Comparing Death in D.H. Lawrence’s The Horse Dealer’s Daughter and Kath

Comparing Death in D.H. Lawrence’s The Horse Dealer’s Daughter and Katherine Mansfield’s The Garden Party Controlling the movements of the short stories, death is a regnant theme in D.H. Lawrence’s â€Å"The Horse Dealer’s Daughter† and Katherine Mansfield’s â€Å"The Garden Party.† Death brings forth consciousness and it excites the need for an epiphany within the protagonists. To a lesser extent, death creates tremors in the worlds of the antagonists. Death furthermore makes the indifferences of the secondary characters more pronounced. Affecting the lives of the protagonists, the antagonists, and the secondary characters of these two short stories, death plays an integral role in the themes of these works. Lawrence’s â€Å"The Horse Dealer’s Daughter† was originally called â€Å"The Miracle,† marking the protagonist’s rebirth of love out of death. Mabel, the twenty-seven year old spinster, is revived physically and spiritually after her submergence in the â€Å"dead cold pond† (2337). For a decade, Mabel played housekeeper for her â€Å"ineffectual brothers† and although she was not happy, the â€Å"sense of money†¦kept her proud, confident†(2334). After the death of Mabel’s father, the family’s horse-dealing business collapses and Mabel becomes â€Å"mindless and persistent, [enduring] from day to day† (2335). Distant from her brothers and receiving no visitors other than dealers and â€Å"coarse men† (2334), Mabel concludes that her life is like a barren field. Even though Mabel reassures herself that she â€Å"would always hold the keys of her own situation† (2335), she has a lready died a spiritual death – a death that is mirrored by the imageries of the desolate house and the â€Å"sloping, dank, winter-dark fields† (2334). Mabel does not have any hopes for ... ... resonates throughout both short stories and it spurs the growths of the protagonists and antagonists, characters who reach new heights of understanding about themselves and others. These characters are also able to resolve the peace with death, the purgative process that transforms them. The secondary characters in these two stories are unfazed by death, thus uncovering their insensitivity towards the loss of others. Albeit tragic in many ways, â€Å"The Horse Dealer’s Daughter† and â€Å"The Garden Party† reveal glimmers of hope and humanity in the shadow of death. Works Cited Lawrence, D.H. â€Å"The Horse Dealer’s Daughter.† 1922. Norton Anthology of English Literature. 7th ed. 2 vols. New York: Norton, 2000, 2: 2330-2341. Mansfield, Katherine. â€Å"The Garden Party.† 1921, 1922. Norton Anthology of English Literature. 7th ed. 2 vols. New York: Norton, 2000, 2: 2423-2433.

