Bypass the Story of a Road Analysis Essay Example for Free

Bypass the Story of a Road Analysis Essay McGirr takes virtually every detour possible and in doing so seems to suggest that life’s journey is at its most interesting when one strays from the central path. It is in the towns and rest stations that McGirr encounters individuals with interesting stories to tell – stories that give McGirr’s narrative its essential variety and ‘life’. McGirr’s interest is not only in what lies off to the side of the ‘main road’ in a literal sense. He is attracted by the lives of ‘ordinary’ people who are not famous or even particularly successful. Even when relating incidents from his life as a priest he enjoys telling stories that would otherwise never appear in print: attending the wrong wedding reception; seeing a bride answer a mobile phone. He does occasionally refer to famous or powerful people; even here, though, his preference is for the little known incident over the important, nation-shaping decision – such as John Curtin’s midnight pot of tea in a Gundagai cafà ©. In short, McGirr suggests that, although the highway itself is valuable, we must not forget or neglect places and lives that the highway bypasses, for these too constitute the ‘life-blood’ of the nation. And similarly, although the nation’s central story or history is important – that of, say, the Anzacs, the explorers, the two world wars – the stories that lie off to the side of the historical mainstream are equally worth knowing, are equally valuable. As narrator and author of this narrative, McGirr has a lot of control over how he depicts himself. Indeed, ‘the power of the person who gets to tell the story’ (p.19) is considerable, as he notes when discussing Hovell’s power over Hume in that regard. McGirr is depicted as a fairly affable, if occasionally bumbling figure whose decision to leave the Jesuit order after twenty-one years is a life-changing one. The decision prompts him to experience a number of ‘firsts’: he buys property in Gunning; embarks on an intimate relationship with Jenny whom he subsequently marries and has children with; and decides to travel on a bike down the Hume Highway and document his progress. McGirr might come across as something of an ‘everyman’ figure but his life-experiences mark him as someone rather eclectic (unusual). McGirr displays a capacity for droll humour throughout the narrative, and also a willingness to reflect deeply on his experiences and those of others. His reflective tendencies see him discuss his struggle to sincerely uphold the vow of obedience when he was a member of the Jesuit order (p.173), and also his feeling of being alone when he first joined the order (p.229). It might be argued that McGirr is depicted as someone who thinks a little too much: the discussion of his dilemma about buying orange juice with the money allocated to new Jesuits for ‘emergencies’ (p.228) is an example. Fortunately, his capacity for reflection does not make the text too ponderous. McGirr’s accounts of his developing relationship with Jenny and his self-deprecatory asides about his weight (p.31, p.98), snoring (p.227), age (p.32) and tendency to lecture others (p.142) depict him as a jovial, likeable bloke. Bypass, a hybrid work of creative non-fiction is a memoir, travel story, social history, romance and road story. The literary devices used in Bypass enliven and enrich the writing with sparkling wit. For example: ‘Hovell had been a naval captain. On land, however, he was all at sea.’(p 19) ‘They were like fishermen who were prepared to dam their own river rather than let it starve them.’(p 48) ‘A roadhouse is a place where everything that can’t be eaten has been laminated, and not all the food can be eaten.’(p 66) ‘Guerrilla warfare is the opposite of God who, for some unknown reason, makes his or her absence felt even when present.’(p 81) ‘I came to Gunning to hide, but people kept finding me.’(p 97) ‘Sturt went blind trying to see what none had seen before.’(p 170) McGirr’s anger at some social problems is often expressed in blunt metaphors, for example, when discussing gaming machines in Goulburn he writes: ‘They are abattoirs of the human spirit.’(p 90) His love for language is reflected, for example, where the text is an extended reverie on arcane words and their meanings eg panier (p 98), or in his jovial attempt to find a word to describe a group of prime ministers (pp 153-4). Humour is one of the most appealing features Bypass, for example the discussion of caravans with a fellow traveller (pp 110-1). Michael McGirr is masterly in creating punch lines to end his stories. eg ‘I don’t believe in washing your dirty laundry in public.’(p 263) The Hume Highway: The Hume Highway runs for over eight hundred kilometres inland, between Sydney and Melbourne. Early settlers, such as Charles Throsby and Hume and Hovell, made journeys overland that eventuated in the Hume Highway being developed. The road, initially sometimes called the Great South Road in New South Wales and Sydney Road in what became Victoria, has been re-routed, extended and improved over time. In 1928, it became officially known as the Hume Highway. A number of towns originally on the Hume Highway have now been bypassed to reduce both travel times and the amount of traffic (especially trucks) passing through town centres. The meaning of bypass: The term bypass means to go around something; a road bypass normally goes around a town or the centre of a town. There are many such bypasses on the Hume Highway, allowing the traveller to avoid built up areas and suburban streets. However, although Bypass is the story of a journey along the Hume Highway, the title makes it clear that McGirr’s main interest is in how the road goes around places and people, and what the effects of this might be – both positive and negative. For more about McGirr’s engagement with the notion of a bypass, see the section on Themes, Ideas and Values. The main idea in the novel Bypass is the idea of a journey. In literal terms, Bypass: the story of a road tells the story of a physical journey from one point to another: in this case, from Sydney to Melbourne. However, McGirr makes clear that a journey can have qualities that are more metaphorical. The literary references to Don Quixote and Anna Karenina, in particular, suggest very different types of journeys. The quotation from Don Quixote, ‘there’s no road so smooth that it ain’t got a few potholes’, implicitly signals Sancho’s philosophical take on the nature of relationships and life more generally. This attitude towards the vicissitudes of life clearly informs the text as a whole. For instance, McGirr comments about the degree to which his ‘silly adventure’ might impact negatively on his relationship with Jenny (p.137). Likewise, the comments he makes about the truckies whose marriages can suffer from their long hours on the road (p.52), suggest that physical journeys and emotional journeys are closely intertwined. The frequent references to Anna Karenina also signal McGirr’s interest in the romantic and tragic dimensions of life. The flirtatious comments about McGirr’s relationship with Anna Karenina, his predilection for relinquishing (and then recovering) the text from time to time and the inevitable decision to place her in close proximity to a railway (p.260) work symbolically as a comment on life more generally, as well as on the plot of Tolstoy’s novel. After all, Tolstoy’s Anna throws herself in front of a train. McGirr is all too aware of the fragility of life – both on the road and beyond it. In this novel, death and memorial are also an important theme. The ultimate destination in life’s journey is death. McGirr does not shy