3 essay

2. Consider, for example, poverty, which is arguably the most far-reaching, long-standing cause of chronic suffering there is. The magnitude of poverty is especially ironic in a country like the United States whose enormous wealth dwarfs that of entire continents. More than one out of every six people in the United States lives in poverty or near-poverty. For children, the rate is even higher. Even in the middle class there is a great deal of anxiety about the possibility of falling into poverty or something close to it – through divorce, for example, or simply being laid off as companies try to improve their competitive advantage, profit margins, and stock prices by transferring jobs overseas.
But to see why some fifth of the population must be poor no matter how fast people run, all we have to do is look at the system itself. It uses unbridled competition to determine not only who gets fancy cars and nice houses, but who gets to eat or has a place to live or access to health care. It distributes income and wealth in ways that promote increasing concentrations among those who already have the most. Given this, the people in this year’s bottom fifth might run faster next year and get someone else to take their place in the bottom fifth.
In part, then, poverty exists because the economic system is organized in ways that encourage the accumulation of wealth at one end and creates conditions of scarcity that make poverty inevitable at the other. But the capitalist system generates poverty in other ways as well. In the drive for profit, for example, capitalism places a high value on competition and efficiency. This motivates companies and their managers to control costs by keeping wages as low as possible and replacing people with machines or replacing full-time workers with part-time workers. It makes it a rational choice to move jobs to regions or countries where labor is cheaper and workers are less likely to complain about poor working conditions, or where laws protecting the natural environment from industrial pollution or workers from injuries on the job are weak or unenforced. Capitalism also encourages owners to shut down factories and invest money elsewhere in enterprises that offer a higher rate of return.
New subdivisions are sold by purveying the image of a home in quasi-rural surroundings, but conveniently located near the city. The fact that these semi-rural paradises rapidly become urban areas distinguished from the city proper mainly by their monotony only serves as a basis for promoting a subsequent round of flight to the new urban fringe.

In short, we are a society in a perpetual state of flight from the city. In practice, most people who can afford to move out of the inner city do so. To be sure, there are middle-class and wealthy people residing in selected downtown areas — gentrified older neighbourhoods or up-scale condominiums, especially in the most prosperous cities. But the vast majority of people with money to spend prefer to live outside the inner city.

In the neighbourhoods that are not gentrified, that leaves those who cannot afford to move out. Poverty is not necessarily accompanied by social problems, any more than wealth guarantees the absence of social problems. But when a metropolitan area is divided into neighbourhoods where poverty predominates and others where comfortable circumstances are the rule, it is inevitable that there will be a concentration of social problems in the poor areas. At the same time, the exodus from those areas makes it inevitable that, as the problems escalate, the resources for dealing with them will dwindle.

Where social problems predominate, lawlessness follows. Increasing crime and growing poverty lead to the decay of some downtown neighbourhoods. Houses are boarded up. Some neighbourhoods become so crime-ridden and decayed that they turn into no-go zones, and, hey presto, the bias against cities that started it all begins to look factual.

Confronted with growing evidence of the nastiness of city life, growing numbers of people take counter-measures. First they lock their car doors when they drive through what, in their minds at least, has become The Ghetto. But of course their neighbourhoods are not free of crime either, and when they are hit by crime they imagine that it has been committed by a refugee from the hideous streets of the inner city.

The solution, or so may of them begin to believe, is to fortify their homes against outsiders. It begins with high fences, heavy gates and barred windows, then proceeds to the hiring of private police to patrol the neighbourhood. When that still does not produce the yearned-for feeling of security, the next step is gated communities: whole subdivisions, entire condominium developments, or apartment complexes protected from the outside world by armed guards or electronic security. Such developments have already proliferated in the United States and are gaining a foothold in Canada.

A similar mentality is evident in retail trade. Shopping malls have always been highly controlled environments, carefully designed for the sole purpose of circulating potential customers as quickly as possible from one purchase to the next. From the outset, penniless lingerers were kept at bay. Security personnel forbade lengthy stays in the food court.

