Rudyard Kiplings Troubles Of The Empire English Literature Essay

Rudyard Kiplings Troubles Of The Empire English Literature Essay The White Mans burden reflects the Victorian degradation of the non-European world. Rudyard Kipling invites Americans to join the ranks of the British in imperializing the uncivilized Filipinos to rid them of troubles. The imperial nation plays a role of a father who is obligated to raise the child-like natives into becoming mature westernized adults. These Imperialists are defined throughout the poem as having idealized, saintly characteristics that are patrilineally passed through generations of whites for the purpose of imposing well-built culture to the atrocious adolescently uncultured. An altruistic, chauvinistic tone and purpose brings a shining idolization of imperialism but in doing so reveals Victorian era thoughts and sociocultural beliefs. These beliefs would not have been readily accepted as part of the modern time of the late 1800s, yet they were so deeply engrained into society that they shaped the lives of not only white men but of unrelated races of the world. These industrialized, patriarchal, racist attitudes have become so imbedded into the minds of people that it went unnoticed as to how it affected their definitive ideas of race, gender, social status, idealized characteristics, and nationalism. Kipling portrays this through constant use of figurative language to exaggerate certain ideas and relate them to the main theme of necessary colonialism. The use of a similar structure for each stanza group, alongside with the use of repetition and an unselfish tone, create a sense of order and of a powerful urgency to commit imperialism. The poem is organized in a manner that portrays order and power. He organizes each stanza into an octet. Each stanza, being eight lines long symbolizes perfection. Eight is the infinity sign sideways and represents totality and absolutism (Properties of 8). The imperialist view themselves as perfect being that have complete order and Kipling captures this by organizing his stanzas in a manner that most represents the infinite symbol. The poem is organized into an iambic trimeter and has rhythm every odd line. The unit of sound is divided into two syllables and stresses the second syllable (iambic trimester wiki). This is used to stress the importance of certain words in each line; for example: forthà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦bestà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦breed/ bindà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦sonsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦exile (Kipling, lines 1, 2). These words are stressed because they are the ones that are important for the meaning of the lines and the poem as a whole. Two words that are constantly stressed throughout the poem are White and burden (Kipling line 1). Kipling purposely does this to relay the significance of these words as they relate to his poem as a whole. They hold more meaning because of they are repeated throughout and are stress. The first and foremost obligation the audience must meet is of a racial concern. An imperialist must be white and of a westernized culture. This was an obvious requirement and seemed natural to the peoples of the 1800s; however, it served a more distinct purpose of creating a division between two peoples: the Whites, in this case the Americans, and nonwhites, particularly those who are Filipinos. This division is set up to faintly, yet effectively, create a dichotomy between the two. One expression about this dichotomy is a metaphorical representation of a father to a son. The son, who represents the natives, is an uneducated and unenlightened half-devil and half-child (Kipling, line 8). He is young and has had no exposer to a responsible, committed, and real-world lifestyle and lives in isolation from the rest of humanity and knows nothing of its complexities. Children need the care of a mature adult who is willing to search [his] manhood and take up the challenge of teaching them t o have done with childish days (Kipling, line 53, 49). This use of language creates men, not woman, as the care giver. Child rearing was done predominantly by woman during this time; however, Kipling ignores this tendency and uses a fatherly relationship. In Victorian society, men need to become fathers as a rite of passage in their masculinity (Tosh, page 79). Being a patrilinial society, the ideal child was a son; he would carry on the name and inherit the essence of the family. Children obeyed their father and if they failed to do so, the father alone punishes them; he is the enforcer. Although the actual raising of a child was done by the work of women, Kipling refers to the fatherly dominance of the household. The natives will inherit the fathers characteristics and must obey him at all times otherwise they will be