away from discussing the fragility of life and makes much of the memorials on the Hume Highway. Death is something that cannot be bypassed and, like ‘the road [which] has no respect for persons or status’ (p.158), it comes to us all. As McGirr notes when reflecting on the cemetery in Gunning, ‘even a long life is short’ (p.7). For McGirr the Hume Highway is ‘sacred space’ (p.15); it is ‘lined with countless reminders of death’ (p.178) and memorialises both those who have died on it and those who have died at war. While McGirr is respectful and interested in the memorials dedicated to the war dead, his main priority is to acknowledge that death comes to all and that the lives of all ordinary Australians – including soldiers – are worth acknowledging and commemorating. Indeed, this is clearly conveyed by his juxtaposition of the near-death experience of Kerry Packer (p.40) and the funerals of the Queen Mother (p.255) and the Princess of Wales (p.256) with the experiences of less well-known individuals. Packer’s blunt assertion that there is no life beyond the grave is contrasted with the more positive reflection of a woman who believed that her husband had ‘gone to the great swap-meet in the sky’ (p.41). Similarly, the vast amount of coverage and ceremony afforded the funerals of the Queen Mother and the Princess of Wales is diametrically opposed to the more poignant account of the interment of Anton, a lonely old man whose funeral was attended by three people: the undertaker, Anton’s neighbour and McGirr in his role as priest (p.256). McGirr says of those like Anton, ‘At least God knew this person †¦ even if nobody else did’ (p.256). McGirr’s accounts of death or near-death experiences are most chilling when he considers those who have endured harrowing experiences on the road. His discussion of the murders committed by Ivan Milat (pp.70–4) and by bushrangers (pp.77–83) brings home the fact that ‘the Hume has a dark side’ (p.70). Not wanting to sensationalise – or justify – the actions of these men, McGirr nonetheless provides some background details to depict them in ways that are complex, non-judgemental and at times unnerving. ENTRY SEVEN: PHILOSOPHY IN BYPASS Given McGirr’s work as a priest for much of his life, it is not surprising that this text is largely preoccupied with issues of faith and philosophical ponderings about life more generally. McGirr makes clear his continued belief in God (p.174) but is not heavy-handed in his discussion of faith. The gently humorous and respectful way in which he recounts Jenny’s aphorisms (wise sayings) about life is a case in point. His recollection of Jenny’s remark that he should ‘just accept [the Hume Highway] for what it is †¦ you’ll enjoy it more’ (p.155) is exemplary. His discussion of Jenny’s view that there is a concave (negative and convex (optimistic) way of looking at the world (p.170) – and that he ‘might be right’ (p.170) in thinking that he has a concave approach to the world is similarly light-hearted in tone but relevant to the book’s overall interest in forms of belief. The light-hearted banter continues when McGirr discusses his acquisition of the Chinese philosophical text, Tao Te Ching. Its pithy words of wisdom are for McGirr redolent of the bumper sticker sayings that he has liberally peppered throughout his narrative. At times, McGirr’s discussion of philosophical matters takes on a more earnest tone. His discussion of how, as a priest, he subscribed to the vow of obedience in an effort to ‘make up a sense of purpose which I otherwise lacked’ (p.173) and his related anxiety that he would reach the ‘point at which you can no longer recognise yourself in the things you are starting to say or do’ (p.173) signal his need to be honest with himself as well as with others. His comment that ‘the secret of being human is learning how to enjoy our limitations’ (p.301) suggests that honesty and humility are part and parcel of a reflective existence, McGirr is also interested in the ways in which others concern themselves with spiritual matters. His discussion of the House of Prayer in Goulburn shows how prayer provides respite from the manic nature of everyday life and celebrates those like Catherine who dedicate their lives to helping others in need find peace (pp.85–6). In a very different and secular vein, McGirr recounts the belief Liz Vincent has in ghosts – of people and of the road. Although Vincent does not believe in God, McGirr seems fascinated by her stories and sensitively recounts her belief that ‘the people we love can scarcely bear to leave us and sometimes hang around as ghosts’ (p.59). Perhaps more interesting is Vincent’s claim that the old Hume Highway near Picton has a ‘ghostly presence of its own’ (p.59), appearing before unwary drivers’ eyes and beguiling them into believing that the phantom road they are following is the real thing (p.59). ENTRY EIGHT: THE POLITICS IN BYPASS In some ways Bypass is a book about power – about who has it and who does not. As McGirr writes, ‘Roads are political. Building them is a sign that somebody is the boss’ (p.14). McGirr’s discussion of the impact on Merri Creek of the F2 freeway into Melbourne (p.284), the ensuing court case and the verdict that ultimately endorsed the freeway project, exemplifies the political nature of road-making. The very essence of a bypass, for instance, is a political act and McGirr makes this clear when discussing the difficulties surrounding the decision to create an internal or an external bypass for Albury in the late 1990s (pp.203–6). Concerns about the economic effect of a route directing traffic away from town are weighed up with concerns about the impact of noise and pollution that a new road near or through a town invariably brings. Tussles between federal and state governments, as was the case with the Albury bypass, certainly highlight the political nature of road-making, as do arguments between different interest groups. The issue of the Albury bypass, along with the 1979 truck blockade staged between Camden and Picton on a notorious stretch of road known as razorback (pp.47–51), illustrate power struggles of very different sorts. McGirr also points out that the amount of money spent on roads as opposed to public transport is a political act. He writes that ‘in the last ten years, for every dollar spent on laying rail in Australia, eight dollars have been spent on highways’ (p.92). This pattern of spending is, he continues, ‘a symptom of something deeper because government spending decisions simply mirror the interests of voters’ (p.92). Bypass: the story of a road is particularly concerned with the way the highway has been the backdrop for various well-known and not so well-known aspects of Australia’s history. From Hume and Hovell’s early markings of the Hume Highway, to the increased tea ration bargained for by Jack Castrisson when John Curtin visited the Niagara Cafà © in Gundagai, to Ned Kelly’s exploits, to the antics of the humble, ordinary Australians who travel on the Hume year by year, McGirr celebrates the way aspects of Australia’s history are part and parcel of the Hume Highway’s rich narrative. McGirr’s interest in Australian history is, however, not indicative of a desire to celebrate or endorse conventional representations of Australia’s past. In a number of instances, McGirr wants to query the legitimacy of idealistic views of the nation’s evolution. McGirr challenges the idea that Australia is an egalitarian nation, for example, and claims tha t this view is a ‘myth’ (p.200). He also reminds readers of the fraught relationship between colonisers and Indigenous Australians when he discusses the life and death of an Aboriginal man named Bill Punch who