Benches in the mall corridor looked attractive, but had been designed, possibly by sadists, and apparently with the objective of encouraging short rest periods. In time, such measures have been augmented by electronic security and guards who double as bouncers instructed to deal summarily with anyone deemed an undesirable presence
day’s society is divided in to three classes. You are “placed” in one of these classes based on your wealth and education. The three classes are: the upper class, which is broken up into the upper-upper class and the lower –upper class, the middle class which is broken up into the upper middle and lower middle, then there is the working class and the last is the underclass. Examples of people in each class are: companies that have industrialized worldwide and are generations old and are basically rich are part of the upper-upper class. The executives who direct these companies that make a couple million a year can be considered part of the upper lower class. Someone who may own an agency of this company can be considered part of the upper middle because they make a lot more than the average person. The sales-men of this company are part of the lower middle class , generally because their income is a lot lower and they have less education. Those who do the actual labor for this company can be considered part of the upper lower class, they are usually paid minimum wages. Last, janitorial workers are part of the lower-lower class. It is possible to move thru these classes, intergenerational mobility is the movement of a whole generation thru the social classes, usually going upward, and intragenerational mobility is the movement of an individual thru the social classes, also commonly going upward. Poverty is divided into two parts, relative poverty which is when one is struggling but not completely poor and absolute which is basically homeless

Greetings, community at Iron March, good fellow fascists, radicals and political misfits. I am a resurgent National Socialist who briefly posted here back in the summer of 2013. At the time I had assumed the name of “Brynhelde” and identified as a Danish folkish nationalist. Some of you may even vaguely remember me. Essentially my return to this forum follows a gradual period of personal political transformation, turbulent shifts in my thought and positions, a constant alternating between radicalism and reformism. As I had initially distanced myself from fascism, from the radical right, not due to disagreement but my sheer misunderstandings at the time and perhaps a little arrogance, I had at this time, assumed a real bland, dare I even say cheesy, bread-and-butter bourgeois conservative nationalism. Now this period in my political development was mercifully short lived given the sheer embarrassment of holding such a position, even going so far as to support the likes of Farage and Geert Wilders, labeling them the knights of the West’s darkest hour, even taking a philo-semitic stance and backing Israel. This also presented itself as an intellectual black-hole, cultivation, meaningful constructive debate or dialogue of any kind being strictly limited by the leagues of rank and file simpletons, limp bumpkins, charlatans, disingenuous of all sorts. No sense of direction, other than these same bloated literary catchphrases after catchphrases. Bland chatter of tradition and traditional values, of “reforming” the system, “Western ideals”, read the tomes by Buchanan and etc, correcting the massive, maybe we can reform this or that. Not that their understanding is up to par anyway. because I am an impatient man when it comes to politics

With a diverse population existing in the United States today, our country is a melting pot of different cultures, each one unique in its own respect. Culture, distinguishing one societal group from another, includes beliefs, behaviors, language, traditions, art, fashion styles, food, religion, politics, and economic systems. Through lifelong and ever changing processes of learning, creativity, and sharing, culture shapes our patterns of behavior and thinking. A culture’s significance is so profound that it touches almost every aspect of who and what we are. “Culture becomes the lens through which we perceive and evaluate what is going on around us” (Henslin, 1993).

Trying to define the complex term of culture with varying elements of distinguishable characteristics is a difficult task. Perhaps, a description of a culture would be easier to explain. For instance, an Iranian woman has just appeared in your office for services and it is immediately evident that her culture is very different than yours. First, her dark colored clothing covers her entire body from head to toe, including a black veil over her face. Secondly, as she speaks, a cultural difference is detected in both, her language and gestures. Her accent and the non-visible facial expressions create a barrier for comprehending the communication. Later, as the service for the woman progresses, her beliefs, values, and norms of her culture are dispelled. For example, in order for the woman to show her face to another male in public, she must first request permission from her husband to unveil. During further discussion, it becomes even more apparent, that this Iranian woman is subservient and possesses a lower level of status than that of Iranian males. All of these characteristics are indicative of this woman’s culture.

As conveyed in the above description, the characteristics represent the unique symbols of one’s culture. Symbols, in representative form of communication, art, expressions, materials, and so on, allow a cultural group to develop complex thoughts and to exchange those thoughts with each other. Through the exchanging of symbols, one’s cultural ideas, beliefs, and values, are passed on from one generation to the next.