Dominant Images of Women and Gender Construction

Introduction Women in society are viewed as subordinates to men. Women are expected to listen, sit and wait for the men. There are examples of the subordination of women everywhere you look. In literature, the media and different societies all over the globe, women are portrayed as lesser than men. In the past, many Eastern and Western societies did not allow women to be educated due to the fact that men thought women should not have the knowledge and be able to use their knowledge in any way. Men treated women in such a primitive manner.All the females needed to know were the basics of keeping house, raising children, and following their husband’s orders. In section 2, I will describe two dominant imageries of women. I will provide modern day examples of these two dominant images which I chose to discuss. I will discuss how these images co-play with the mechanisms of gender construction. There will be a feed-back loop on the effects of expectations of women due to these 2 typ es of imagery. 2. Women as Sex Objects Women are often viewed as sex objects.One reason why men view women as sex objects is because men use women to reproduce and without women, there will be no way to have more children. Another reason why men view women as sex objects is because it makes them feel more superior to women. This is especially true in the porn industry. Pornography constructs women as what men want sexually. Pornography is the answer to the fantasies of men. Women are constantly being dominated by men and used to satisfy the men’s desires. In many cases, women who are perceived as â€Å"dangerous† are often made to appear less threatening, more childlike.Women who are perceived to be too pure are portrayed to be more â€Å"bad†. Many antipornography feminists protest against pornography because it degrades women and promotes violence against women. Overall, pornography radiates a bad image of women to the world. As a result of women being viewed as sex objects, men acquire a certain expectation from women to act and behave the way women are portrayed in pornography. Sometimes, men take pornography scenes too literally and are tempted to re-enact the scenes out, giving life to these fantasies. In MacKinnon’s, Pornography, Civil Rights, and â€Å"Speech†: The books that were ound with this man were: Violent Stories of Kinky Humiliation, Violent Stories of Dominance and Submission – you think feminists made up these words? – Bizarre Sex Crimes, Shamed Victims, and Water Sports Fetish, Enemas and Golden Showers. The Minnesota Supreme Court said, â€Å"It appears that in committing these various acts, the defendant was giving life to some stories he had read in various pornographic books. †(1993: 379). Women as Earth Mothers Ever since ancient times, women have been viewed as earth mothers because they are considered to be closer to nature.Staying at home, having kids, raising the kids, teachin g, cooking and cleaning – these are all the things that are expected naturally from women. According to anthropologist Sherry Ortner: Women are universally devalued and this is tied to the symbolic association of women and â€Å"nature†. (1974: 29). She argued nature is controlled by culture by means of symbol and artifacts. In her sense, â€Å"culture† is associated with human consciousness and the products of humans, such as technology and thoughts which humans use to control â€Å"nature†.This means that culture is superior to nature because it can form and shape nature any way it wants to shape it according to the needs or wishes of humans. As earth mothers, women are associated with â€Å"nature† and men have been associated with â€Å"culture†; so therefore, men are seen as superior to women and men can easily control women. Women are considered closer to nature in 3 ways. One is due to their ability to bear children. To be able to rep roduce makes women a step closer to nature than men. Another reason is based on the fact that women are caretakers or infants and children.They are nurturing individuals who take care of children who are too young to acquire cultural values so this makes children closer to nature. The women are viewed as even closer to nature because they are taking care of these young children who have yet to acquire culture. The third way women are seen as earth mothers is because women deal with more concrete issues such as taking care of the children, taking care of her husband, and housework. As a result of women being viewed as earth mothers, the women act the role while the men expect the women to have kids and nurture the family.If this standard expectation is not followed, society will criticize the individuals. 3. Conclusion There are many dominant images of women. The main ones I chose to discuss are women portrayed as subordinate sex objects and women portrayed as nurturing earth mothers . The world is still filled with the idea that women are subordinates compared to men and it will be a tough fight for feminists; but little by little, progress is being made. Soon, not only women are going to be viewed as the caretakers of the family – men are slowly adopting the roles women are currently playing. Society is gradually changing.