punished. Kipling ignores the fact that rearing children was done by women because colonialism is about taking on the characteristics of the imperial nation. He choo ses to use the metaphor of fathers, not mothers, because men have a stronger will to conduct the task of imperialism. Without the white man to be a father to these children, they shall remain ignorant, weak, and uncultured. Kipling exaggerates this with strong word choices. For example, the natives are described as illiterate, silent, sullen people (Kipling, line 47). Kipling ignores the fact that they speak a foreign language and, instead, says they do not speak at all. This dehumanization insists that the indigenous people will remain silent unless they learn the true language of English; the only language that is in existence, the rest is gibberish. Another example of Kiplings use of strong language would be when he hints that starvation and disease will be inevitable unless they have a father to fill full [their] mouth[s] of famine and bid the sickness cease (Kipling, lines 19, 20). The natives are automatically categorized as famine and disease infested. This is used as another form of justification for colonialism. The fatherly nations of imperialism will put an end to this. The natives, being children, will remain like this unless they are taught otherwise. And since most of western society during the 1800s was patriarchal, the father was the one to do the job. Kiplings use of language makes it quite clear as to who the poem is aimed at in terms of gender. The constant repetition of sexist language is evident in the title and in every following stanza with the phrase: White Mans burden. This reappearance is meant to create a clarification of who has the privilege of colonization. More words that reflect a male audience are sons, manhood, king, and the continuous reiteration of his and man (Kipling, lines 3, 26, 53). These word choices hint heavily toward a male audience. The role of an imperial colonization was solely a mans duty and honor to complete. This reflects a sexist Victorian world where males play the dominant role (Tiffert). It was a time where women were expected to be conservative, quiet, caring, emotional, and supportive of their husbands yet reliant of them. Males, on the other hand, were brave, politically active, patriotic, socially active, and hardworking. During this time it was only fitting for men to construct colonies and be brave enough to aid the foreign sullen people (Kipling, line 7). But not just any man was fitting enough to execute such a task successfully; it had to be narrowed down to an elite few. The Victorian era was a time of many statuses and classes that divided people and made certain white males more qualified to colonize over others; The White Mans Burden captures this division in a few lines. Kipling targets parents to send forth the best ye breed and bind [their] sons to exile to serve [their] captives needs (Kipling, lines 2, 3, 4). Now first off, it is not considered an exile but a privilege because only the select few have what it takes to colonize. The word exile is used as a metaphorical representation of the foreign land. The natives live in a place that is not suitable for proper life; it would be considered an exile to the peoples of western society. Its very existence is a crime against nature. The white man must go and fix this land and its people. And second, as hinted in this quote, only the most intelligent and superlative can conduct such a challenging task of cleansing and taming the untamed. The phrase, best ye breed, not only states who the intended class is, but also creates a division among the whites themselves and says that not all can undertake in the mission of colonization. The word breed brings to mind either dogs or horses; more specifically pure breed ones. This allusion is used to represent the upper (pure breed) and lower (mixed breed) classes and puts a value on them. Pure breeds are usually worth more than mixed-breeds; therefore, the upper class has a higher value, is specialized, better developed, and more idealized (Welton). But then later in the poem Kipling seems to contradict himself when he says that this process requires the toil of serf and sweeper (Kipling, line 27). These jobs of servitude were usually held by members of the lower class during this time (Victorian Era). But, realizing how daunting the challenge of colonization is, the work of lower class men must be included. Colonization was just like any other business of the time. The rich are the bosses and the poor are the workers. The orchestrator gets all the recognition but the musicians are the actual ones to conduct the procedure. Now of course the upper class has organization skills, tenacity and many other characteristics that are vital for imperialism to be performed. Traits that Kipling so explains throughout his poem in a