People are not born with culture; they have to learn it. Throughout the development of the entire life span, culture is learned from the society in which we live. Furthermore, in the diverse population of the United States, ethnic groups or societies will have to interact with other groups outside the realm of their individual self. In order to do so, it is necessary for the societies to exchange languages, ideas, or even, technology. In addition, the changing environments of the world population requires a need for cultural adaptation for basic survival. For example, a move from the United States, where basic resources are plentiful, to Russia, where the resources are scarce, would force an adaptation to the cultural differences in order to develop a new lifestyle.

In conclusion, culture defines who we are, how we think, and how we behave. Some kinds of culture are include better means of making life securer than others. Cultural traits that offer some advantages, utility, or even pleasures are sought and accepted by societies. According to a prominent anthropologist, “Culture is contagious.” “A culture is a means to an end: the security and continuity of life.” (Britannica.com, p.12).


Henslin, J. (1993). Sociology: a down to earth approach. Needham Heights: Simon & Schuster, Inc.

Transcending our literary bounds

The human brain is a massive construct whose full potential scientists are only able to measure about ten percent. Ten thousand years ago, the average size of the human brain was ten percent larger than it is now, yet despite our loss in brain size, we are incredibly advanced in comparison to our sister species’. Why is that?

It’s because our brain evolved to become powerful, as well as more compact. In the last ten thousand years, the brain has become more wrinkled, invaginating into itself to make a big enough brain with a huge storage capacity.

The human brain has evolved to become more efficient, and in that quest, it has become smaller. In this case, however, less is more. In an almost poetic way, technology has evolved alongside humanity in almost the exact same path. Before the 1950s, technology was built big to store a lot. After the invention of transistors in 1954, smaller forms of technology ended up storing huge amounts of information. Fast forward fifty years, and there are microchips, the size of a dime, storing hundreds of gigabytes.

There is a pattern in both the evolution of the brain and the evolution of technology. They are getting smaller and more efficient; they process data and condense it to process it faster. They are becoming incredible devices of storage. However, some believe that the human brain is losing its efficiency due to our significant achievements in technology. In Nicholas Carr’s essay, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?,” he states that because of how easy information is to access and store on our computers, our brains no longer have to work as hard, and thus we are slowly losing our ability to concentrate and absorb long packets of information presented to us. He suggests that the information streamlined to us is full of distractions, and we fall prey to the subtle influence of the media. Ultimately, he says that our brain has the capacity to rewire itself when exposed to modern technology, and as a result of our increased reliance on it, our ability to critically analyze and contemplate on literature has been hindered.

At the beginning of his essay, Carr recites that his mind is slipping. Essentially, he has difficulty in concentrating whenever he attempts to read a large book or article. He then relates to how he does research for his articles today, as opposed to how it was done previously. Carr says that all his research which originally “required days in the stacks or periodical rooms of libraries can now be done in minutes. A few Google searches, some quick clicks on hyperlinks, and I’ve got the telltale fact or pithy quote I was after.” Carr admits that he spends a majority of his time on the internet, even when he’s not researching for an article and theorizes that perhaps his time spent online is actually changing the way he thinks.

According to a study, referenced by Carr, about online research habits, “It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of ‘reading’ are emerging as users ‘power browse’ horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.” Carr completely neglects the fact that unlike the era before the internet, there is an information overload in modern society. Counter to a time where citizens were only knowledgeable about the events in their small community, the modern era citizen can live in a remote town in Kansas and know the local events in a random town in Baghdad. News is updated every minute, and every society has some socio-political issue going on, and it’s completely ridiculous to expect any person to read a six page article on any such event.

When one browses the internet, most sites structure their content so one can get a general idea about what’s going on in every section, whether that be world news or celebrity gossip. Websites like Reddit, Yahoo, and Google News all have major headlines that users can pick and choose to read about what they’re interested in. That doesn’t mean that they have to be an expert in whatever they choose to read about. People don’t have the time to read War and Peace every time there’s a new political ramification in Syria. And perhaps the brain is changing to adapt to this method. Perhaps it’s allowing us to scan and make out what is most important in a series of articles. Is that really so bad?

I don’t believe the brain is getting inefficient at all. This is all part of a long-term evolution that has been occurring since before the beginning of man. People have taught themselves to speed read, which is just omitting non-essential word clusters and mental imagery in order to quickly scan and understand literature.