survived a massacre as a baby and went on to fight for the Allies on the Western Front in World War I (pp.246–7). McGirr’s willingness to temper some representations of Australia’s past is underpinned by an appreciation of the power of language. He notes that those who are in a position to write about the past can have more agencies in their lives and also more control of history than those who don’t (p.19). This awareness allows him to ponder on the way bushrangers and explorers have been depicted over time, and how being literate can impact on the type of individual one becomes (pp.77–8). McGirr is attentive to the idea that some histories are not told and that those that are relayed are not always definitive. Bypass: the story of a road offers a quirky exploration of the Hume Highway and the personalities of the people whose lives have been touched by the road in one way or another. At the age of 40, former Jesuit priest, Michael McGirr armed with not much more than a copy of Anna Karenina, some spare clothes and a less than state-of-the-art Chinese built bicycle set out to ride the 880 kilometres (547 miles) of the Hume Highway which links Sydney and Melbourne. While the ride forms the backdrop to McGirrs book Bypass: The Story of a Road, like all good travelogues the ride itself is really just a frame to hang the real story around, which as the title suggests, is the story of the Hume Highway. From its humble beginnings as a rough track across the Great Dividing Range, to its current state as a modern dual carriageway, the Highway continues to serve as the major thoroughfare linking Australias two largest cities. Bypass took me on a wonderful journey covering the history of the Hume, and the politics that helped shape it. Along the way you meet some great and not so great Australian characters that have helped imprint the name of the highway into the Australian psyche. People like the 61 year old Cliff Young (great), who in 1983 won the inaugural Sydney to Melbourne foot race against competitors half his age. And men like Ivan Milat (not so great) who was convicted of the murder of seven young backpackers and hitch-hikers, all of whom he buried in the Belanglo State Forest. Then there are the explorers Hamilton Hume (after whom the Highway was eventually named) and William Hovell, who in 1824 along with at least six others, set of from Appin (near the present day Sydney suburb of Campbelltown) for the first successful quest to reach Melbourne. Through the novel, I also met truckies; the bushrangers Ben Hall and Ned Kelly; and the poets Banjo Paterson and Henry Lawson. I attended a Catholic Mass in Tarcutta officially the halfway point between Sydney and Melbourne where apart from the priest and two parishioners, the only other people in attendance are the author of Bypass and his companion Jenny, who has by this time joined him on his ride to Mel bourne. Reading this book, it seemed like I visited almost every country town along the route of the Hume Highway, and learn something about each of them. Towns like Goulburn, famous for the Big Merino and Goulburn Jail (where Ivan Milat is currently serving seven life sentences). I visited Holbrook and learn why the outer shell of the Oberon Class submarine HMAS Otway now sits in a public park in the middle of town. In Chiltern we pass by the childhood home of the Australian writer Henry Handel Richardson, and learn that Henrys real name was Ethel Florence. I learned too, that like other female writers have done throughout history, Ethel wrote under a male nom de plume because at the time it was felt that women didnt have what it took to be great writers. And I also visited the town of Yass, and drop by the Liberty Cafà © for a meal before continuing on the journey, and turning page after page. Across its many short chapters, Bypass also introduced me to some of the thousands of bumper stickers that adorn the rear ends of many Australian vehicles. In fact, McGirr uses stickers as chapter headings to introduce the readers to every aspect of his journey. Thus, the bumper sticker THE OLDER I GET THE BETTER I WAS, allows him to explain some of his own personal story and the reasons for his decision to ride the Hume Highway. In the chapter THE GODDESS IS DANCING, McGirr introduces us to his riding partner Jenny, and in DEATH IS THE MANUFACTURERS RECALL NOTICE, we pause to learn about some of the many roadside memorials that mark the sites of fatal road accidents that line the Highway. To conclude, the book is immensely readable, always entertaining and informative, often surprising, and constantly filled with odd facts and humorous anecdotes. These keep the story moving along smoothly and effortlessly which cannot always be said of Michael McGirrs monumental bike ride.

Understanding European history Essay Example for Free

Understanding European history Essay Although experiencing a period of expanding intellectual and geographical horizons, European history in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries witnessed, on the whole, a profoundly intolerant age. To clarify our opinion, we must first introduce European history under the literary history of this age. Here, we will display our understanding of European history in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, the one by Brecht or the one by Montaigne as two famous authors of the Renaissance age. Herr Bertolt Brecht in relation to European drama and theatre Anyone who was anyone in Germany and France wrote historical dramas. It is therefore understandable that the poets of inner conflicts, the prophets of the Byronic hero, also emerged as writers of historical drama and often released the two themes in the same play. The most important condition a historical drama should fulfill when it was to be performed was that should represent history as an all-embracing system and as a force which helps to define identity. Unlike ONeil and Pirandello, however, Brecht does not want the spectator to identify or feel empathy with his heroes. In 1922, he noted in his diary: I hope in Baal and Jungle Ive avoided one common artistic bloomer that of trying to carry people away. Instinctively, Ive kept my distance and ensured that the realization of my†¦. effects remains within bounds. The spectators splendid isolations is left intact; it is not sua res quae agitur. Consequently, Brecht draws quite different conclusions from the concept of the impossibility of individuality in Baal than do ONeil or Pirandello in their work. Brecht opposes the idea of the ever-constant – tragic or polyvalent – absurd being (Sein) of man with the theorem of mans changeability. He designed the comedy Mann IST Mann (Man equals Man) as a kind of experimental apparatus which would demonstrate the basic pre-conditions of re-assembling one personality into another. Herr Bertolt Brecht maintains man equals man- a view that has been around since time began. But then Herr Brecht points out how far one can maneuver and manipulate that man. All of Brechts re-writs began from the insight gained from Baal, that man is nothing without his social and economic relations (One is none) and that it is only through relationships that he becomes something; these relationships prove to be not primarily human ones but rather relationships based on commodity exchange. Such relationships of ownership turn man into an object which can be used in a negative or positive way, according to the situation, and this can be demonstrated experimentally. Brecht developed the form of Lehrstuck in response to a very specific problem which repeatedly confronted his theater in the course of 1920s. It concerns, on the one hand, the new type, and, on the other, the