condescending manner. If it were not for the brainchild of the intelligent, this operation would not happen at all. Kipling really emphasizes this by choosing to only portray elements of upper class men. It is evident in his patronizing tone throughout the whole poem. For these reasons, the target of the poem can be narrowed down to the middle to upper class of society, the knights of bravery; knights who are required to fight for their birthright to honor and duty. Kipling implies the importance of this duty to colonize but explains this by using the seemingly unrelated, connotative meaning of the word burden. He repeats the phrase, take up the White Mans burden at the start of every stanza to illustrate the white man as his sole audience; it is a demand aimed directly at the reader, commanding them to take up the burden (Kipling, line 1). This burden is described throughout the poem as requiring the white man to serve the captives needs, veil the threat of terror, to fill full the mouth of famine, and the list goes on (Kipling, line 4, 11, 19). The ultimate meaning is that the conquerors are providing benefits and servitude to the conquered and nothing is mentioned about slavery, stolen political freedom, and the life toll of defeat. The burden, being of such a noble cause, can only be conducted by whites that have the proper characteristics. This is where Kiplings patronizing tone comes into play. He explains that they must show patience, be plain in their purpose, forfeit their show of pride, and be selfless (Kipling, line 10, 12, 13, 14). They must be merciful enough to end the misery of the half-deviled and half-child by filling full the mouth of Famine and making their sickness cease (Kipling, line 8, 19, 20). They must be willing to work hard and conduct the toil of serf and sweeper and not just simply rule as luxurious lazy kings (Kipling, line 26, 27). The saintly figures will never exploit the colonized but instead they bestow their heavenly touch on the people: curing their diseased, revitalizing their economy, and ending their hunger. All these noble characteristics, duties, and acts of civility are taught in western culture and are born from nationalistic passions. Nationalism is the main idea behind colonization. Kipling is explaining how nationalism can be harnessed to implore citizens to believe colonization is a necessity and that this imperialistic burden is, in fact, a natural occurrence. In this sense, nationalism can be explained by Imperialism which, in turn, can be explained in terms of Social Darwinism. Social Darwinism was born in the 19th century and soon became recognized by imperialist in the same way Aristotles ideas about planetary orbit around Earth was recognized by the Roman Catholic Church (What is Social Darwinism). It was nothing but truth and could be related to almost every aspect of human interaction in one form or another including superiority of a race over others (What is Social Darwinism). Western nations, as known throughout the Victorian era, are by far the most superior beings in the world and the highest example, at this time, was Great Britain. This can be explained by their advances in science, industry, medi cine, and even quality of life as expressed through culture. Foreign races, lacking many of these same advances, naturally were less competent and weaker. But instead of letting these races die out or live horrible lives as explained by Darwin, it is more humane and noble to assist them in becoming enlightened. It is the duty of western culture to use their predictive knowledge of the troubles of these foreign races and aid them before they happen. Imperialism demands that they take advantage of this opportunity and act, not only for spoils but for honest principles. Their natural, nationalistic pride should stir up these beliefs and if they do not, they are just as inferior and ignorant as the races they are trying to help. If America does not quench its prides demands, they shall face the judgment of [their] peers who are the British (Kipling, line56). Nationalism is a justification for imperialism which Kipling harnesses, and this is why his poem is effective in convincing his au dience towards colonialism. The root of this justification is Great Britain, the homeland of Rudyard Kipling. Kipling is informing Americans on the proper way to portray their nationalistic passions. In doing so, Britain becomes the teacher; a teacher who does not wish to get embarrassed by the pupil. America needs to show maturity and responsibility in empire building. Kipling is spurring America to work hard and long and to reject the lightly proffered laurel and the easy ungrudged praise of taking the painless route to international and national recognition (Kipling, line 51, 52). It is something that is earned through progressive work with the indigenous, not something that can be easily taken from them.