People use the process of chunking, in order to remember numbers, passwords, and almost everything. There’s a huge amount of psychological studies done on ways to efficiently improve human memory, and all of them involve breaking down information in order to quickly absorb it into long term memory. I may not be able to recite Brave New World word for word, but I can easily write a summary about it. Any quotes or phrases can be searched for online. And that’s the magic of human and technological evolution; they are evolving side by side and making each other more efficient.

Delving even further back, Carr speaks about how Nietzsche’s writing was observed to have changed after he began using a typewriter, that his prose “changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style,” and that this effect was because the brain “has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly, altering the way it functions.” Carr eventually goes on to state that the internet has the most profound effect as it is “subsuming most of our other intellectual technologies. It’s becoming our map and our clock, our printing press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and TV.” A true fact indeed. Especially when he adds that the internet is being littered with distractions much like “television programs add text crawls and pop-up ads, and magazines and newspapers shorten their articles, introduce capsule summaries, and crowd their pages with easy-to-browse info-snippets.” We have reached a point in society where we could potentially enter a Huxlean world, where humanity is distracted from real issues and calmly ruled without quarrel because we wouldn’t even care about pressing issues. However, he suggests that the problem is due to technology as a whole, rather than a few corrupt individuals. I think most humans are very likely to be engrossed with current events, but how are many of us to know whether an article is editorialized? The media lies and has lied on many occasions; one can’t give blame technology for what is innately a human fault.

Furthermore, Carr supports his belief that the internet is programming us to think differently in a historical context by referring to Frederick Winslow Taylor who broke “down every job into a sequence of small, discrete steps and then tested different ways of performing each one, [he] created a set of precise instructions for how each worker should work.” The workers complained, “claiming that it turned them into little more than automatons, but the factory’s productivity soared.” Carr brings that idea back round when he says that the internet is an efficient machine with “legions of programmers are intent on finding the ‘one best method’—the perfect algorithm—to carry out every mental movement of what we’ve come to describe as ‘knowledge work.’” His point is that the internet is being programmed so we don’t have to work hard to find what we need. We will end up relying on the internet so much that if a time ever came for us to actually work hard for research, we wouldn’t be able to because we are already programmed to scan and browse rather than read deeply.

And in some ways, he is absolutely correct. However, this isn’t a problem with the brain losing its efficiency. This is just the basic characteristic of human laziness. We don’t want to work hard. But I guarantee that any person still has the capability to research, if the need arises. We may not all be reading something so dry as War and Peace, but there are still thousands, if not millions, reading Harry Potter over and over for fun. We haven’t lost our ability to read deeply, but we have gotten lazier over time. And that may be a bigger issue overall.

Near the end of his essay, Carr reveals his true fear. The fear of Artificial Intelligence. He acknowledges that perhaps he is a bit too apprehensive about the technology and correlates his idea with an anecdote about Socrates having his own apprehensions about the development of writing. He mentions that “Socrates wasn’t wrong—the new technology did often have the effects he feared—but he was shortsighted. He couldn’t foresee the many ways that writing and reading would serve to spread information, spur fresh ideas, and expand human knowledge.” And he’s perfectly valid in fearing such a possibility. It’s the idea that we are fostering such a dependence on technology that in the near future, we may not know how to live without it. Are we really losing our minds? I don’t think so.

As technology evolves, we evolve alongside it. And maybe that means we’ll rely more on technology. Maybe that means we’ll rely a little less on ourselves. And maybe, we’ll form a symbiotic bond with developing technology, and our reliance on it may be the only human thing about us left. It’s an idea present throughout all of science fiction and perhaps it’s the next stage in human evolution.

