Etanercept Essay Example for Free

Etanercept Essay Although it is known that etanercept is a recombinant human soluble tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF? ) receptor fusion protein that decreases its role in disorders that involves excess inflammation in animals, mainly in humans, including autoimmune diseases such as ankylosing spondylitis, psoriasis, hepatitis C, rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis, it obviously shows that the effect of this fusion protein depends on the genes of the patient relative to his or her reaction to this protein. Citing the 60 year old male patient who was involved of being treated with etanercept, again, it manifests that there are different cases for different sets of specimens. Presumably, it is not wise to jump to conclusions that etanercept is not that beneficial in treating psoriasis or hepatitis C or both. One must take into consideration the genial pattern of the patient. Furthermore, etanercept is protein, which as we all know, comprises the basic genial structure of each cell of the body. In order for such protein to react or perform smoothly and beneficially, the subject should be focused more on protein â€Å"match-up† rather than citing several cases from the past or other occurrences involving etanercept.

Analysis of the Human Rights Act, 1998

Analysis of the Human Rights Act, 1998 Human Rights Law ‘Despite the Human Rights Act 1998, the courts have failed appropriately to limit the scope for the exercise of breach of the peace powers.’ The Human Rights Act 1998 received royal assent on November 9, 1998 and came into force on October 2, 2000. The objective of said Act was to harmonize the domestic law of the United Kingdom with the European Convention on Human Rights. To reaffirm the commitment of the UK to human rights and civil liberties, it is now possible under the said Act to file a claim for violation of the ECHR without going to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Says Weinstein: This ability to transcend national law, and to compel revision of such law to comport with rights guaranteed by the European Convention in a broad range of areas, most often within the exclusive purview of national and local courts, is of historic note. Generally, nation states have been the final arbiters of most issues affecting their citizenry and within their borders. By treaty, the signatory nations of Europe have granted the ECHR binding authority to decide cases affecting their citizenry and other persons subject to their authority. In instances where state law is found inconsistent with an ECHR judgment, the nation at issue is obliged to amend its national law to comport with the ECHR decision. These cases illustrate the concept of what is increasingly being referred to as an evolving European supranational identity. The ECHR grants jurisdiction to any individual, non-governmental organization, or group claiming be a victim of a violation of the European Convention by a ECHR signatory nation, and to bring cases before it, as does, in applicable cases, the European Court of Justice (the ECJ), the court of the European Union, based in Luxembourg. Equally important, it prohibits any public body from behaving in a manner that is incompatible with any of the rights guaranteed under the ECHR. The Human Rights Act has gone a long way in limiting arbitrary actions from public bodies, in particular, police officers. It cannot be denied, however, that the laws on â€Å"breach of the peace† grant have historically been so vast in scope that in some occasions, human rights violations arise. The definition of â€Å"breach of the peace† (also known as breach of the Queen’s peace) has been discussed in the Court of Appeal decision of Howell, where it was stated as follows: We are emboldened to say that there is a breach of the peace whenever harm is actually done or is likely to be done to a person or in his presence his property or a person is in fear of being so harmed through an assault, an affray, a riot, unlawful assembly or other disturbance. It used to be that the prospect of violence alone would not be enough to be considered a â€Å"breach of the peace†, as in the comment of Farqhuarson LJ that â€Å"The act which puts someone in fear of violence taking place entitles a police officerto detain the actor but it is not a breach of the peace, for the violence has not yet occurred.† There has been scant support for this view, such that in the present time, â€Å"breach of the peace† also embraces â€Å"behaviour likely to cause a violent reaction†, even if such behaviour is not of itself violent. The policy of the law has been recently discussed in the case of Humberside Police v. McQuade, where it was held that: â€Å"the policy of the law relating to arrest for breach of the peace is plain enough. Its purpose is to deal with emergencies. The power of arrest may be exercised without a warrant and belongs to the ordinary citizen as much as to the constable.† In a handful of cases, the European Court of Human Rights has found that there is no contradiction between the concept and the Human Rights act of 1998. The most cited case is the case of McLeod v. United Kingdom , where the Court held as follows: â€Å"The concept of breach of the peace has been clarified by the English courts over the last two decades, to the extent that it is now sufficiently established that a breach of the peace is committed only when an individual causes harm, or appears likely to cause harm, to persons or property, or acts in a manner the natural consequence of which would be to provoke violence in others.† There are several powers that underlie a â€Å"breach of the peace†. The first power is the power of arrest. In Howell the conditions for making an arrest on this basis were laid down, to wit – â€Å"Where: (1) a breach of the peace is committed in the presence of a person making the arrest or (2) the arrestor believes that such a breach will be committed in the immediate future by the person arrested although he has not yet committed any breach or (3) where a breach has been committed and it is reasonably believed that a renewal of it is threatened.