Summary Essay

Brett Virkelyst Leanne Rowley WR 095 4/9/2013 â€Å"William Zinsser Simplicity Summary† William Zinsser begins with telling us that we clutter our sentences too often in American Writing. Essentially, we shouldn’t try to put so many extra words into our sentences; we need to get it down to its simplest form, so the reader can understand the sentence clearly and efficiently. Citizens today are spending too much time trying to emphasize their sentences, trying to sound smarter, or they think it will get their point across better.Readers may find the writing very difficult to read, and they usually won’t be able to portray the message that the writer is trying to convey. We ask, what is the real question and how can we solve this? Citizens would love to get rid of this problem, and Zinsser has a few solutions on how we can get rid of cluttered writing forever. Human beings do not want to challenge, nor do they want to go above and beyond of what we think that we are capable of writing wise. Nobody likes reading something and not knowing what they are talking about, it makes for a very unpleasant experience. Also you can read this summary –  Protecting Freedom of Expression on the CampusZinsser says that all we have to do is â€Å"clear our heads of clutter. Clear thinking becomes clear writing: one can’t exist without the other. † Once you have strayed away the reader, there is no hope for them to finish that story, it is game over. Cluttering will more then likely make the reader lose their interest, after a paragraph or two. Articles can end up being so cluttered, that it doesn’t only end up being the dullness that turned the reader away, it may be that they simply couldn’t understand what it meant. Always ask yourself â€Å"what am I trying to say? because some people are not naturally born to be clear headed writers. You have got to make sure to make the material clear and to the point. Make sure words aren’t being used that have the same meaning, also don’t use prior sentences and try to word them differently. Learn to ditch the b ad parts of the material, because not everything will make the final cut. Once you learn this, your message will be able to be conveyed smooth and direct. Work Cited Zinsser, William. â€Å"Simplicity. † Language Awareness: Essays for College Writers. Eds. P. Escholz & A. Rosa. New York: St. Martins, 1997. 50-55. Print.

History of Feminism in the 1990’s

Overall, the rights and status of women have improved considerably in the last century; however, gender equality has recently been threatened within the last decade. Blatantly sexist laws and practices are slowly being eliminated while social perceptions of â€Å"women's roles† continue to stagnate and even degrade back to traditional ideals. It is these social perceptions that challenge the evolution of women as equal on all levels. In this study, I will argue that subtle and blatant sexism continues to exist throughout educational, economic, professional and legal arenas. Women who carefully follow their expected roles may never recognize sexism as an oppressive force in their life. I find many parallels between women's experiences in the nineties with Betty Friedan's, in her essay: The Way We Were – 1949. She dealt with a society that expected women to fulfill certain roles. Those roles completely disregarded the needs of educated and motivated business women and scientific women. Actually, the subtle message that society gave was that the educated woman was actually selfish and evil. I remember in particular the searing effect on me, who once intended to be a psychologist, of a tory in McCall's in December 1949 called â€Å"A Weekend with Daddy. † A little girl who lives a lonely life with her mother, divorced, an intellectual know-it-all psychologist, goes to the country to spend a weekend with her father and his new wife, who is wholesome, happy, and a good cook and gardener. And there is love and laughter and growing flowers and hot clams and a gourmet cheese omelet and square dancing, and she doesn't want to go home. But, pitying her poor mother typing away all by herself in the lonesome apartment, she keeps her guilty secret that from now on she will e living for the moments when she can escape to that dream home in the country where they know â€Å"what life is all about. † (See Endnote #1) I have often consulted my grandparents about their experiences, and I find their historical perspective enlightening. My grandmother was pregnant with her third child in 1949. Her work experience included: interior design and modeling women's clothes for the Sears catalog. I asked her to read the Friedan essay and let me know if she felt as moved as I was, and to share with me her experiences of sexism. Her immediate reaction was to point out that â€Å"Betty Friedan was a college educated woman and she had certain goals that never interested me. † My grandmother, though growing up during a time when women had few social rights, said she didn't experience oppressive sexism in her life. However, when she describes her life accomplishments, I feel she has spent most of her life fulfilling the expected roles of women instead of pursuing goals that were mostly reserved for men. Unknowingly, her life was controlled by traditional, sexist values prevalent in her time and still prevalent in the nineties. Twenty-four years after the above article from McCall's magazine was written, the Supreme Court decided whether women should have a right to an abortion in Roe v. Wade (410 U. S. 113 (1973)). I believe the decision was made in favor of women's rights mostly because the court made a progressive decision to consider