middle-class audience response to it. Brecht presumes that there can be no individuality in the way conceived by the former bourgeoisie, and that no definitive statements can be made on new trans-individual man since it can only rise as the result of a lasting process of development. Brecht felt supported in this view by Marxism, which defines man as a changeable and world-changing being, whose consciousness is determined through his social being. The new man, who will be formed as a product of situation where there is no bourgeoisie, in a classless society, thus cannot be defined and fixed in advance. The dramatic poet in my view is merely someone who records history. He stands above history, however, in that he creates history for a second time and places us directly in the life of a certain time, instead of providing a dry account; he provides characters instead of characteristics, and figures instead of descriptions. It is his greatest ask to come as close as he can to history as it really happened. Brecht constructed as antithesis, from similar points of departure he arrives at completely opposite conclusion: †¢ The absolute self-realization of the vital individual, liberated from all moral scruples is impossible in bourgeois society, since this form of society forces everyone to fit in and its conventions stand in total opposition to the individuals claim to happiness and eradicate individuality. †¢ The individual who sets himself up to be absolute, who lives out his insatiable sexual lust, his incontinent consumption of food and drink, is a monstrous social being who either falls into the realms of the mythic or becomes part of the circle of nature- from the white mothers womb to the dark womb of the earth- and dissolves his own individuality. Brecht turns his conclusion into a positive one- something only Hugo von Hofmannsthal had recognized at that time. Michel de Montaignes essays in the Renaissance age Mantaigne essentially invented the literary form of essay, a short subjective treatment of a given topic, of which the book contains a large number. Essay is French for trial or attempt. Montaigne wrote in a kind of crafted rhetoric designed to intrigue and involve the reader, sometimes appearing to move in a stream-of-thought from topic to topic and at other times employing a structured style which gives more emphasis to the didactic nature of his work. His arguments are often supported with quotes from classical Greek and Roman texts. Montaignes stated goal in his book is to describe man, and especially himself, with utter frankness. As an essayist, his great project centered on the sustained delineation of only one character, which was Montaignes character. He finds the great variety and volatility of human nature to be its most basic features. A typical quote is I have never seen a greater monster or miracle than myself, He describes his own poor memory, his ability to solve problems and mediate conflicts without truly getting emotionally involved, his disgust for mans pursuit of lasting fame, and his attempts to detach himself from worldly things to prepare for death. Montaigne is known for popularizing the essay as a literary genre. He became famous for his effortless ability to merge serious intellectual speculation with casual anecdotes and autobiography- and his massive volume essays (translated literally as Attempts) contains, to this day, some of the most widely influential essays ever written. Montaigne had a direct influence on writers the world over, from William Shakespeare to Rene Descartes, from Ralph Waldo Emerson to Stephan Zweig. Montaigne freely borrowed of others, and he has found men willing to borrow of him as freely. We need not wonder at the reputation which he with seeming facility achieved. He was, without being aware of it, the leader of a new school in letters and morals. His book was different from all others which were at that date in the world. It diverted the ancient currents of thought into new channels. It told its readers, with unexampled frankness, what its writers opinion was about men and things, and threw what must have been a strange kind of new light on many matters but darkly understood. Above all, the essayist uncased himself, and made his intellectual and physical organism public property. He took the world into his confidence on all subjects. His essays were a sort of literary anatomy, where we get a diagnosis of the writers mind, made by himself at different levels and under a large variety of operating influences. It was reasonable enough that Montaigne should expect for his work a certain share of celebrity in Gascony, and even, as time went on, through ¬out France; but it is scarcely probable that he foresaw how his renown was to become world-wide; how he was to occupy an almost unique position as a man of letters and a moralist; how the Essays would be read, in all the principal languages of Europe, by millions of intelligent human beings, who never heard of Perigord or the League, and who are in doubt, if they are questioned, whether the author lived in the sixteenth or the eighteenth century. This is true fame. A man of genius belongs to no period and no country. He speaks the language of nature, which is always everywhere the same. Evaluating the difference between Brecht and Montaigne Thus, if the Stream of things is a mixture of dying and regeneration, the thought problems confronting us are dialectical, in the identity of opposites, of negative and positive; and also linguistic, in the logical validity of sentences and the mutual exclusion of their meanings; and also aesthetic, in so far as one aspect of the dead moons continued life is its perception as strange [fremd] by even one last living being, its estrangement of itself and of that being. Finally, causality intervenes, and intersects the vast sublunary landscape of all that is: raising its own linguistic and dialectical questions. Brecht was willing to force the issue even more pointedly, as in his suggestion that although the purely biological death of the individual IS uninteresting to society, dying ought none the less to be taught. It is probably less a Montaigne-like aspiration than the expression of themes surrounding Die Massnahme from this same period. A social Tao, on the other hand, is surely bound up with the issues of technology and modernity raised above, to which we will return in conclusion. Bibliography References used in the current essay: 1. History of European drama and theatre, Erika Fischer-Lichte, Jo Riley. Pages 232-238-315-317-318 2. The Complete Essays of Michel de Montaigne, Vol. 1 of 2. Michel de Montaigne. Pages 1-2 3. Brecht and method, Fredric Jameson. Page 171

Comparison of Herny V Adaptations