† Another power is the power to enter premises. The leading case for this is the case of Thomas v. Sawkins which involved a meeting to protest the Inciting to Disaffection Bill. Wary that seditious and inflammatory statements would be made, the policemen stormed in and attended the meeting, even though they were aware that they were unwelcome. In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled that the presence of the police officers was lawful. Stone explains why this is an alarming prospect: A point of uncertainty, however, arose from the fact that the meeting took place on private premises. Did the power of entry recognised in the case only apply to meetings to which the public were invited, or are the police entitled to enter any premises on which a breach of the peace is occurring or is likely to occur? The judges in Thomas v Sawkins appeared to attach importance to the fact that they were dealing with a public meeting, but the general law of trespass makes no distinction of this kind. If those attending a public meeting on private premises do so on the basis of a licence from the occupier, then that licence may be withdrawn, from the police as much as anyone else. If the police have the power to override the withdrawal of a licence, then there seems no reason why that power should not exist on all occasions. The result is that Thomas v Sawkins had the effect of giving the police a power to enter any premises to prevent or deal with a breach of the peace. Another power police officers have is the power to control/restrict/compel an individual’s movement. The seminal case for this is the case of Moss v McLachlan , which involved militant striking miners prevented by policemen from joining the ranks of more â€Å"moderate† miners. The Court upheld the actions of the law enforcement agents, saying as follows: â€Å"If the police feared that a convoy of cars travelling towards a working coal field bearing banners and broadcasting, by sight or sound, hostility or threats towards working miners might cause a violent episode, they would be justified in halting the convoy to enquire into its destination and purpose. If, on stopping the vehicles, the police were satisfied that there was a real possibility of the occupants causing a breach of the peace one-and-a-half miles away, a journey of less than five minutes by car, then in our judgment it would be their duty to prevent the convoy from proceeding further and they have the power to do so.† There are many human rights issues that are affected by an overly-broad interpretation of â€Å"breach of the peace.† The first principle that they may invoke is the principle regarding Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion which is enshrined in Article 9. There is no dearth of cases that they may cite in order to support their position. For example, in the case of Arrowsmith v. United Kingdom, it was stated this right refers to acts that are an expression of a religion or belief. This right was raised before the ECHR for a variety of reasons, such as employment and prisoners’ rights. While certainly, the courts have taken quite a restrictive approach in applying the provision and granting relief under it, it has been restrictive when the acts sought to be justified are acts that are patently illegal and morally wrong, such as assisted suicide or the distribution of cannabis. These acts cannot be compared to the simple act of dancing or organizing. The dangers of cannabis and euthanasia simply cannot compare to the conjectured danger in the case at hand, and thus, the latter should fall under the ambit of freedom of religion. There is also the freedom of assembly and association argument (Article 11) that may be raised. Aside from imposing a negative obligation on law enforcement agents not trample on protected rights, they must secure the effective enjoyment of these rights. In the case of Plattform ‘Arzte fur das Leben v. Austria the ECHR held that â€Å"Genuine effective freedom of peaceful assembly cannot be reduced to a mere duty on the part of the state not to interfere†¦ Article 11 sometimes requires positive measures to be taken, even in the sphere of relations between individuals, if need be.† Freedom of Expression which may be found in Article 10, can likewise be cited. There can be no doubt that freedom of expression is of paramount importance. While the right to free speech is a crystallized principle that has been place almost since the beginning of time, enjoying a cherished position in the bill of rights of virtually all civilized legal systems, the interpretation of what constitutes free and protected speech still has yet to be perfectly refined. This provision has been invoked many times over in the course of history, whether within the European Union or outside, successfully and unsuccessfully; and Courts have had many opportunities to set standards and devise guidelines to determine if the speech in question should be protected or not. It is important to note that Article 10 protects not merely the substance of the idea but also the form that they are conveyed. This was the ruling in the case of Oberschlick v. Austria and it could be applied here. The form of the expression should also be considered protected speech. This is bolstered by the fact that in the case of Stevens v. United Kingdom, the concept of expression covers even â€Å"actions†. It becomes more difficult when the right to free speech competes with another right, in this case, the right of the public to order, or to put it more classically, the right of the Queen to her peace. In â€Å"easy† cases, all that should be done is look through jurisprudence until one finds the applicable case with similar facts. In â€Å"hard† cases with novel facts, the role of the judge becomes infinitely more difficult. The boundaries are ever-shifting; and internally, the judge will be trying not only to apply the law, but to subject the text or speech in question to her own subjective inquiry in order to determine the intent of the message-bearer and what the material was trying to say. Social and political values inevitably come to the fore. To quote legal writer Thomas Streeter, â€Å"It is in the character of language, in other words, that a judge will never be able to look at the text of the Bill of Rights and legal precedents to decide whether or not flag b urning is protected by the First Amendment; he will always in one way or another be forced to make a choice about whether or not he thinks it should be protected, and will always be faced with the possibility that a reasonable person could plausibly disagree.