the woman as a human who may be motivated by other things in life than just being a mother. Justice Blackmun delivered the following opinion: Maternity, or additional offspring, may force upon the woman a distressful life and future. Psychological harm may be imminent. Mental and physical health may be taxed by child care. There is also a distress, for all concerned, associated with the unwanted child, and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family already unable, psychologically and otherwise, to care for it. In other cases, as in this one, the additional difficulties and continuing stigma of unwed motherhood I feel the court decision of Roe v. Wade would not have been made in 1949. Even in 1973, it was a progressive decision. The problem of abortion has existed for the entire history of this country (and eyond), but had never been addressed because discussing these issues was not socially acceptable. A culture of not discussing issues that have a profound impact on women is a culture that The right of abortion became a major issue. Before 1970, about a million abortions were done every year, of which only about ten thousand were legal. Perhaps a third of the women having illegal abortions – mostly poor people – had to be hospitalized for complications. How many thousands died as a result of these illegal abortions no one really knows. But the illegalization of abortion clearly orked against the poor, for the rich could manage either to have their baby or to have their abortion under safe conditions. (See Endnote #3) A critic of the women's movement would quickly remind us that women have a right to decline marriage and sex, and pursue their individual interests. However, I would argue that the social pressure women must endure if they do not conform to their expected role is unfair. The problem goes beyond social conformity and crosses into government intervention (or lack thereof). The 1980's saw the pendulum swing against the women's movement. Violent acts against women who sought abortions became common and the government was unsympathetic to the victims. There are parallels between the Southern Black's civil rights movement and the women's movement: Blacks have long been accustomed to the white government being unsympathetic to violent acts against them. During the civil rights movement, legal action seemed only to come when a white civil rights activist was killed. Women are facing similar disregard presently, and their movement is truly one A national campaign by the National Organization of Women began on 2 March 1984, demanding hat the US Justice Department investigate anti-abortion terrorism. On 1 August federal authorities finally agreed to begin to monitor the violence. However, Federal Bureau of Investigation director, William Webster, declared that he saw no evidence of â€Å"terrorism. Only on 3 January 1985, in a pro-forma statement, did the President criticize the series of bombings as â€Å"violent anarchist acts† but he still refused to term them â€Å"terrorism. † Reagan deferred to Moral Majoritarian Jerry Falwell's subsequent campaign to have fifteen million Americans wear â€Å"armbands† on 22 January 1985, â€Å"one or every legal abortion† since 1973. Falwell's anti-abortion outburst epitomized Reaganism's orientation: â€Å"We can no longer passively and quietly wait for the Supreme Court to change their mind or for Congress to pass a law. † Extremism on the right was no vice, moderation no virtue. Or, as Hitler explained in Mein Kamph, â€Å"The very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence. † (See Endnote #4) This mentality continued on through 1989 during the Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (109 S. Ct. 3040 (1989)) case. The Reagan Administration had urged the Supreme Court to use this case as the basis for overturning Roe v. Wade. † (See Endnote #5) It is disturbing that the slow gains achieved by the women's movement are so volatile and endangered when conservative administrations gain a majority in government. To put the problem into perspective: a woman's right to have an abortion in this country did not come until 1973. Less than two decades later, the president of the United States is pushing to take that right away. It seems blatant that society is bent on putting women in their places. From the above examples, it appears American culture prefers women as non-professional, non-intellectual, homemakers and mothers. This mentality is not easily resolved, because it is introduced at a young age. Alice Brooks experienced inequality on the basis of her race and her sex. In her autobiography, A Dream Deferred, she recalls the reaction of her father when she brought up the idea of college to him: I found a scholarship for veterans' children and asked my father to sign and furnish proof that he was a veteran. He refused and told me that I was only going to get married and have babies. I needed to stay home and help my mother with her kids. My brother needed college to support a family. Not only was I not going to get any help, I was also tagged as selfish because I wanted to This is another example of women being labeled as selfish for wanting the same opportunities as men. Alice Brooks is a very courageous woman; seemingly able to overcome any oppression she may encounter. During her presentation to our class, she said that â€Å"women who succeed in male dominated fields are never mediocre – they are extraordinary achievers. † Her insight encapsulates uch of the subtle sexism that exists today. I feel that no one can truly be equal in a society when only the â€Å"extraordinary achievers† are allowed to succeed out of