or highly charismatic, or even willing to listen to and act on others ideas on the organization itself (in the military, most soldiers want someone firmly in charge), on the quality of their decisions, and on the needs of the people they lead. If theyre generally decent and not abusive, make good deci sions for the organization, and fulfil the parent-figure or authority -figure image that most people in the organization are looking for, they can be both effective and well-respected. 2. Managerial. The leader who sees herself as a manager is concerned primarily with the running of the organization. Where its going is not at issue, as long as it gets there in good shape. She may pay attention to relationships with and among staff members, but only in the service of keeping things running smoothly. Depending upon the nature and stability of the organization, her main focus may be on funding, on strengthening the organizations systems and infrastructure (policies, positions, equipment, etc.), or on making sure day-to-day operations go well (including making sure that everyone is doing what hes supposed to). If shes efficient, a managerial leader will generally be on top of whats happening in the organization. Depending on the size of the organization and her management level, shell have control of the budget, know the policies and procedures manual inside out, be aware of whos doing his job efficiently and whos not, and deal with issues quickly and firmly as they co me up. What she wont do is steer the organization. Vision isnt her business; maintaining the organization is. Effects on the organization. In general, a well-managed organization, regardless of its leadership style, is a reasonably pleasant place to work. Staff members don t have to worry about ambiguity, or about whether theyll get paid. As long as oversight is relatively civil no screaming at people, no setting staff members against one another things go along on an even keel. Good managers even try to foster friendly relationships with and among staff, because they make the organization work better. On the other hand, good management without a clear vision creates an organization with no sense of purpose. The organization may simply act to support the status quo, doing what it has always done in order to keep  things running smoothly. That attitude neither fosters passion in staff members, nor takes account of the changing needs (and they do change) of the target population or the community. The organization may do what it does efficiently and wellbut what it does may not be what it should be doing, and it wont be examining that possibility any time soon. Obviously, the leader of any organization as well as any other administrator has to be a manager at least some of the time. Many are in fact excellent managers, and keep the organization running smoothly on a number of levels. The issue here is the style that person adopts as a leader. If she sees management as her primary purpose, shes a managerial leader, and will have a very different slant on leadership than if her style is essentially democratic, for instance. 3. Democratic. A democratic leader understands that there is no organization without its people. He looks at his and others positions in terms of responsibilities rather than status, and often consults in decision-making. While he solicits, values, and takes into account others opinions, however, he sees the ultimate responsibility for decision-making as hi s own. He accepts that authority also means the buck stops with him. Although he sees the organization as a cooperative venture, he knows that he ultimately has to face the consequences of his decisions alone. Democratic leadership invites the participation of staff members and others, not only in decision-making, but in shaping the organizations vision. It allows everyone to express opinions about how things should be done, and where the organization should go. By bringing in everyones ideas, it enriches the organizations possibilities. But it still leaves the final decisions about what to do with those ideas in the hands of a single person. Some models of democratic leadership might put the responsibility in the hands of a small group a management team or executive committee rather than an individual. Effects on the organization. Democratic leadership, with its emphasis on equal status, can encourage friendships and good relationships throughout the organization. (In more hierarchical organizations, clerical staff and administrators are unlikely to socialize, for instance; in a democratically-led organization, such socialization often happens.) It helps people feel valued when their opinions are solicited, and even more so if those opinions are incorporated into a final decision or policy. What a democratic leadership doesnt necessarily do although it can is  establish staff ownership of the organization and its goals. Although everyone may be asked for ideas or opinions, not all of those are used or incorporated in the workings of the organization. If there is no real discussion of ideas, with a resulting general agreement, a sense of ownership is unlikely. Thus, democratic leadership may have some of the drawbacks of autocratic leadership a lack of buy-in without the advantages of quick and clear decision-making that comes with the elimination of consultation. 