† What distinguishes the area on free speech from other â€Å"legally-indeterminate† areas is that it is inextricably intertwined with and largely dependent on language which, as many eminent linguists have said, is arbitrary in the sense that meanings cannot be derived from anything logically-inherent in the words. These meanings are merely â€Å"assigned meanings† born of the collective experiences of people in a community and this system of interpretation is never static. As stated by Streeter, â€Å"Aside from language in general and perhaps some very deep-level aspects of syntax, there is very little that is universal, neutral, or mechanical about human languages.† Another issue is the right to due process. Legal systems in the civilized world – whether in civil or common law jurisdictions have, at least in theory, given primacy to the rights of the accused, understanding that ambiguity should be resolved in his or her favor. This, however, does not mean that one must let down his or her vigilance and stop guarding against possible infringement of constitutional guarantees by overzealous judges, particularly at a time when human rights advocacy for the accused has been made unpopular by the rising rate of crime. It used to be that the primacy of the State is the core principle of the international legal regime as it is traditionally known. This, however, has been challenged by the alarming rise of state-sponsored human rights violations that has prodded the community of nations to recognize that its more pressing duty is to protect the individual from systemic and institutional atrocity, even at the expense of its legal fictions. To quote from Hersch Lauterpacht, in his article International Law and Human Rights, An international legal system which aims at effectively safeguarding human freedom in all its aspects is no longer an abstraction. It is as real as man’s interest in the guarantee and the preservation of his inalienable rights as a rational and moral being. International law, which has excelled in punctilious insistence on the respect owed by one sovereign State to another, henceforth acknowledges the sovereignty of man. For fundamental human rights are superior to the law of the sovereign State. This is the raison d’etre behind the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights which entered into force in 1966 and the Human Rights Act of 1998. State parties were cognizant of the need to protect civil and political rights of citizens from possible encroachment by the state. The ICCPR explicitly declares: â€Å"No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.† It is undeniable that this includes protection of citizens from agents of the state such as members of the police force. And yet, we see how police officers routinely violate the human rights of those they apprehend. The implicit message is that these are criminals anyway – thugs, petty thieves, gangsters, punks, drug addicts, alcoholics – and they are doing society a favor by treating them brusquely. An oft-heard justification is that you cannot treat hardened criminals with kid gloves or you will be perpetrating crime even further. However, it cannot be gainsaid that the legal restrictions on evidence make police brutality inimical to law enforcement, rather than the opposite. Given the propensity of law enforcement agents to manhandle an accused or use unnecessary force to restrain and subdue him, they should be taught that such behavior only bolsters crime instead of eliminating it. First: it emboldens criminals to seek revenge and go on â€Å"vendetta killings† and perpetuates a vicious cycle of crime that exacerbates the situation even further. Second: evidence procured by vi rtue of such rough manhandling will not be admissible in evidence and the criminal they seek to put behind bars will be allowed to go back to the streets. Most importantly, however, even hardened criminals are covered by the human rights guarantees in the Constitution and in human rights conventions. Human rights are inalienable and imprescriptible, and they apply to everyone. But perhaps the most recent caselaw on breach of the peace with respect to the concept of human rights is the recently concluded Fairford Coach Action where the police detained 120 protesters on their way to an anti-war demonstration in Gloucestershire. The Public Order and Criminal Justice Act was used by the policemen. The Law Lords eventually ruled in favour of the protesters. In 2004, it made this crucial point: The rights to freedom of expression, and assembly and association, which are protected by Articles 10 and 11 of the ECHR respectively, are of the greatest importance to the proper functioning of any democracy. Any intrusion upon the rights, either by the developing common law or by the intervention of statute law, has to be jealously scrutinised. In conclusion, while certainly there are significant inroads brought about by the Human Rights Act of 1998, these still must be reckoned with the laws on breach of the peace. It is the duty of the courts and of every citizen to be vigilant against encroachments by police officers. The law is there to provide refuge, but education and awareness are primary.   Bibliography Hoffman, D. Rowe, J. (2003). Human Rights in the UK: An Introduction to the Human Rights Act 1998. London: Pearson Longman. Lauterpacht, Hersch. 1950. International Law and Human Rights. Connecticut: Archon Books. Stone, R. (2001) Breach of the Peace: The Case for Abolition. 2 Web. JCLI. Streeter, T. (1995) Some Thoughts on Free Speech, Language and the Rule of Law. In Jensen, R. and Allen, D. (Eds.) Freeing the First Amendment: Critical Perspectives on Freedom of Expression.31-53. New York University Press. Weinstein, B. â€Å"Recent Decisions from the European Court of Human Rights.† American Society of International Law. May 2000. visited 21 January 2007. http://www.asil.org/insights/insigh45.htm

Heart of Darkness versus MacBeth Essay -- Joseph Conrad William Shakes