Comparison of Herny V Adaptations Compare two different adaptations of the same primary text. In this brief essay, I will look at the comparative versions of Henry V, the first of which was the film produced during the Second World War in 1944 as a Laurence Olivier vehicle, given its full title The Chronicle History of King Henry the Fift with His Battell Fought in Agincourt in France, the second of which was Kenneth Branaghs Henry V, produced over four decades later in 1989. Firstly, the purpose behind the two films were very different. One of the arguments for the production of Shakespeares war plays was that they were written in order to enlist people into the British army. Thus, during the Second World War, the play itself was resurrected (with the recommendation of Winston Churchill himself), and became more polemicised still under the guidance of Olivier. Oliviers production begins in an Elizabethan theatre, which serves to steep the play in the history of its time. Rather than trying to enlist people into the army, the purpose of the play had changed into simply providing rousing propaganda for the masses. It could be argued that Oliviers choice to switch settings from a film set in an actual location to the authenticity of a theatrical setting steeps the film in a personal (and British) history that serves the nationalistic agenda of the film well. Branaghs film, on the other hand, chooses not to stray into the realms of the play within a play for mat, and instead provides escapist entertainment whose only agenda is to provide an authentic and encapsulating filmic rendition of the play itself. Central to the original version of Henry V is the speech where Henry psyches his army up to go into battle. In the two adaptations, it is striking how differently the play is directed. Olivier chooses simply to speak. The camera is stationary and there is no additional elements to the speech. The words are uttered in a much more florid way, perhaps emulating the stoical and noble speeches of Churchill at the time, who gave the impression of strong leadership and control at all times. On the other hand, Branaghs speech is delivered in a much more passionate way. Branagh bellows the lines, and during the speech the camera is in constant movement, suggesting a leader much closer to the actual action of the battle and of the brutalities of the war. Also, in Oliviers speech, the soundtrack remains conspicuously absent, which, on the one hand highlights the importancy of the words being spoken, but on the other hand, doesnt add any additional dramatic impact to the scene. Branaghs speech, in almost direct opposition to the production by Olivier, sets the speech to a rousing orchestral soundtrack, and as the speech develops, almost to echo the motivating and rousing impact of the speech, brass elements are added to the orchestra. The result is that Branagh makes the speech more immediately accessible, perhaps at the expense of Shakespeares language itself. Thus, what the second adaptation of the play gains in its portrayal of the dirtiness and of the visceral impact of war, it perhaps loses in relegating the simple, theatrical delivery of the lines to second place over a more expressionist style of cinematography. Olivier himself suggested during an interview after the film that When you are young, you are too bashful to play a hero; you debunk it. He starred in the play when he was 37, whereas Branagh himself was just 29 when he starred and directed his own version of the play. It is ironic that, although the first film was designed primarily as a propaganda film designed to stir up nationalistic sentiment, the second version of the play, because of the slightly less subtle vocal delivery by Branagh, and because of the cinematic devices used in the adaptation, is in fact much more effective as a pro-war and pro-patriotic propaganda film. But this arguably, was not the purpose of the first film. Certainly, the way in which both actors play Henry V differ greatly insofar as Oliviers performance is one that is much softer as in, the words and the vocal delivery isnt so much shouted, but portrayed instead in a much more distant, Churchillian way, which is arguably, a much more effective portraya l of the leader of Britain as it was intended to be portrayed during the Second World War. In terms of how effective the two films were in synthesising the elements of Shakespeares original war play, and using them to portray two very different aspects of leadership and of how a great war leader portrays himself, both films, albeit in very different ways, offer equally effective renditions of this central element of the play. Shakespeare himself intended the play to be used as propaganda to enlist people into the army, and the rousing speech about the nobility of war proves central to both film adaptations of the play. In the first, Oliviers rendition of the words are done in a more minimalist way. Henrys motivational speech is enunciated without any additional cinematographic devices, which highlights the delivery of the language and the subtleties of the words, rather than attacking the feeling the speech intended to rouse by using expressionist devices such as non-diagetic music and camera movement. Indeed, the Olivier produced piece is stark in the way it re-enacts the war scenes, as dialogue is very infrequently used in conjunction with dialogue. Conversely, Branagh uses a massive orchestral score during his rendition of the motivational speech, and the effect of portraying both the brutality and the nobility of great leadership in war is very different. Both films are effective in their own ways the Branagh directed piece, although it lacked the subtlety of personal performance and the vocalisation of Shakespeares lines that Oliviers had, also provided audiences with a Hollywood spectacle less encumbered by the sanctity of Shakespearean language, and more interested in providing a slice of historical entertainment, which, arguably, would have been Shakespeares original intention.

An examination of the sonnet from Petrarch to Browning. Essay -- Engli

An examination of the sonnet from Petrarch to Browning. A sonnet is a poem, which traditionally contains the subject of love. The creator of the sonnet was a man named Francesco Petrarca who was usually referred to as Petrarch. Petrarch wrote many of his sonnets based upon himself, and his lover, Laura. The conventional format of a sonnet contains fourteen lines, and is segregated to illustrate two arguments. Every sonnet takes the conventional format of fourteen lines, although the way the arguments are split up, may be different. For example, Petrarch and Elizabeth Barrett Browning's sonnet both take the format of an octave and a sestet, whereas Shakespeare's sonnet takes the format of three quatrains and a rhyming couplet. The arguments usually comprise of love juxtaposed against its opposite. For example, love versus hate, and love versus death. I have chosen to compare three sonnets. I will compare the subject of their sonnet, the form of the sonnet, and the way that they depict their argument in their sonnet. For example, how they have set out the sonnet, and their use of language. I have chosen to compare, Petrarch's, "XLL," and Shakespeare's, "Sonnet 138," and Barrett Browning's, "XLIII." The three sonnets that I have selected all contain the subject of love, but do not compose of the same aspect of love. The subject of, "Sonnet XXL," is about a woman named Laura, with whom the author Francesco Petrarch fell deeply in love with, even though she did not return his affections. Shakespeare's, "Sonnet 138," is about the experience of being in love. He writes from a masculine perspective, describing his lover as, "Unchaste, unfaithful, and dishonest." Elizabeth Barrett Browning's, "Sonnet XLIII,"... ...ar the most exceptional sonnet out of the three that I have chosen. I think this because of his motivating subject, and the way he has used different techniques of language and imagery. I think that his sonnet depicts the subject of love very well. Petrarch's sonnet was the second best sonnet out of the three, again for its subject. I felt that it didn't compose of the same ingredients as Shakespeare's sonnet, and it didn't contain as many uses of language and imagery as Shakespeare's did. I found that Elizabeth Barrett Browning's sonnet was not as good as the other two because of the way she used very little language and imagery, and because of the way that her subject was constant throughout the sonnet. All three sonnets portrayed their subject well, and used many techniques such as imagery and rhyme, which helped the reader understand each sonnet more.