their expected social role. This attitude of rising blatant and subtle attacks on women's civil rights is further exemplified in recent reactions to affirmative action plans. These plans have been devised to try to give women and minorities an opportunity to participate in traditionally white male dominated areas. However, we see the same trends in legal action for the use of affirmative action plans as we saw in the 980's backlash against the Roe v. Wade decision. A few interesting points were presented in the case, Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara (480 U. S. 616 (1987)). Mr. Paul E. Johnson filed suit against the Santa Clara County Transportation Agency when he was denied a promotion, feeling the company's affirmative action plan denied him of his civil rights. Some interesting facts were presented in this case: Specifically, 9 of the 10 Para-Professionals and 110 of the 145 Office and Clerical Workers were women. By contrast, women were only 2 of the 28 Officials and Administrators, 5 of the 58 Professionals, 12 of the 124 Technicians, none of the Skilled Crafts Workers, and 1 – who was Joyce – of the 110 Road Maintenance Workers. The above statistics show women have been considerably underrepresented at the Santa Clara County Transportation Agency. These numbers are not uncommon and are found throughout business. It is interesting to note the current popular perception is that affirmative action precludes white males from finding employment with companies that implement these plans. The truth is in the numbers, however. The fact that Mr. Johnson felt he was denied his civil rights because an equally qualified woman was given a promotion, instead of him, is just a small window into the subtle sexism that exists today. Most critics of affirmative action do not consider the grossly unequal numbers of men in management and professional positions. Secondly, it never seems an issue of debate that a woman may have had no other previous life opportunities in these male dominated areas. I do not intend to argue that affirmative action is good or bad, but only wish to point out that the current backlash against these programs is heavily rooted in sexism and racism. Often blatant violence or unfair acts against a group of people will cause that group to pull together and empower themselves against their oppressors. The women's movement has made large steps to eliminate many of these blatantly sexist acts in the last century. Now the real difficulty is upon us: subtle acts of sexism and the degrading social roles of women in today's conservative culture. Alice Brooks so eloquently described her experiences with inequality, stating, â€Å"the worse pain came from those little things people said or did to me. † As these â€Å"little things† accumulate in the experience of a oung woman, she increasingly finds herself powerless in her relationships, employment, economics, and society in general. The female child has as many goals as the male child, but statistically she is unable to realize these goals because of the obstacles that society sets in front of her. Society and media attempt to create an illusion that women have every right that men enjoy. However, women will never be equal until the day female scientists, intellectuals, professionals, military leaders, and politicians are just as accepted and encouraged to participate in all of society's arenas as males.

Investigating The Relationship Between The Actual...

This paper will attempt to examine the relationship between the actual reporting of the murders during the time with retellings of the murders in modern popular culture. It will therefore examine sources from the 19th century onward. It will explore both facts and legends associated with the mysterious figure of Jack the Ripper. Public responses both in the original reporting and feedback to modern films will be addressed. This will coincide with the cultural significance of these crimes and how it continues today. The cultural phenomenon of Jack the Ripper will be addressed in how this both fuels the media coverage and how the media fills a desire in its audience. Direct comparisons will be made in some cases to the portrayal of actual†¦show more content†¦There is also quite simply the gruesome nature of these crimes. It is not just Jack the Ripper, but rather all serial killers and general criminals that attract the attention of a variety of audiences. In humanity’s diametrically opposed worldview, crimes are seen as being committed by delinquents, and criminals are vastly different from the average â€Å"good† person. Therefore outlandish and egregious crimes carry more interest in the media. According to a study by the Federal Bureau of Investigations, less than one percent of murders are committed annually by serial killers as opposed to 12.5 percent of murders that are committed by members of one’s own family. And yet, domestic violence stories are often d ismissed fairly quickly by the media, precisely because of their frequency. Because of this, it is not so much the unknown quantity of Jack the Ripper that generates such broad appeal but rather the rarity of these uniquely horrendous crimes themselves. The histrionics of the retellings have escalated with the times much as they did with the original reportings from the first murder to the last. This tale is as much about the Ripper himself, with his grotesque crimes and unknown identity, as it is about the human condition and psyche. As Coville and Lucanio note, it is â€Å"also Brundeen, 3 the story of the human passion to voyeuristically follow in the Ripper’s footsteps†. Details, both of Jack the Ripper