4. Collaborative. A collaborative leader tries to involve everyone in the organization in leadership. She is truly first among equals, in that she may initiate discussion, pinpoint problems or issues that need to be addressed, and keep track of the organization as a whole, rather than of one particular job. But decisions are made through a collaborative process of discussion, and some form of either majority or consensus agreement. Toward that end, a collaborative leader tries to foster trust and teamwork among the staff as a whole. A collaborative leader has to let go of the need for control or power or status if she is to be effective. Her goal is to foster the collaborative process, and to empower the group whether the staff and others involved in an organization, or the individuals and organizations participating in a community initiative to control the vision and the workings of the organization. She must trust that, if people have all the relevant information, theyll make good decisionsand she must make sure that they have that information, and provide the facilitation that assures those good decisions. Effects on the organization. Collaborative leadership comes as close as possible to ensuring that members of the organization buy into its vision and decisions, since they are directly involved in creating them. It comes closest to the goal of servant leadership explored in the previous section (Please see Chapter 13, Section 2: Servant Leadership: Accepting and Maintaining the Call of Service), and it also comes closest to reflecting the concepts of equality and empowerment included in the philosophy and miss ion of so many grass roots and community-based organizations. It thus removes much of the distrust that often exists between line staff and administrators. David Chrislip and Carl E. Larson, in Collaborative Leadership How Citizens and Civic Leaders Can Make a Difference, equate collaborative leadership not only with servant leadership, but with transformational (see below) and  facilitative leadership as well. They identify four characteristics of the collaborative leader: * Inspiring commitment and action. The collaborative leader helps people develop the vision and passion to start and maintain the work. * Leading as a peer problem solver. The collaborative leader facilitates problem solving by modeling and teaching a process, and by helping others bring their experience and ideas to bear. * Building broad-based involvement. The collaborative leader invites everyone concerned into an inclusive process. * Sustaining hope and participation. Reaching goals may take a long time. The collaborative leader both helps the group set interim goals so it can see progress, and, by example and in other ways, helps to maintain the passion and commitment to keep going when theres no end in sight. Collaborative leaders also generally foster close relationships among staff members, making for more communication and cross-fertilization in their work, and leading to more effective ways to accomplish the organizations goals. On the down side, management can be neglected in favor of building a collaborative organization. Even more to the point, collaborative decision-making can be excruciating. Depending upon the group, ideas can be talked to death, and insignificant disagreements about insignificant areas of policy can take hours to resolve. Collaborative decision-making can be democratic based on a majority vote after discussion or dependent on arriving at consensus, with a range of possibilities in between. Consensus decision-making is particularly difficult, in that it requires everyone to agree before a decision can be made. A single determined individual can derail the process indefinitely. Even at its best, a consensus process can take inordinate amounts of time, and try the patience of all involved. Its not impossible to employ, but it takes real commitment to the ideal of consensus, and enormous patience. In practice, true consensus decision-making is most often used in collective organizations, which are significantly different from collaborative ones, and often involve everyone in leadership. Another way of looking at leadership style A different view, popularized by James MacGregor Burns, contrasts two styles of leadership: transactional and transformational. Transactional leadership, as its name implies, views leadership as based on transactions  between leader and followers. The leader sees human relations as a series of transactions. Thus rewards, punishments, reciprocity, exchanges (economic, emotional, physical) and other such transactions are the basis of leadership. In simplest terms, I lead this organization by paying you and telling you what you need to do; you respond by doing what you need to do efficiently and well, and the organization will prosper. Transformational leadership looks at leadership differently. It sees a true leader as one who can distill the values and hopes and needs of followers into a vision, and then encourage and empower followers to pursue that vision. A transactional leader thinks of improvement or development as doing the same thing better: an organization that reaches more people, a company that makes more money. A transformational leader thinks about changing the world, even if only on a small scale. Combining the two views of leadership style These two ways of looking at leadership style are not mutually exclusive: in fact, its easier to look at leadership in the context of both. Assuming, as almost all leadership theorists do, that transformational is either better than, or a necessary addition to, transactional leadership, what elements go into creating a transformational leader? What styles are transformational leaders likely to employ, and how? Elements of transformational leadership The transformational leader conceives of leadership as helping people to create a common vision and then to pursue that vision until its realized. She elicits that vision from the needs and aspirations of others, gives it form, and sets it up as a goal to strive for. The vision is not hers: it is a shared vision that each person sees as his own. Martin Luther Kings overwhelming I Have A Dream speech derived its power not only from the beauty of his oratory, but from the fact that it crystallized the feelings of all those citizens, of all