Heart of Darkness and MacBeth  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Joseph Conrad and William Shakespeare are not traditionally paired up for a critical analysis. However, the characters MacBeth and Kurtz in MacBeth and Heart of Darkness, respectively, prove to be worthy of comparison. MacBeth and Kurtz share many common characteristics: both have vaulting ambition that leads both to their success and their demise, a superiority complex, and both make similar sacrifices to achieve their goal. Despite their many similarities, MacBeth and Kurtz differ in many respects. The way the authors present each character varies greatly, and the way each interacts with his surroundings contrast a great deal. The circumstances that follow their actions also differ since the societies in which they live are not similar in any aspect. Through their many similarities and differences, MacBeth and Kurtz prove to be characters filled with evilness, and upon a closer examination, the differing degrees of that evilness are seen.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Both MacBeth and Kurtz’s initial actions are dominated by ambition. MacBeth chooses to overthrow King Duncan for the sole purpose of his own political gain. He even admits that he "[has] no spur/ To prick the sides of [his] intent, but only/ Vaulting ambition, which o’erleaps itself/ And falls on th’other" (Act I, sc. 7). Despite many other good reasons for overthrowing a king, such as for the good of the state or if the king is infringing on the people’s rights, MacBeth claims only selfish intentions. Like MacBeth, Kurtz, too, starts his road to evil with ambition. Kurtz, in order to earn his Intended’s hand, goes to Africa to make something of himself. Instead of going on a "heavenly mission to civilize"(Conrad, 70) the savages, Kurtz’s intentions, from the start, are to make money as quickly as possible. And he does. This "vaulting ambition" leads both met to climb the ladder of success at a quick pace. MacBeth is named "Thane of Cawdor" after one brave battle; Kurtz is given control of the Inner Station because of his success in bringing in ivory. Ambition, though traditionally looked at as a positive characteristic cause both men to perform evil deeds.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  With ambition and success comes a feeling of superiority. Both MacBeth and Kurtz are portrayed as men who think themselves to be above God. MacBeth knows that the crime of killing a king goes a... ...compassed he has become by evil.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Both MacBeth and Kurtz share the same qualities of ambition, superiority, and the sacrifice of their life because of the lives they have taken. These connections can be made because of the evil that is intertwined in both characters. The evil in them is brought forth through the evil deeds they commit. Where the two differ, though, is in their behavior after the murders have been committed. In MacBeth, an almost apologetic behavior is seen. His guilt, through the hallucinations, proves that he, at least subconsciously, is sorry for what he has done. In Kurtz, no sympathy or guilt is seen. Through this apathetic behavior, one must question whether Kurtz is really sound in mind. It is a natural human instinct to at least have some guilt after committing an offense against another human. The evil that is in both these characters ties them together, but their morals after the acts are committed sets them apart as MacBeth is seen as more of a human being; and Kurtz, mo re of an animal. Works Cited Conrad, Joseph. Heart of Darkness. New York: NAL Penguin Inc., 1983. Shakespeare, William. MacBeth. New York: Washington Square Press, 1992.

Macbeth :: essays research papers

The Elizabethan Concept of the King Intro: Our actions define who we are. Who we are, defines our actions. This concept has been common to man throughout history, and the Elizabethans are no exception. They applied this statement to their kings in an attempt to classify them as good or bad, strong or weak. In the play Macbeth, we notice many references to the characteristics of a good king. The Elizabethan view was that if a king was weak, he would be taken advantage of and killed. Thesis Statement: The Elizabethan view of the king has taught us that a king must possess certain characteristics in order to survive. A king must have physical and emotional strength, good judgement, intelligence, confidence, and rational thinking, or he will be killed. 1st point - physical and emotional strength Topic Sentence: A good king must possess physical and emotional strength or he will be taken advantage of and killed. Duncan -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Act I Scene II -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Reveals King Duncan as mild and benevolent, but weak and unfit to be a king. -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Shows his physical weakness because there was rebellion and invasion, but Duncan was not out leading his army. (I, II, 1) -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Act I Scene IV -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Shows Duncan’s emotional weakness -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  He is too weak and shows over-gratitude. (I, IV, 33) Macbeth -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Macbeth shows emotional weakness when he hallucinates -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  During Macbeth’s soliloquy in Act II Scene I, he hallucinates and sees a dagger floating in front of him. (II, I, 33) As you can see through these examples, both Duncan and Macbeth show physical weakness and in return are both killed. 2nd point - good judgement Topic Sentence: In order for a king to stay in power and stay alive, he must make the right decisions and use good judgement. Duncan -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Uses bad judgement by giving Macbeth the title of Thane of Cawdor -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Rewards Macbeth and not Banquo which could cause envy in Banquo and cause Macbeth to feel more important than Banquo -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Shows that he is a poor judge of human nature (I, IV, 11) -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Shows poor judgement in choosing a time to reveal Malcolm as his successor to the throne -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Could not see Macbeth’s ambition which others could see (I, III, 120) -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Uses bad judgement when deciding to sleep at Macbeth’s house (I, VI, 1) Macbeth -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Makes a bad decision to kill Banquo which made the people more suspicious -  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Decides to kill Macduff’s family, which gave Macduff the motive to kill Macbeth. (IV, III, 233) 3rd point - intelligence, confidence, and rational thinking Topic Sentence: To avoid being killed, a king must be intelligent, rational, and confident.