In today’s society many believe that the World Wide Web is not good for your minds and how you think. But in reality it just comes down to self-control. You are the one who turns on that monitor; you are the one who decides what you do on the computer. No one is forcing you to watch videos on YouTube and “zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski”. Not everyone is the same and have the same habits like each other. Many people work better on the computer and the most out of every answer than they would for a book. And some would rather sit with a novel than be within seeing distance of a computer. Technology can become an addiction if used religiously; many people today have become addicts because they lack self-control and focus. Everyone will have a different opinion about this subject and no one will ever truly know the right answer to the question. All we will know is that at the end of the day technology will still be around the corner, lurking and waiting for you to use it or not. So it seems like the question “is Google making us stupid” is left for you to decide.
My thesis statement is basically to agree and disagree with Carr’s essay. Its all opinionated and up to the reader to determine if google is making you stupid or not
In Nicholas Carr’s essay “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, discusses society’s continuous use of technology and the internet. Carr first describes the continuous use of technology and the internet has effected our own way of thinking. The way we perceived information has changed dramatically because of the different styles of writing on the internet. Carr explained, “My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy”(Carr). Our minds have adjusted or reprogrammed to reading articles on the internet and now made it difficult for people to read a normal novel as Carr described. He is correct, people has lost the ability of deep reading. The internet has made vast information accessible by the click of a button. It has turned days of hard research at the library to hours of studying at the access of a home computer. Society’s reliance on technology has increased immeasurably throughout time because of the vast amounts of information and benefits it has provided for the human race.

My thesis is the very last sentence and this paragraph just mostly describes Nicholas Carr’s main points throughout his essay and how he refers back to a time before technology was this advance. This is also my introductory paragraph.
Carr’s vagueness is also matched with very opinionated supporting evidence, “you should be skeptical of my skepticism” (“Is Google Making Us Stupid”). Admitting to his own readers that he is skeptical is admitting that the portrayal of his evidence is biased. While, many may argue that this claim enhances his credibility, Carr really doesn’t lose any support by admitting he is biased, because he counts on the reader to fill in the blanks. He expects that the reader will establish their own opinion mimicking his own beliefs, due to the reader’s own biases about society, and it lack to be all knowing, without such supplemental aids, as Google. Carr even makes the claim that he was “a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski” (“Is Google Making Us Stupid”) with claims like these he expresses his own opinion, he doesn’t exert a fact, but uses it as evidence. These claims sprinkle the article and distract from the argument, and force the reader to rely on his word alone.
Alston1Yolonda AlstonEng 101Professor Alicia Bolton19June2012 Technology of the Youth over theOld Generation Amy Goldwasser’s article “What’s the Matter with Kids Today?” has argues that the internet hasa positive effect on today’s youth in response to the older generation’s blame that the internet isresponsible for the decline in kids actually reading literature. Goldwasser gives examples on how theinternet’s impact has greatly affected today’s youth as opposed to the older generation’s views: Kidstoday read and write on their own free will via social networks, blogs, etc.They have instant access toinformation on any historical event or literature in their possession, and how the youth influence oureveryday life thru the internet. I agree with Goldwasser in saying that the internet has a more positiveinfluence on today’s youth life than the older generation gives it credit for. I agree with Goldwasserby questioning the older generation by asking, “If the inanities ofleveling charges based on fear, ignorance and old media, multiple choice testing?” (Goldwasser667).Technology is looked down upon by most of the older generations who are consequently stuck intheir ways and refuse to adapt to today’s way of life. Kids are more willing to accept change and use it totheir advantage. Technology has provided us with the internet, and it is more than a means ofcommunication.Personally, I had to get used to using the internet for my English 101 class. All myassignments require me to use the internet for blogging, researching, discussions, etc. The internet plays a large role in the lives of the youth today. The youth of today hasincorporated their social life into the internet, “using social networks, blog sites, IM’s, etc. to write andread about what is going on with them and their friends” ( Goldwasser 667).Author JuneAhnstates that “social network sites like Myspace and Facebook are now popular online communities with
2. Alston2large teenage user population “( June 1).In Goldwasser essay “ On average, a child has 30 or so friendson these networks, they all are going to spend 20 minutes or so hanging out and writing” (Goldwasser667). The social network is how the youth today communicate. This is also how the youth keep up withthe latest news and are reunited with old friend and relatives.Ahn saying that teens use socialnetworking to” Interact, play, explore, and learn in significant ways”( June 1). The internet also provides today’s youth with unlimited amounts of free knowledge at theirfingertips. Goldwasser states that “Ninety –Seven Percent of the teens in the Common Core surveyconnected “I have a dream” with its speaker” (Goldwasser 667). Because of the internet, I can look upthe video of Dr.King’s speech at any given moment with a laptop, Google it on an iPod or read it on aNook. The internet has made information available to everybody in some way shape or form, versusencyclopedias and books. Back in the days they couldn’t just flip a cell phone and look through any oftheir local libraries’ inventory for a copy of “The Diary of Anne Frank”; not to mention that they couldn’tbuy and download it from off the web. Not long ago that laptop, Kindles, Nook, and iPods were availableto us. For example,if you didn’t own encyclopedias, you had to get a ride to the nearest library to doyour homework. The realities of today seem so distant to the older generation. If they would open theireyes they would see what a great tool the internet can be, not saying that the internet within itself isn’tresponsible for a lot of damage. With the good, comes the bad, but in this case the good outweighs thebad from my personal opinion. The internet also gives kids today the ability to look up almost any piece of information uponrequest but it gives millions of kids around the world the choice to voice their opinion. Once a child’sopinion was swept aside, but nowadays the internet has a big impact on our everyday lives. And withthat being said, anybody who has access to the World Wide Web can voice their opinion on any andeverything they desire. Millions of kids from around the world have visited sites like YouTube, Twitter,MySpace and Facebook to voice their opinions on everything from presidential elections to their favorite
3. Alston3fast food restaurants. With the way society depends on computers and the internet nowadays, theyouth’s voice will be heard. With devices like the iPod, Nook, and Kindle book readers on the market,the use of books might one day be overlooked. Most of the books that are released today, as well asolder ones, are now available in a digital form. Hard copies of books, as well as pens, are being pulledfrom classes.Schools around the country have already begun to issue iPods andlaptops. I couldn’t thinkof a better way to get kids more involved in learning. In ten years or so when technology becomescheaper, the use of a book bag may no longer be needed. Technology may eventually incorporate everyaspect of our lives. In conclusion,I agree with Goldwasser in saying that the internet has a more positive influenceon today’s youth than the older generation gives it credit for. Kids of today read and write on their ownfree will, they have instant access to any historical information or literature in their possession, and theyinfluence our everyday life with their opinions via the internet
I do agree with Carr that technology has shaped our way of thinking, though. I liked his example of the clock and how, after its invention, we “stopped listening to our senses and started obeying the clock.” I had never thought about this before, but I guess that’s because I’ve never lived without a sense of time; my activities and thoughts are dictated by schedules. Hmm…I can definitely see how a change in the way we think could have happened (or is happening?) as a result of the Internet. With the millions of different things we can do on our computers these days, how could it not? I think Carr pretty much sums it up when he claims:
Carr admits that we, as a culture, read a lot more because of the Web, but laments that “our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.” And he highlights a quote from an essay by the playwright Richard Foreman:

The great German composer Beethoven, born 1770, died 1827 was world renowned for his provocative style which laid the groundwork for the romanticism. One thing that certainly had a great if not the primary inspiration for his style was his own experiences in life. Beethoven had a miserable
childhood. Beethoven has endured a difficult frusturating often cruel childhood. . He was painstakingly trained into the musical profession, despite his natural talents, he was still subject to harsh regimental cruelty by an alcoholic abusive father. His father was a cold distant man. His father was said to be a violent and intemperate man, who returned home late at night much worse for drink and dragged young Ludwig from his bed in order to “beat” music lessons into the boy’s sleepy head. There are also stories of his father forcing him to play his violin for the amusement of his drinking cronies. Despite these and other abuses – which might well have persuaded as lesser person to loathe the subject – the young Beethoven developed a sensitivity and vision for music. He was often the subject of his intense ridicule and torment. Beethoven remained strained with his father throughout his life. Beethoven, because of his natural talents felt convicted to put them to use. He traveled to Vienna in 1787 but this trip was cut short by his Mothers death. His career was marked by a certain . His earlier works were characterized by He begin to lose his hearing. Eventually going deaf. This, combined with a social repulsion and a custody battle over his nephew, his later years were certainly embittering ones.
His deafness had a significant impact on the style of his music. As the affliction was gradual, so it correlated with the shift in direction of his music over time. As his deafness progressed, his music lost the simplicity of his earlier composing period, and became more complex and passionate. His “Middle” period of composing began soon after his deafness started. His music of this period tended towards large-scale works expressing heroism and struggle, and included six symphonies, starting with the “Eroica” (3rd symphony), and including the intense Fifth Symphony which clearly illustrates a struggle and ultimate victory.