races, who believed that racism was a great wrong. In that speech, King spoke with the voices of the hundreds of thousands who stood before the Lincoln Memorial, and of millions of others who shared in his vision. That speech remains as the defining moment of the Civil Rights struggle, and defined King who had already proved his mettle in Birmingham and elsewhere as a transformational leader. The conception behind transformational leadership is thu s providing and working toward a  vision, but also has elements of empowerment, of taking care of people, and even of task orientation. The job of the transformational leader is not simply to provide inspiration and then disappear. It is to be there, day after day, convincing people that the vision is reachable, renewing their commitment, priming their enthusiasm. Transformational leaders work harder than anyone else, and, in the words of a spiritual, keep their eyes on the prize. The methods that transformational leaders might use to reach their goals can vary. Theyll virtually always include involving followers in the goal, as well as charisma, which comes, if not from personal characteristics, from the ability to put a mutual vision into words, and to move a group toward the realization of that vision. Transformational leaders may also use sharing power, setting an example, and/or persuasion to help move a group toward its goal. What style does all that imply? The managerial style is perhaps least appropriate to transformational leadership, since it pays no attention to vision. The autocratic pays little attention to the ideas of others, and is not generally congenial to the transformational leader. On the other hand, there was Hitler, who tapped into the deepest emotions of those he led, and voiced them in a frightening but highly effective way. There is no guarantee that a transformational leader will work for the betterment of humanity, although he may c ouch his vision in those terms. The intersection of the transformational and the autocratic is not impossible, but it usually has, at best, mixed results. Fidel Castro initiated and has maintained desperately-needed land, education, health, and other reforms in Cuba, for which he is still revered by much of the islands population. He also eliminated any vestige of political freedom, imprisoned and executed dissenters and political opponents, and was at least partially responsible for destroying much of Cubas economic base in the name of ideological purity. As with the four styles described earlier, there is no guarantee that either a transactional or transformational leader will be an effective one. The democratic and collaborative styles are both better possibilities for transformational leadership. Both allow for input from everyone, and both encourage participation in the realization of long-term goals. It can be difficult for a highly motivated, charismatic leader to operate in the collaborative mode, but it can also be tremendously satisfying. There is an argument to be made  that, because of the high degree of ownership of the vision in a collaboratively-run organization, the collaborative style could be the most successful for transformational leadership. As noted above, David Chrislip and Carl Larson actually see collaborative and transformational leadership as essentially the same.  and of course the leaders qualities and personal traits are a major factor, whether they are confident , inspirational, approachable, committed, knowledgeable, disciplined, open minded, responsible, positive, energising , trustworthy,

The Cherry Orchard :: essays research papers

In drama â€Å" The Cherry Orchard† , Lopakhin and Madame Ranevsky are clashing individuals, who are not to be judged as either good or bad. Both characters are human, having honorable traits. Lopakhin and Madame Ranevsky's characters are incompatible in the other's mind. Madame Ravensky is a member of the falling aristocracy who is a lost romantic trapped in a fantasy world on the orchard while forgetting her troubles in the "real" world. Lopakhin is a money driven, sometimes vulgar, and socially rising individual. Lopakhin is trying to make a future by overcoming his past, but remains genuine and practical in his offering help. The orchard is a focal piece in the play, hence the name "The Cherry Orchard." The orchard is to be sold in a month after Madame Ravensky's arrival. Lopakhin believes that the only way the orchard estate can be saved is by chopping down the cherry trees and breaking up the property, which he intends to do if he buys the orchard. Madame Ravensky would rather the orchard be lost completely than changed from how it will remain in her memories forever. The orchard haunts Madame Ravensky. The orchard is where her son died, which is the saddest thing in her life, but at the same time the orchard was where Madame Ravensky grew up. She remembers all the innocence she had at the orchard, and the orchard would not be the same if it changed. No one can bring back the orchard in her family and she won't save it because the orchard is merely a memory. She is dropping in class as seen in her fifth floor apartment, but will still put on a pitying facade shown by her tipping a rupel. She seems ignorant, yet confident in her impracticality, because she loves the orchard so much but does not want to save it. This is true because Madame Ravensky may not want to save it. Her son died on the orchard as well as the orchard is where she used to live prosperously and like a little girl in her innocence and no worries. It is conceivable that she may not want to save the orchard and just keep it in her memories as she moves back to France excepting her fall in society but still living, acting wealthy. She the orchard reminds Madame Ravensky of the romantic times of her life and wants to hold onto them one last time.