E-Money: Affecting Canadian Commerce Essay -- Economics Economy Essays

E-Money: Affecting Canadian Commerce The text "Out of Control", by Kevin Kelly, is an exciting description of the future as seen by the author, a journalist and optimistic technologist. The predictions presented must certainly be taken as entertaining reading that are intended to inspire visions of the future. The predictions of Kelly have already proven to be inaccurate in the four years since publication. The most glaring example of this is electronic commerce. Canada is quickly becoming a leader in electronic commerce, through online banking and direct payment purchases. The coming cashless society presents several opportunities and problems that were not previously available in the paper money world. Canada is now foremost in the world of electronic commerce. The Interac Network is the busiest per capita on Earth. Interac, backed by the Inter-Members Association, is a conglomerate of financial companies who, 14 years ago, agreed to share technology and a national computer network in order to facilitate the introduction of ATM machines. The astounding success of automated banking and "shared cash distribution" inspired direct payment. According to Interac's web site, in 1998 over 1 billion direct payment purchases were made in Canada. That's 32 purchases a second, 24 hours a day, for the entire year! In Kevin Kelly's Out Of Control, Kelly's flair for dramatic exaggeration is accompanied by unrealistic predictions that I find amazing when considering they were made only four years ago. Kelly predicts that the use of bank issued debit cards will "die on the drawing board" because of lack of privacy, cost of cards, and fees for use. The Interac network, caught in what Kelly refers to as the "fax mach... ...e resulting answers will change how our society operates on its most basic economic level. As we approach a Canada ruled by e-money, it will become increasingly interesting to study the changing issues in privacy, encryption technology, banking ethics, and government control. Works Cited Electronic Frontier Canada: http://insight.mcmaster.ca/org/efc/efc.html Kelly, Kevin. Out of Control: The New Biology of Machines, Social Systems, and the Economic World. Don Mills: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1994. The Mondex Scenario: Transcript. Toronto: CBC Television, March 27, 1997. Rowan, Geoffery. Encryption issue hoists Ottawa onto a tightrope. Toronto: The Globe & Mail, April 22, 1998. RSA Data Security, Inc. Web Page: http://www.rsa.com Tanaka, Tatuso. Possible Economic Consequences of Digital Cash. First Monday, 1996 (2).

The Mention of the Israelites in Egyptian Scriptures :: essays research papers fc

There are several Egyptian documents that not only mention the Israelites in their texts, but also tie the Bible to historical facts. Egyptian documents such as the Tell el-Amarna letters, a large â€Å"stele† of the Menephtah, and the Elephantine papyri not only tell the history of Egypt, they also coincide with biblical scripture. The documents confirm not only dates, certain numbers, and rituals, such as circumcision, but places and event, e.g. The Exodus, of biblical stories.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  According to James Orr, general editor for â€Å"The Definition for Egypt,† the Tell el-Amarna Letters were discovered in 1887. â€Å"These documents refer to many Biblical cities; they also give much direct information concerning the political and social conditions at that period† (Orr, Palestine). Damien Mackey’s â€Å"The House of David,† shows the remarkable similarities between several rulers in Egypt and the three kings (Saul, David, and Salomon) mentioned in the Bible. In Michael Grant’s â€Å"The History of Ancient Israel,† he states that a ruler in the 14th century named Labayu ruled over Shechem and extended his kingdom as far as the Mediterranean coast (18). One model given in the case of Saul tells of a second name stated in Psalm 57; the name is Lebaim, â€Å"a unique word in the Old Testament meaning great lions.† In line with this passage comes a reference from the Amarna letters; an Egyptian pharaoh whose name was Labayu, meaning â€Å"Great Lion of (N)’ where N is a god’s name† (Mackey 1). The Amarna letters could also wrap together David and Tuthmosis III as one and the same. Labayu had sons that battled for an equally important roll after his death (Grant 18). In II Samuel 3:1, the passage tells of how Saul’s two sons Ish-Bosheth and David fought for power. This leads Mackey to a comprehensive comparison between David and Tuthmosis I & III. A few illustrations in the contrast are ranging from military campaigns to coronation ceremonies (Mackey 3-5). In the military campaign of Megiddo, the records by Tuthmosis III describe the split of his armies to defeat scattered forces in separate Canaanite towns. Later, Tuthmosis rejoins his armies to capture of Megiddo (Orr, Palestine). This corresponds with II Samuel 11:1 account of David’s conquest of Rabbah (Mackey 5). Although, not as much information is found on the Elephantine papyri and the â€Å"stele† of Menephtah, they still display the bonds between the history of Egypt and biblical scriptures.

Title of Paper

â€Å"Although his name is hardly a household word, the ghost of Jay M. Near still stalks most U.S. courtrooms.   There exists no plaque that bears his name†¦.Near is truy the unknown soldier in the continuing struggle between the powers of government and the power of the press to publish the news.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 172) Fred Friendly, journalist, wrote of the struggle men, such as Jay M. Near, fought in their determination to live the American dream.   Their dream may not be acknowledged by the general public, but Near and his peers were trying to live the rights bestowed upon them as Americans.   Among those rights were the right to free speech, and freedom of the press. The reason Near is not a household name is because his cause may not have been seen by many to be noble.   If fought today, his cause or his dream would be likened to that of The Enquirer or The Star.   In fact, Friendly, in Minnesota Rag:   Corruption, Yellow Journalism, and the Case That Saved Freedom of The Press,   described Near vs. Minnesota, as a cast that placed freedom of the press in the least favorable light. Minnesota Rag, by Fred Friendly, traces the roots of this case all the way back to Duluth, Minnesota, beginning with a man by the name of James Morrison, who edited the Rip-Saw.   Morrison is described as a self-righteous man, willing to do anything to prove his point.   He saw a need in Duluth to expose the lawmakers for what they were.   It was a time of prohibition and Morrison saw failure in politicians and corruption in the police.   The Rip-Saw, as described by Friendly, was relentless.   â€Å"Once it had a victim in its sights, it didn’t stop until its prey was wounded.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 8) The Rip-Saw became a popular success.   The prohibition had been a failure and opened the door for Morrison to attack.   He ran storied of gambling dens increasing, prostitution and politicians, but did so under the guise of moral decency, which led the general public to believe him and the Rip-Saw.   The business sector did not have as much faith in Morrison or the Rip-Saw.   They accused him or trying to force businesses to buy advertising in order to eliminate the risk of gossip. Morrison was a single man trying to affect an entire community into believing and acting on his morals.   He had identified what he thought was just and decent and insisted that the rest of the community live by his law, or be punished.   His punishment was to be published as a headline in his paper in a non-flattering and often libelous manner.   He took it upon himself to judge the morals of others.   Morrison had an impact on local elections with the stories he printed, whether true or untrue. When finally brought to court on charges of libel, Morrison was found guilty.   Morrison immediately appealed the decision and six months later was ordered to make a public apology.   By that time, Morrison had already won, as the Mayor Power he had so maliciously written about had lost his election.   Morrison issued an apology, but certainly in jest as he had already accomplished what he had set out to do. Having accomplished such a feat, two other politicians, Boylan and Lommen, who had been lambasted in the Rip-Saw, determined that this type of press was unacceptable and formed legislation prohibiting publications that were producing â€Å"malicious, scandalous, and defamatory material.