The “Late” period of Beethoven’s career covered the last eleven years of his life, and his compositions reflected his personal expression in their depth and intensity. They were among his most passionate and experimental styles, very much in the Romantic style. This period included his final symphony, the “Choral”, which employed the use of voice as a scored instrument for the first time. nd life naturally became more self-contained, hermetic, and isolated. Wagner. To him, Beethoven’s deafness wasn’t a negative thing, it was a positive thing. It permitted him to enter this strange, transcendent realm where he was able to compose this music, cut off from the conventions that constrained composers who could hear. The experts looked at the first violin part in the first movement of each quartet, counting the number of notes above G6, which corresponds to 1,568 Hertz.
Use of higher notes decreased as the deafness progressed, they found.
To compensate, Beethoven used more middle- and low-frequency notes, which he could hear better when music was performed.
But in the late quartets — written by the time he was totally deaf — the higher notes returned.
“When he came to rely compl
Far overshadowing these general conditions were the two particular personal problems that beset Beethoven, especially in later life: his deafness and his obsessive relationship with his nephew Karl. Beethoven began to suffer from deafness during his early years in Vienna, and his condition gradually grew worse, despite remissions. So severe was the problem as early as 1802 that he actually seems to have contemplated suicide, as can be inferred from the so-called Heiligenstadt Testament, a private document written that year. It shows clear evidence of his deep conflict over his sense of artistic mission and his fear of inability to hear normally, to use the sense that should have been his most effective and reliable one. The turning points in his deafness actually came only later: first, about 1815, when he was compelled to give up all hope of performing publicly as a pianist (his Fifth Piano Concerto was written in 1809, an unfinished concerto in 1815); and after 1818, when he was no longer able to converse with visitors, who were thus forced to use writing pads to communicate (the famous “Conversation Books”).
The works of Beethoven’s middle years form an extraordinary procession of major compositions, entirely departing from the traditional proportions and, to some extent, the methods of earlier tonal music. The earlier “facile” level of composition is abandoned, and occasional regressions to earlier types of movement structure are suppressed (for example, the substitution of a conventional slow movement by a tightly compressed slow introduction to the finale in the Waldstein Piano Sonata, Op. 53). Even the most superficial view of Beethoven’s new scheme of musical design must include the following observations. He works now with the intensive elaboration of single ideas, to an extent never previously attempted in classical instrumental music (for example, the first movement of the Fifth Symphony). He extends the time scale of the three-or four-movement formal scheme to a high degree (for example, the Eroica Symphony, the unusual length of which was noted by the composer on his autograph manuscript). He replaces the old third movement of the symphony and the quartet (minuet or other medium-tempo dance form) with a dynamic and rapid movement, always called scherzo (this had already been done in early works). He brings about the dramatization of instrumental effects and musical components to an unprecedented degree, partly through the juxtaposition of strongly dissimilar musical ideas, partly through the ingenious use of means of establishing expectations of a particular kind and then either delaying them or turning in an unexpected direction (for example, the first movement of the Appassionata Sonata, Op. 57, in which no full resolution of a cadence on to the tonic is permitted until the end of the movement; the opening of the RasumovskyQuartet, Op. 59, No. 3; and the dramatic use of silence, as in the opening of the Coriolanus Overture, Op. 62).


The Father in a family is someone who is the male figure in a family. He is there to help the mother raise a child or children. A child will spend their whole life looking up to the big man in the house because he is the one who fixes everything, Spends time playing ball, building a . A father is an important person in a child life, but w