Exposing American Myths Today Essays -- essays research papers

The United States of America has been blessed with the grace with God, it is the land of spacious skies, amber waves of grain, endless possibilities, and freedom for all. It is superior to all other nations and when faced with moral dilemmas. It is firmly believed by citizens that God sides with them. Though these are the ideals and the purposes of which the United States was founded, they are still myths and legends that are not necessarily truthful today. They were partially created by facts but mostly by the government and the people. Myths are dreams that take one from reality and place them in a comfort zone that feels much more at ease than dealing with what is reality and truth. There are so many myths that are meant to placate the frazzled American who is just looking for some reassurance from what is stressfully everyday life. However, some myths can be offensive and overlooked as many are not recognized as being false at first glance. Some assumptions of certain cultural gr oups, religious affiliations, political parties, and many others face the abuse daily. Since myths in the United States are often misperceived, the way society sees myths is bias. They can be seen as delusions of the ways people are to distinguish between what is reality and what is not. Myths in the United States began when the first pilgrims set foot on Plymouth Rock, it is unlikely they knew the importance of what they had begun but they knew the principles on which they had founded the new land with the notion that they were now able to begin the second journey of their lives free from British persecution and hardship. A common myth one will find about the new settlers and the Native Americans that resided there can be found in an ordinary kind... ...no myth bold enough to state that bliss has ever resolved anything. Works Cited Churchill, Ward. â€Å"Crimes Against Humanity.† The Presence of Others. Eds. Andrea Lunsford and John J. Ruszkiewicz. Boston: Bedford, 2005. 536-543. Douglass, Frederick. â€Å"What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?† The Presence of Others. Eds. Andrea Lunsford and John J. Ruszkiewicz. Boston: Bedford, 2005. 522-533. Jefferson, Thomas. â€Å"Declaration of Independence.† The Presence of Others. Eds. Andrea Lunsford and John J. Ruszkiewicz. Boston: Bedford, 2005. 517-520. Shindle, Kate. â€Å"Miss America: More Than a Beauty Queen?† The Presence of Others. Eds. Andrea Lunsford and John J. Ruszkiewicz. Boston: Bedford, 2005. 563-566. Postman, Neil. â€Å"The Great Symbol Drain.† The Presence of Others. Eds.Andrea Lunsford and John J. Ruszkiewicz. Boston: Bedford. 2005. 546-555.

Frankenstein as Anti-Hero Character Essay

SUCI HANIFAH LITERARY CRITICISM II EDRIA SANDIKA/MARLIZA YENI 8 MAY 2013 Frankenstein as Anti Hero Character A women who wrote â€Å"Frankenstein† named, Mary Shelley, she was born August 30, 1797, in London, England. Mary Shelley came from a rich literary heritage. She was the daughter of William Godwin, a political theorist, novelist, and publisher. Her ideas to write Frankenstein cameon summer of 1816, Mary and his brother Percy visited the poet Lord Byron at his villa beside Lake Geneva in Switzerland. Stormy weather finally forced them going indoors, while the other guests read a volume of ghost stories. So there, Mary’s story became Frankenstein when she was only 19 years old.Frankenstein was published in 1818, when Mary was 21, and became a huge success. Many people disbelieving that a 19-year-old woman could have written such a horror story. The story starts with the letter of a sailor who had trip to North Pole, in the letter to his sister he was talking about a new friend, who was strange, calm, but had complicated and mysterious life story behind. The man’s name was Victor Frankenstein, Victor told him all of his life story, about his happy childhood, his family, Elizabeth, his best friend Hendry Clerval who taught him about danger and adventure. Victor was a bright student, he loves science, he intends to now about everything, nature,universe , and also the living creature. And his curiousity about human, drove him into his big achievement in his entire of life, his passion, desire, and mind, led him to create a human or worse, we can say it a horrible moster. The figure of Victor Frankenstein is very interesting to be analyzed. Mary created him with amazing personality, which can be categorized as Hero’s trait but through his achievement and fatal flaw, that personality is destroyed by himself, in case here described as â€Å"anti-hero†. Focus of analysis is Victor’s characterization in this story, because he passed so many events with up and downs untill finally he found the way to make his dream come true, to research about human and made a human-like. So, the next chapter will discuss especially â€Å"anti hero†, and will show the evidences and  the codes that put Victor as a Anti-hero. A hero in literary work is a character which has a special power, admirable traits, and good achievement (Begley 1). The power that a hero has must be used for the justice, the human, for the country and the world, a hero must have a special power, physically or spiritually. The action from a hero will impress the people around, being admirer because of their admirable traits, kind hearted, full of spirit, brave and honest. An absolute example of a hero is : Captain America, who fight for his country and human, or Doraemon who has a special ability to use a sophisticated tools to help Nobita, and nobody have it, that special pocket. On the contrary, Anti-hero is similar with the hero, but he has a fatal flaw that lead him and his society into misery. Anti heroes usually distrust common values and are unable to commit themselves to any ideals. In his writing, Begley adds that anti hero will has some of the personality flaws and ultimate fortune traditionally assigned to villains but b eside that also has enough heroic qualities or intention to gain the sympathy of readers, anti hero can be awkward, passive, or pitiful. Victor in general, seemingly has Hero’s traits. Victor came from a noble family, rich, and high respect in his society, his father had filled several public situations and positions with honour and reputation. He was a civilized person, his parent loved him so much, he was bringing up with a big fullfilment, tenderness and deep conciousness of his parent toward him. He received a lesson of patience, charity, and self-control, he really has a beautifull childhood, as he told to the