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 20)   This legislation is what would become known as the Public Nuisance Bill of 1925, often referred to as the â€Å"gag law.† â€Å"Any person who†¦.shall be engaged in the business of regularly or customarily producing, publishing or circulating, having in possession, selling or giving away, (a)  Ã‚  Ã‚   an obscene, lewd and lascivious newspaper, magazine or other periodical, or (b)  Ã‚   a malicious, scandalous and defamatory newspaper is guilty of nuisance.† This law enabled a single judge to prevent the publication of anything they believed or considered to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, or malicious, scandalous and defamatory.   Press coverage of this bill was almost non-existent and yet it had the largest impact on their business.   America, founded on freedom and liberty, was now going to allow the fate of individuals to rest in the hands of one judge, and his beliefs.   This judgment went against everything that our laws our founded on.   This wouldn’t go down without a fight. Minneapolis, Minnesota was vastly affected by the prohibition as well.   Friendly described it as a crossroads in the Canadian whiskey trade.   From Minneapolis it could be shipped to Chicago and St. Louis.   Some journalists in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area described both the politicians and law enforcement as being on the take.   Minneapolis was known as a town of gambling, illegal booze and prostitution, plagued by gang killings.   Friendly describes many of the journalists of respectable newspapers as looking the other way.   They chose not to get involved.   Enter Morrison’s successor, Jay M. Near. Near is not described as a man of conscience or character, but a man who was looking to profit, in any way he saw fit.   Again, this is likely why his name is not a household term.   Near and his partner Guilford, began a crusade against local authorities, including the chief of police.   Their publication The Saturday Press took aim at the local authorities.   Their implications tied the police to the local gambling syndicates and further accused the police of extorting money from local businesses. Brunskill, the chief of police had ordered an official ban of the paper from all newsstands in Minneapolis, on the basis that it would corrupt the morals of children.   Brunskill threatened arrest of anyone who would be selling the paper, which made Near fight harder.   Near and his cohorts promised legal aid and bail to anyone who would willingly sell the paper.   It was a political and racial fight from beginning to end.   Near, who was anti-Catholic, anti-Semitic, anti-black, anti-labor, would find support in the Jewish community to further his cause.   Never the less, The Saturday Press was eventually closed and padlocked. The United States, a country founded on freedom, had caused the creation of a number of civic unions that would fight for a cause, whether they believed in it or not.   They were fighting for freedom, yours, mine and theirs.   Near had found a way to reach out to the American Civil Liberties Union, and although they did not agree with his publication, they agreed with his right to publish it.   Near was also joined by Robert Rutherford McCormick, publisher of the Chicago Tribune.   McCormick joined the battle because of his belief in the First Amendment. They joined forces in order to fight the Public Nuisance Law and to support Freedom of the Press.   They did not all agree on the purpose of that freedom or how it should be used, but that it should be present for everyone.   They had determined that no one man should have the right to quiet the voice of another, despite their difference in opinion, and they took their case to the Supreme Court. Weymouth Kirkland, appellant’s counsel, in his address to the court, asserted that the Minnesota law violated the United States Constitution by restricting freedom of the press.   Kirkland admitted that the articles were defamatory, but added, â€Å"So long as men do evil, so long will newspapers publish defamation.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 126)   Kirkland concluded that every man has the right to publish malicious, scandalous and defamatory matter, even if untrue and with bad motives. (127) They may be dealt with after the publication of such matter, but no one has the right to prevent such publication.   Kirkland’s point was that the Minnesota gag law was a method of permanent censorship, however criminal proceedings on a specific complaint were always available to the state.   (128)   The Supreme Court ruled in Near’s favor. According to Friendly, Near vs. Minnesota, placed freedom of the press in the least favorable light.   (172)   Near’s cause did not appear to be significant or even just, except by those that choose to fight this battle.   To those who fought the battle it created a â€Å"sturdy† law.   â€Å"If great cases like hard cases make bad law, as the Holmes proverb warns, it may follow that since few knew or cared about Near’s cause, freedom of the press was transformed successfully into a twentieth-century constitutional bulwark.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 173) Had this case never been heard, we may be left with the inability to question our government or local authorities today.   We live in a democratic society, where we have been granted certain unalienable rights, among them the right to freedom of speech and freedom of the press.   Without those options, the press would be unable to publish stories of certain unflattering truths about our elected officials.   We would be unable to make informed decisions. â€Å"Both the history and language of the First Amendment support the view that the press must be left to publish news, whatever the source, without censorship, injunctions, or prior restraint.   Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.† (Friendly, 176) Near vs. Minnesota and the case of Morrison and the Rip-Saw, either story seems hard pressed to point to a great law that would emerge from the scandals.   But to leave the Public Nuisance Law in place, to limit the freedom of the press, would ultimately result in a restraint upon the freedom of the general public.   If the press cannot print what they learn, then our democracy is dissolved. â€Å"But, history, fate, or whatever fore it is that provides the unlikely champion, or the subtle, improbably turn of events that leaves its indelible stamp upon the course of human events, intervened.   It was one such incident that ultimately empowered five Supreme Court Justices to infuse with life and spirit and amendment which for 150 years had existed only as a bare skeleton.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 179)                                  Title of Paper â€Å"Although his name is hardly a household word, the ghost of Jay M. Near still stalks most U.S. courtrooms.   There exists no plaque that bears his name†¦.Near is truy the unknown soldier in the continuing struggle between the powers of government and the power of the press to publish the news.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 172) Fred Friendly, journalist, wrote of the struggle men, such as Jay M. Near, fought in their determination to live the American dream.   Their dream may not be acknowledged by the general public, but Near and his peers were trying to live the rights bestowed upon them as Americans.   Among those rights were the right to free speech, and freedom of the press. The reason Near is not a household name is because his cause may not have been seen by many to be noble.   If fought today, his cause or his dream would be likened to that of The Enquirer or The Star.   In fact, Friendly, in Minnesota Rag:   Corruption, Yellow Journalism, and the Case That Saved Freedom of The Press,   described Near vs. Minnesota, as a cast that placed freedom of the press in the least favorable light. Minnesota Rag, by Fred Friendly, traces the roots of this case all the way back to Duluth, Minnesota, beginning with a man by the name of James Morrison, who edited the Rip-Saw.   Morrison is described as a self-righteous man, willing to do anything to prove his point.   He saw a need in Duluth to expose the lawmakers for what they were.   It was a time of prohibition and Morrison saw failure in politicians and corruption in the police.   The Rip-Saw, as described by Friendly, was relentless.   