Is Google Making Us Stupid - 1220 Words

Sandra Cortes Professor Stansbury English 101 7 A.M. 7 September 2015 Is Google Making Us Stupid? In Carr’s article â€Å"Is Google Making Us Stupid?†, he claims that Google is making us think differently. He tells us about his own troubles and those of his colleagues, that they can no longer deep read or deep think. Carr gives examples from the past and connects them to what is happening in our present. He also provides a look into what our future may look like with our continued use of technology in our everyday lives. Carr delivers many convincing points in his article and really explains to the reader that their electronic devices and the Internet are creating a shallower person. He provides an insight to the other side of his argument, the side that believes technology is changing our world for the better. Both sides of the argument can be understood. However, Carr’s side of the argument persuades me more to become a skeptic of new advances. Technology is changing the way we think, act, and connect with each other; the more advanced we become the more disconnected we get. In the beginning of the article, Carr reflects on times where he has not been able to read lengthy articles all the way through. He provides anecdotes from other ex-deep-thinkers, â€Å"Bruce Friedman, who blogs regularly about the use of computers in medicine, also described how the InternetShow MoreRelatedIs Google Making Us Stupid?1240 Words   |  5 Pagesone idea to be represented in many different ways. Both Nicholas Carr’s article â€Å"Is Google Making Us Stupid?† and M.T Anderson’s novel Feed, the broad idea of the relationship between humans and technology is portrayed. Carr’s article complains of how technology changes the way we think. Carr instigates the idea that we are losing our passion for learning as a result of the internet and search engines such as Google. These advancements, Carr proposes, lead to a world where our intelligence â€Å"flattensRead MoreIs Google Making Us Stupid 1140 Words   |  5 PagesIs Google Making Us Stupid In the Atlantic Magazine, Nicholas Carr wrote an article, â€Å"Is Google Making Us Stupid?† Carr poses a good question about how the internet has affected our brain, by remapping the neural circuitry and reprogramming our memory. Carr states, â€Å"My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell-but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the say way I used to think.† Carr went on farther, saying that he cannot read as long as he used to, his concentration starts to wonder after two or threeRead MoreIs Google Making Us Stupid?920 Words   |  4 Pagesa different perspective than that of Manuel Castells. In â€Å"Is Google Making Us Stupid?† Carr believes the Internet has taken the foundation out of learning, socializing and reading. Coupled with Manuel Castells, Nicholas Carr agrees that the Internet has been of good use in some cases (Wikipedia for the many hours of research conducted for its database that we access) but he also believes the Internet is slowly making him and us stupid. Carr says â€Å"My mind now expects to take in information the wayRead MoreIs Google Making Us Stupid?1548 Words   |  7 Pagesindependent will and creative imagination. These gives us the ultimate human freedom†¦. The power to choose, to respond, to change (Independence Quotes. Brainy Quote. Xplore. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.).† The Declaration of In dependence allows people to do whatever they please as long as it’s within the law, but Google is restraining what people can really do. It may not seem that a search engine can limit people, but one needs to think about the many things Google consists of that doesn’t allow people to chooseRead MoreIs Google Making Us Stupid?1048 Words   |  4 Pagesï » ¿Is Google making us stupid? Three authors weigh in One of the most common clichÃÆ' ©s is that the Internet has robbed us of our attention spans and impeded our ability to communicate effectively. Once we could write properly, now we only text. Google has made us lazy in terms of how we research and access data. However, is this true? In three major news publications, three major essayists have grappled with this question and come to completely different conclusions. Although the neurological evidenceRead MoreIs Google Making Us Stupid?879 Words   |  4 PagesAmerican writer, Nicholas G. Carr, in The Atlantic July/ August 2008 Issue titled â€Å"Is Google Making Us Stupid?† argues that the amount of time we spend online, especially google, has caused us to lose our minds by â€Å"tinkering† with our brains, â€Å"reprograming our memory,† and changing the way in which we process information. Carr’s purpose is to contribute to the idea that â€Å"Google† along with other online tools, is programi ng us to be less attentive and to the inhibition of our critical thinking skills. GuidedRead More`` Is Google Making Us Stupid?1505 Words   |  7 Pagescritically inspect both the positive and negative effects technology can have on development and cognition and all assert that technology is not as daunting as some make it out to be. However, some opinion based pieces such as Nicholas Carr’s â€Å"Is Google Making Us Stupid?† conclude that we should be apprehensive about technology advancing. The differences in outlook towards digital technology s future effect on the mind can best be seen in how authors view technology as a source of distraction, hypertextRead More`` Is Google Making Us Stupid?1384 Words   |  6 Pagestechnology is changing the way we access information; anything is accessible in mere seconds. This implementation has resulted in the most aware society of all time. Most information is just a quick and simple Google search away. An article, written by Nicholas Carr â€Å"Is Google Making Us Stupid? â€Å" in a 2008 issue for The Atlantic magazine, questioned the negative cognitive effects of the world wide web. Carr recognizes how much we rely on the internet and believes that humanity needs reform. AccordingRead MoreIs Google Making Us Stupid?1040 Words   |  5 Pagesquestion â€Å"Is Google Making Us Stupid?† This has set off a debate on the effects the internet is having on our brains. Obviously the internet is here to stay, but is it making us scatterbrained? Are we losing the ability to think deeply? Criticism of the Web most often questions whether we are becoming more superficial and scattered in our thinking. In the July-August 2008 Atlantic magazine, Nicholas Carr published Is Google Making Us Stupid? (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google). Like otherRead MoreIs Google Making Us Stupid?733 Words   |  3 Pages Nicholas Carrs article, â€Å"Is Google Making Us Stupid?† makes points that I agree with, although I find his sources to be questionable. The article discusses the effects that the Internet may be having on our ability to focus, the difference in knowledge that we now have, and our reliance on the Internet. The points that are made throughout Carrs article are very thought provoking but his sources make them seem invaluable. Carr discusses the effects that the Internet has on our minds and the way