sailor : â€Å"No human being could have passed a happier childhood than myself† (Shelly 29). That was several proves that Victor being rise and growth willingly. In Frankenstein, Victor was a round character, round character is a complex character and increases in complexity throughout the story, and the opposite of flat character (Gerald. Dictionary of Narratology). Because if we identify the character of Victor start from his happy childhood, university environment, but since he created the human-like, the complexity of his life getting worse and worse. He tried to struggle and beated down the monster to  reconcile his mistake, and went back to his hometown to safe his family but ironically he couldn’t. The position of Victor as the anti hero is set in the blurring line between hero and villain (Begley 2), but through the actions and the way he thinks the reader can judge or give their opinion about this tragic character. Looking for the clue and action of the character, based on the proairetic code by Roland Barthes, which is applies to any action that implies a further narrative action of Victor in general, we may look the two bigest act of him : The first when he ran away after staring at the monster. Run here means that he tried to free up his regret feeling, hide his fearness. And the second ; when Victor decide to chase the monster, chasing here absolutely as the revenge, and retaliation for his sinful feeling. The first time when Victor find his misery was when his mother died, all this time his mother such an angel to him, but when she died, he seemed like to lose his life, and Elizabeth is the only woman that he loved. When he study in University, he met with Professor M. Krempe and M. Waldman who provided and inspired him to start his research, without permission from the preofessor, Victor secretly started to create a human, in his apartment which had changed into private laboratory. One by one the various keys were touched, and victimize his bright brain, and soul, Victor successfully made up his achievement. Till this part we can say he had reach his purpose, but in fact after he stared at his own creature, what was become his dream, was exactly right destroy in a few seconds. As it shown in Victor’s mind when he finished his creature :â€Å"I felt the bitterness of disappointment, dreams that had been my food and pleasant rest for so long a space were now become a hell to me , and the change was so rapid, the overthrow so complete!† (Shelley 50). Thisis prove that he was so scare to the thing that he had created, it is not satisfy his sacrifice that he had done for a very long time, but just end up with a horrible creature in front of him. The pitiful life of Victor could be also the evidence that bring him to anti hero, as the characteristic of anti hero, Victor has some of it. He typically distrust conventional values, he thinks and acts in the outside  line of normal people, he likes the different things, just like how much he loves his gods fantacy : Cornelious Agrippa, Albertus Magnus, Paracelsus. When I read Frankenstein, it makes a serious catharsis, the emotion of the reader, and how the sympathy feeling suddenly appear when Victor met his fatal flaw. The last clue is the death of Victor’s family, started with his youngest brother who had been killed by the monster, then his best friend Hendry, his lovely wife Elizabeth, and the last was his father. Beside that, the result of his horrible creature’s revenge also cause an innocent woman had been punished. This is the biggest fatal flaw that he made, the creature that he created, gave soul, had destroyed and drown himself, his admirable trait was useless, his mind, knowledge, power, instead led him to a tragic end of his life and cause the mental conflict. The condition af Victor after he had drown was so pathetic, as Walton explained to his sister in the letter : â€Å"His limbs was nearly frozen, and his body dreadfully emaciated by fatigue and suffering. I never saw a man in so wretched a condition† (Frankenstein, P. 16) As far as I concern about Victor Frankenstein position in the story, that is true that he was reaching his achivement which become his purpose of studying and researching, but through his human creation, the monster had caused him in the middle line of hero or anti hero. In case here, based on the evidences that I already explain above, Victor was not a Villain. Because Villain regarded as antagonist and never change his mind or his goal, but Victor directly changed his mind and felt scare at the very first time he saw his living creature’s eyes. Moreover, when he depressed by the death of the people that he loves, had been murdered by the monster, he changed his mind, refused to make another monster and decided to fight back. This is what anti hero did, after the fatal flaw, depressed, big loses in his life, then ends up ironically with the sadness and sorrow. References Wilfred, Guerrin. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature. New York. Oxford University Press. 1999 Begley, Louis. Defenition of Anti- Hero. 2000 Prince, Gerald. Dictionary of Narratology. Accessed on 7 May 2013 Module on Barthes : On the Five Code. Accessed on 7 May 2013 The Adaptation from the National Library of Medicine.†Frankenstein: Penetrating the Secrets of Nature† Retrieved from websites : www.duluth.lib.mn.us

Deviance & Control in a Feature Film `Boyz n the Hood`

Deviance is a variation from the norm. Everything from picking boogers in public to murdering somebody is considering an act of deviance. There are many theories of deviation and the film Boyz in the Hood and it provides a good base for understanding and providing real life examples concerning deviant behavior. The major issues apparent in the film are concerning the control and labeling theory which gives insight into the characters lives. Boyz N the Hood provides many examples of the deviance and control theories.Deviance in statistics is the variations in what the outcomes are supposed to be. In sociology a deviant is a person who isn’t what he should normally be. Any variation from social, cultural or religious norms can be deviation. â€Å"In a recent book about deviance, Douglas (1984) has identified rape, homosexuality and terrorism as major categories of deviance today, and his choice of these highlights a recurrent concern among sociologists to link an analysis of de viance with that of particular forms of sexual and violent behavior.Indeed, a quick glance through the contents of any book dealing with deviance is likely to reveal an interest