â€Å"Once it had a victim in its sights, it didn’t stop until its prey was wounded.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 8) The Rip-Saw became a popular success.   The prohibition had been a failure and opened the door for Morrison to attack.   He ran storied of gambling dens increasing, prostitution and politicians, but did so under the guise of moral decency, which led the general public to believe him and the Rip-Saw.   The business sector did not have as much faith in Morrison or the Rip-Saw.   They accused him or trying to force businesses to buy advertising in order to eliminate the risk of gossip. Morrison was a single man trying to affect an entire community into believing and acting on his morals.   He had identified what he thought was just and decent and insisted that the rest of the community live by his law, or be punished.   His punishment was to be published as a headline in his paper in a non-flattering and often libelous manner.   He took it upon himself to judge the morals of others.   Morrison had an impact on local elections with the stories he printed, whether true or untrue. When finally brought to court on charges of libel, Morrison was found guilty.   Morrison immediately appealed the decision and six months later was ordered to make a public apology.   By that time, Morrison had already won, as the Mayor Power he had so maliciously written about had lost his election.   Morrison issued an apology, but certainly in jest as he had already accomplished what he had set out to do. Having accomplished such a feat, two other politicians, Boylan and Lommen, who had been lambasted in the Rip-Saw, determined that this type of press was unacceptable and formed legislation prohibiting publications that were producing â€Å"malicious, scandalous, and defamatory material.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 20)   This legislation is what would become known as the Public Nuisance Bill of 1925, often referred to as the â€Å"gag law.† â€Å"Any person who†¦.shall be engaged in the business of regularly or customarily producing, publishing or circulating, having in possession, selling or giving away, (a)  Ã‚  Ã‚   an obscene, lewd and lascivious newspaper, magazine or other periodical, or (b)  Ã‚   a malicious, scandalous and defamatory newspaper is guilty of nuisance.† This law enabled a single judge to prevent the publication of anything they believed or considered to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, or malicious, scandalous and defamatory.   Press coverage of this bill was almost non-existent and yet it had the largest impact on their business.   America, founded on freedom and liberty, was now going to allow the fate of individuals to rest in the hands of one judge, and his beliefs.   This judgment went against everything that our laws our founded on.   This wouldn’t go down without a fight. Minneapolis, Minnesota was vastly affected by the prohibition as well.   Friendly described it as a crossroads in the Canadian whiskey trade.   From Minneapolis it could be shipped to Chicago and St. Louis.   Some journalists in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area described both the politicians and law enforcement as being on the take.   Minneapolis was known as a town of gambling, illegal booze and prostitution, plagued by gang killings.   Friendly describes many of the journalists of respectable newspapers as looking the other way.   They chose not to get involved.   Enter Morrison’s successor, Jay M. Near. Near is not described as a man of conscience or character, but a man who was looking to profit, in any way he saw fit.   Again, this is likely why his name is not a household term.   Near and his partner Guilford, began a crusade against local authorities, including the chief of police.   Their publication The Saturday Press took aim at the local authorities.   Their implications tied the police to the local gambling syndicates and further accused the police of extorting money from local businesses. Brunskill, the chief of police had ordered an official ban of the paper from all newsstands in Minneapolis, on the basis that it would corrupt the morals of children.   Brunskill threatened arrest of anyone who would be selling the paper, which made Near fight harder.   Near and his cohorts promised legal aid and bail to anyone who would willingly sell the paper.   It was a political and racial fight from beginning to end.   Near, who was anti-Catholic, anti-Semitic, anti-black, anti-labor, would find support in the Jewish community to further his cause.   Never the less, The Saturday Press was eventually closed and padlocked. The United States, a country founded on freedom, had caused the creation of a number of civic unions that would fight for a cause, whether they believed in it or not.   They were fighting for freedom, yours, mine and theirs.   Near had found a way to reach out to the American Civil Liberties Union, and although they did not agree with his publication, they agreed with his right to publish it.   Near was also joined by Robert Rutherford McCormick, publisher of the Chicago Tribune.   McCormick joined the battle because of his belief in the First Amendment. They joined forces in order to fight the Public Nuisance Law and to support Freedom of the Press.   They did not all agree on the purpose of that freedom or how it should be used, but that it should be present for everyone.   They had determined that no one man should have the right to quiet the voice of another, despite their difference in opinion, and they took their case to the Supreme Court. Weymouth Kirkland, appellant’s counsel, in his address to the court, asserted that the Minnesota law violated the United States Constitution by restricting freedom of the press.   Kirkland admitted that the articles were defamatory, but added, â€Å"So long as men do evil, so long will newspapers publish defamation.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 126)   Kirkland concluded that every man has the right to publish malicious, scandalous and defamatory matter, even if untrue and with bad motives. (127) They may be dealt with after the publication of such matter, but no one has the right to prevent such publication.   Kirkland’s point was that the Minnesota gag law was a method of permanent censorship, however criminal proceedings on a specific complaint were always available to the state.   (128)   The Supreme Court ruled in Near’s favor. According to Friendly, Near vs. Minnesota, placed freedom of the press in the least favorable light.   (172)   Near’s cause did not appear to be significant or even just, except by those that choose to fight this battle.   To those who fought the battle it created a â€Å"sturdy† law.   â€Å"If great cases like hard cases make bad law, as the Holmes proverb warns, it may follow that since few knew or cared about Near’s cause, freedom of the press was transformed successfully into a twentieth-century constitutional bulwark.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 173) Had this case never been heard, we may be left with the inability to question our government or local authorities today.   We live in a democratic society, where we have been granted certain unalienable rights, among them the right to freedom of speech and freedom of the press.   Without those options, the press would be unable to publish stories of certain unflattering truths about our elected officials.   We would be unable to make informed decisions. â€Å"Both the history and language of the First Amendment support the view that the press must be left to publish news, whatever the source, without censorship, injunctions, or prior restraint.   Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.† (Friendly, 176) Near vs. Minnesota and the case of Morrison and the Rip-Saw, either story seems hard pressed to point to a great law that would emerge from the scandals.   But to leave the Public Nuisance Law in place, to limit the freedom of the press, would ultimately result in a restraint upon the freedom of the general public.   If the press cannot print what they learn, then our democracy is dissolved. â€Å"But, history, fate, or whatever fore it is that provides the unlikely champion, or the subtle, improbably turn of events that leaves its indelible stamp upon the course of human events, intervened.   It was one such incident that ultimately empowered five Supreme Court Justices to infuse with life and spirit and amendment which for 150 years had existed only as a bare skeleton.†Ã‚   (Friendly, 179)