hen a father ends up not being their for the child there is so much missed out on. Not having a dad for seven-teen years is a difficult thing and that is what I had to deal with. Finally realizing the day of longing was over I had a huge feeling of relief. When I looked into my dad loving brown eyes for the very first time it was the most waited for experience in the seven teen years of my life.
The year 2006 was a major turning point in my life, it would be the last time I would physically see my father. I was ten years old, now nineteen going on twenty, almost an entire decade. Of course these years are a pivotal period in one’s development. All of my teenage years, going through high school, playing sports, learning how to drive, etc. All of these are very special moments in a person’s life. It’s the entire transformation from childhood to adulthood. Unfortunately Ive had to go through all of it not knowing my father, without his presence, his voice, his support. And now here I am, having already graduated high school and going through college. Almost a week after my birthday I began searching using online resources that I thought could help me in my search. The only information I had was his first and last name but little did I know that typing Peter Valdivia in the search engine would bring almost 2,000 names. At first I felt like completely giving up but I knew this could be my only chance so I pushed myself and began to look up every name. I eventually eliminated people by location and age, narrowing the search to fifty men that could be the possible match. Of the fifty profiles given for each man there was very little information. Some of the profiles gave e-mail addresses. So I sent e-mails to the ones that showed their addresses. In the e- mail I described my reasons for contacting them and if they felt this pertained to them they could respond.
owing up, my only outlet for this pain was education. I put forth much effort to excel as a student, and this is a habit that I continued to maintain throughout my college career and now in my professional life. No one around me knew what I was dealing with, mainly because they had both parents in their home. My mother, especially, could not understand how I felt, but I’m sure she was sympathetic because she made sure I was still a spoiled brat every now and then. My grandmother was also very compassionate and understanding about my situation, and still is. My grandfather, who passed May 7, 2010, was my father figure. I was extremely close to him and he was very influential in my life. I only wish he could have seen me make it to be a published author. – See more at: http://crissindaponder.com/personal-narrative-essay/#sthash.0whQP0l6.dpuf
though I was not lacking in a father figure. You could say t
Almost a month had gone by and I had got very little to no response from all the names I e-mailed. I was to the point of giving up and saying oh well. I felt that I lived this long without a dad so why care, but at the same time
I felt like crying because I had so many unanswered questions. I was so curious about my dadfs personality and what he does in life. The question that hurt me the most was a why question, I have always wanted to ask him was why did he leave and remain a ghost to me? My whole life I considered my dad dead to me because I could not see a reason why he remained out of my life. I started feeling like it was my fault, or I had did something. I could not understand why a father could abandon his child for so long.
The next day was like any average day for me. I had a basketball game at my school and a lot of people were expected to be there. So that day I got dressed like normal and went to the game. When I walked into the gym the gym was so packed it was hard to notice anyone, but of all the people sitting and talking one man in the corner stood out to me. I thought it was the balloons sitting next to him but it felt like something else. I let it go thinking I was crazy or just being nosey. I forgot about my little incident and went to get ready for the game. After a long game I walked over to give my mom a hug like I routinely do after every game. When I noticed that same man with the balloons walking toward me I was unsure if I knew him or not. I was really confused when he got closer and closer. As the secret man was close enough to me to talk he said with his loving eyes Christina, peter your dad. I could not believe what had just said. I thought somebody was playing a joke on me but my mom leaned over and said yeah that him. He told me he had to work and he had to leave but he gave me his number and told me to call him so we could hang out and talk. My very first hug goodbye was the best feeling in my life. I did not want it to end but I had to.
Later that night we talked on the phone. He told me how he found me using myspace. He said he saw my profile and that I played basketball, which is how he knew I had a game. We had talked for hours on the phone about everything that we both missed. We talked so long it we had ended up talking until two in the morning and I knew that I had class in the morning so we said our goodnights. As soon as I got off the phone I realized I did not ask him the question I really wanted to ask about why he stayed away but I was too tired to call back. I also knew I had the next day to ask him.
Little did I know that the time on the phone would be the first and last night I would talk to my dad? He never called me again and later that week his number become out of service. It has been almost a year since that day and I have moved on. I still go to school and live my life without my dad. I did what I had been doing all the years before I met him. That night changed me by making me stronger, it made me feel like I have had my heart broken and not by a boyfriend but by my dad.

Mothers and fathers obviously parents differently. If children have the combination of what mothers and father bring to parenting, they will have a fuller perspective on life and how to deal with certain situations. Mothers are affectionate, tend to be more comforting, emotional, and enforce the safety of their children. Fathers concentrate alot on discipline, raising obedient children, enforcing success, and a father figure is more physical. When little boys see how fathers treat their mothers or how their father deals with certain situations, do you think it affects them in the way they will treat people, or deal with situations in the future? When little girls see the love, and attention, and protection their father provides, they will know what to expect in a future relationship with another man (Horn).