in making sense of forms of sexual behavior as diverse as prostitution, child abuse, homosexuality, transexualism and extra-marital sexual activity. Similarly with respect to violence, interest has been shown in gang violence, rape, juvenile delinquency, football hooliganism and acts of terrorism. To this list of concerns, however, should be added studies looking at less spectacular forms of deviances such as alcohol dependence, childlessness, stuttering, and solvent use† (Aggleton 1-2)Many of these deviations are portrayed in the movie. The most significant ones relate to crime, murder, sex, and alcohol and drug abuse. A lot less spectacular forms of deviation are also apparent in the movie. One example of this is when Ricky urinates in one of the alleys right before his death. By studying this film c losely a lot of deviant behaviors can be pointed at easily. â€Å"John Singleton’s 1991 film Boyz N the Hood in the context on American sub cultural deviance theories†¦ presents aspects of many of the major theories of deviance (labeling, strain, social control, and differential association).(Leblanc, 1998, p. 64) The major characters Tre, tre’s father, Ricky and Doughboy represent different forms of deviance and control. Tre’s father is a controller because he continuously tells everyone around him to start thinking. Tre is different than the other people in the neighborhood because his father has raised him differently. The dad tries to instill good values in his son so he can succeed and not conform to the deviant norms of his surroundings. Tre’s dad is also active in social control. In one scene after the SAT exam Tre’s dad takes Tre and Ricky out to see something.He brings them to a billboard in the neighborhood and asks the two boys wha t they understand from it. While he explains to them what gentrification a small crowd starts to surround his sermon like speech. He says, â€Å"They want us to kill ourselves†¦ the best way you can destroy a people you take their ability to reproduce themselves. † This reflects the opening lines of the movie and the death toll concerning African Americans. â€Å"One of out of every twenty-one Black males will be murdered in their lifetime†¦most will die at the hands of another Black male.† The dad wants the people in the neighborhood to stop killing each other because â€Å"you’re doing exactly what they want you to do, you have to think†¦ about your future. † This reflects the control theory and how the dad manages to keep a strong relationship with his son. The control theory states that the closer people are to each other and the stronger their bonds they will be less likely to deviate. Continuously throughout the movie the dad talks to his son about everything and tries to teach him along the way. Another example in the movie is when the dad gives him advice about not having children at a young age.He says that any guy can a have a child but raising one makes him a man. Also after the SAT exam the dad tells the boys how the exam is biased and math is the only section that is universally unbiased in the exam. The father son relationship is not there when it comes to Tre’s friends. Ricky and Doughboy are half brothers and there father is never around. Doughboy is the deviant in the family whereas Ricky tries to stay away from trouble. The control theory states that people who have stronger bonds are less like to deviate compared to people who have weaker bonds.The boys’ behavior and their future can be observed and analyzed by both the control theory and the labeling theory. When their lives are analyzed according to the labeling theory it is easy to see why the two brothers act in a specific way. â⠂¬Å"The labeling theory states that of people are called something or told who they are often enough shall begin to act in that manner. † (Leblanc, 1998, p. 64) For example, if a child is labeled a bully in school even if he has done the act one and continues to be called a bully it is quite likely that he will try to or conform to the label that has been given to him.On the other hand if a person is told that they can excel over and over again they will most like live up to those expectations. In the movie this contrast is observed between Ricky and Doughboy. Their mother continuously puts Doughboy down and praises Ricky. â€Å"You ain’t shit, you don’t do shit, and you ain’t never going to amount to shit,† is one of the remarks passed by the mother to Doughboy. When we observe the first half of the movie which depicts the boys childhood it is apparent that Doughboy was not always a deviant. When the boys in the hood, pun intended, take away Rickyà ¢â‚¬â„¢s football Doughboy is appalled.The child simply wants his brother to have his ball back. He stands up for his brother and he gets beaten up. Because of his personality type he gets into trouble. Eventually his mother starts putting him down because he is continuously getting into trouble. â€Å"The labeling theory suggests that this would explain why he was in jail most of his life, deals drugs, kills people, and is eventually murdered in the end of the movie. This theory also suggests that the encouragement of his mother led Ricky to become a football star and receive a scholarship to USC. † (Leblanc, 1998, p.64)In the end of the movie, Ricky dies when other guys from the neighborhood shoot him and Doughboy dies two weeks after avenging his brother’s death. The assumption can be made that Doughboy was murdered by the people connected to his brother’s murderers. When he is young he gets into trouble and starts going down a slippery slope because he defen ds his brother and when he gets old he dies trying to avenge his brother’s death. When the lives of Ricky and Doughboy are observed according to the control theory we can have an even better understanding of why Ricky is the polar opposite of his brother.The control theory talks about the affect of strong bonds between people. Ever since Ricky is little he has had a stronger bond with the people around him. Although both the boys’ fathers’ are never present Ricky has a football that his father gave to him. When they grow up Ricky has a stronger bond with his mom and his mom favors him more. Ricky also has a girlfriend who lives in his house and a son. Ricky has reasons to not deviate. Although his premarital sexual relationship and having a child before marriage is a type of deviation he does not conform to the deviations that his brother does.At the end of the movie when Ricky is dead and Doughboy is talking to Tre he says that he has no one, no brother and no mom. He says that his mom never loved him and it was all about Tre. Doughboy and his weak bonds with the people around him led him to deviate more often. Both the labeling theory and the control theory help us understand the lives of the brothers and how they behaved. Tre’s father is one of the controllers in the movie and his portrayal of a Black man who thinks is presented respectfully. He continuously teaches his son to think and stay away from deviant behavior.After Ricky’s death he explains to Tre that he should not go out to seek revenge because that is exactly what the system is designed to do. He tells his son that if he wants to shoot a man he should shoot his dad first and that it is too stupid to loose Tre over a stupid battle. His message to Tre and everyone else has always been to stop killing each other and pursue a life that is better. With his guidance Tre is one of the characters that is alive at the end of the movie and goes to college. Although Ricky gets accepted and has a scholarship he dies before he can even embark upon the opportunity.The other controller is Tre’s mother. Ever since he was young he has taught him to stick to his word and that there would be consequences if he wouldn’t. He ends up living with is father because he has gotten into a fight at school and his acts have been a breech of contract with his mom. When we compare Tre’s and Doughboy’s childhood they were both involved in confrontations and physical fights as young children. The only thing different was that Tre had a set of parents who were controllers and instilled strong bonds with each other. The police officer is also a controller in the movie except he presented cynically.He believes that everyone in the neighborhood is a deviant and should die. When he comes to Tre’s house after a break in he tells them that the burglar should have been shot and that he shouldn’t have gotten away. He is extremely cynical and does not believe in the betterment of the people in the neighborhood. When Tre is older he is pulled over by the same police officer although he hasn’t broken the law. The officer pulls him over out of spite and just to see if he has been drinking, possesses any drugs or weapons. There are many acts of neutralization present in the movie when the deviants try to justify their behavior.At the sermon in front of the billboard that Tre’s dad gives about people killing themselves over stupid things and conforming to the system a few guys listening in try to defend their actions. They say that if someone â€Å"messes with them† or causes any trouble they are not going to tolerate anything and take action. They say that they will not tolerate any sort of misconduct or even an attitude problem and resort to killing if they need to. This is later reflected in the movie when Ricky gets murdered over an argument. At a party he gets shoved in the arm so he starts yelli ng at the other guys.Those guys are scared away initially by Doughboys gun but then they come back to kill Ricky. This shows that whatever Tre’s dad says has a lot of truth to it and that when a deviant deviates he doesn’t see it as a deviation. He sees it as an act of neutralization. He is simply standing up for himself and defending him self. He is simply justifying his cause. The quality of a deviant is that he fights back each time. Every little thing such as the role of an eye or an argument is reason enough to kill someone. Sometimes people deviate intentionally because they want to prove people wrong.Sometimes people deviate because they are living up to their labels. Sometimes people deviate because they don’t know any better. Tre’s insistence on having sec with his Catholic girlfriend can be considered deviant behavior because he is going against what his parents have told him. His girlfriend gets angry with him but he does not resort to further deviations. Doughboy gets labeled a deviant from an early age but he never fights back to clear the misconception. He continuously involves himself in activities that live upto his reputation.This film seeks to normalize society. The message at the end of the movie is to stop and to create peace. The movie shows a real life depiction of what happens in the hood and how it hurts everyone living in it. It sheds light on how their behavior is affecting them negatively. They show all aspects of particular societal trends in order to create awareness among the people. The movie asks questions about traditional ways of controlling a form of deviance when it highlights the role of the police officer and the kids who try to fight deviance.The police officer just wants to kill everybody and is an extreme cynic and Ricky believes that the only way to stop another deviant is by acting the same way with him. The police officer hopes that the guy who broke in the house should have been dead and that everyone on the street is a gangster. All throughout the movie deviant behavior can be clearly spotted. The only way to normalize deviant behavior is to understand why it happens and how it happens. Young kids like Ricky all over the world end up committing crimes because of the weak bonds they have.They end up deviating from societal norms because they have been labeled a specific way. They already have a reputation and they feel that they cannot get away from it. They accept what society has labeled them and give into the norms of deviation. Kids who have stronger bonds with family and society on the other hand can easily breakaway from any childhood delinquencies they were a part of like Tre. People should understand that the labeling theory is not always negative and that it can be used to boost people’s morale and have positive outcomes.This happened for Ricky because of the continuous support from his mom but in the end he did not live to see any of it. This is why the control theory should be implanted along with the labeling theory in a positive way. When people realize the roots of the problem only then will they be able to fix it. The movie is a message to all the people of America to realize what happens in the certain neighborhoods and how to eradicate the problem. The message is to stop killing each other and to promote peace. References Aggleton, P. (1987). Deviance. Society now. London: Tavistock. Leblanc, Lauraine (1998, January). Observing Reel Life: Using Feature Films to Teach Ethnographic Methods. Teaching Sociology, 1, Retrieved June 16, 2008, from   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.uh.edu/stable/1318681?seq=3 Singleton, J (1990). Boyz N the Hood. (movie)