The Challenges of Cash Flow Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

The Challenges of Cash Flow - Assignment Example This will enable customers to mail payments and checks processed by the bank as quickly as possible. Companies should use one bank to centralize and easily manage their cash. Tightening credit requirements – It is a marketing strategy to extend credit to customers to increase sales. Businesses often have to extend credit to customers, particularly when starting out or growing. Businesses should also scrutinize individual customers to assess the risks related to selling to customers on credit. Additionally, companies should accept credit cards although it will attract a small percentage of interest (Linzer, 2006). Increasing sales – increased sales would defiantly increase cash inflow. In order to achieve this objective, a company should sell more goods to existing customers and get new customers through advertisement of products and services (Jones, 2008). Pricing discounts – discounts on accounts receivable motivate customers to pay early in order to claim the discount offered. This will definitely improve cash inflow. However, this will reduce the firm’s profit margin. A company may delay payments to the suppliers as a counteraction. This must be done with a lot of precaution so as not to affect the firm’s credit rating. Securing loans – bank overdraft or other short-term loans can also be used to solve short-term cash flow problems (Linzer, 2006). A long-term amortized loan is also another way to solve cash flow during financial difficulties but it should sum up principal and interest until the loan is finally settled. Set cash flow targets- proper cash flow projections will enable your firm to properly estimate and project the required cash flow. The use of cash flow analysis tools like use of cash budget and projected cash flow statement are also effective (Jones, 2008). Make payment by your customers as

Health Care Administration Ethics Movie Review Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Health Care Administration Ethics - Movie Review Example On this basis, he was not an expert of a leverage buyout. Initiating a merger with the company would have proved successful, and on this note, it was surprising for him to engage in a buyout. Another issue is that he tried to remodel RJR Nabisco, which was a company that consisted of a diverse group of companies. He was not successful in this attempt. However, his decision to buy RJR Nabisco experienced some challenges with the emergence of another company, referred to as KKR. These are experts in LBO buyouts, and this result in a series of negotiations and exchanges, leading to the failure of the buyout. One of the opinions raised by the author is that leveraged buyouts have to be conducted by people experienced in the same. This is because the author is able to depict in the movie that Ross Johnson was not qualified enough to engage in a leveraged buyout because he was an expert of a buyout, and not a merger (Thomas, 74). On this basis, the KKR Company was better placed to handle the buyout, as opposed to the firm employed by Ross Johnson that is Shearson Lehmann. Furthermore, the author is against leverage buyout, and this is because it uses the company’s debts and equity as collateral in purchasing a given company. In the view of the author, this is unethical business practice. Furthermore, the author identifies the greed and corrupt activities of Wall Street managers, whose ambition is driven by making more money. This was the case of Ross Johnson, as well as the managers of KKR Company. They were engaged in a series of price wars, and negotiations, without involving the shareholders, or even catering for the interests of the shareholders (Russell, 17). These opinions by the author are valid, and they are even reflected in the real life situation of the business world. For instance, Lehman Brothers was an equity investment company that collapsed in

Diverse Racial Experience Essay Example for Free

Diverse Racial Experience Essay The chapter by Ruth Frankenberg entitled, Introduction: Points of Origin, Points of Departure, argues that the way one is perceived in society drastically changes their experience and advantage over others. Therefore, white women are often distinguished by their whiteness which gives them a more diverse racial experience (Frankenberg, 1993, pp. 1). With being white comes various additional components that set it apart from the other raced women of the world. Moreover, being a white woman automatically links them to a more favourable position of superiority in the way that they are often identified. This means that they get certain benefits by being white, as colonialism positioned them to have a large portion of control and authority over others. This provides them with the advantage to define the public and its individual beings the way they believe or want it to be. Moreover, they see their whiteness as a normative position in society that is invisible. Frankenberg`s goal is to make whiteness visible so that a white person can identify that they have an advantage over a person of colour by virtue of their skin. She also takes into consideration the intersectionality of class, culture, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality in a white racialized body (Frankenberg, 1993, pp. 1). Colonization is an important factor to Frankenberg because of how it uncovers the concept of whiteness and how it subsequently became associated to a position of authority and power. In the article `The Murder of Pamela George`, the author observes that history of colonial violence permitted white men to annex land that did not belong to them and treat it as though they were entitled to it (Razack, 2004 ,pp.127). This perception has perpetuated the control and authority of white people throughout history. A critique in the second wave of feminism made white feminists reconsider what and for whom they were advocating. The movement of feminism was envisioned to include all women but it only targeted one specific group of white middle class women. This occurred because the women could only see there suffering from their particular standpoint. This is seen in the article The Problem That Has No Name by Betty Friedan since she assumes that all women are homogeneous and all have the same lived experiences. She does not consider race, class, and sexuality as a factor in feminism (1997). White women mostly consider their whiteness as undetectable and thus not subject to racism (Frankenberg, 1993, pp. 3). These white feminists in the second wave were unintentionally being racist towards other women; this made them unsure about how to precede and resolve this issue (Frankenberg, 1993, pp. 4). Frankenberg educated herself about racism by positioning herself to learn from the standpoint of women of colour. Enakshi Dua stated in her article that, in order to understand how race and gender are interconnected one has to listen to the lived experiences of women of colour (2005, pp. 64). Frankenberg followed this method formulating questions that she wanted to investigate to find out how racism affects a white women`s life and how society propagates racism through societal means. After answering these questions Frankenberg proceeded to figure out how white women can fight against racism. Most white women believe that their race is invisible and do not realize that it gives them a distinct experience in the world. This is because the dominant class structures society and thus normalizes whiteness. White women and women of colour have distinct experiences that are subject to how they experience racism. Whiteness is socially constructed and it does affect a white women`s life. However, white women usually tended to regard racism as something that has no effect on them and that women of colour only have to live through (Frankenberg, 1993, pp. 6). This belief does not put the onus on the white people and it does not identify the perpetrator of the subjection. Racism does not just happen, it is constructed (Tim Wise 2005). Therefore, it impacts the lives of white women which makes race and gender intersectional for all women not just women of colour. There is a denial in the observations that there is one specific dominating male gender. There is also an abundance of only white women`s experiences by this masculine hegemon. After women realized that the world view did not only have to be seen on a male standpoint the world started to shift views (Frankenberg, 1993, pp. 8). Women of colour now want to focus on a standpoint from a radicalized point of view in order to stop racism. Moreover, since white people are the oppressors they cannot see how their situation is reinforcing racism. People of colour are the oppressed and know exactly how they are underprivileged. Subsequently, women of colour were the first to see how gender, race and class forms a persons experience in life (Frankenberg, 1993, pp. 8). White women did not see their race as something that was constructed. They did not see themselves as racialized because they were coming from a position of privilege. This position for a white person was normalized throughout American history. Therefore, in order to deconstruct race white women have to admit it is something that affects them (Frankenberg, 1993, pp. 11). Race is in a fluid motion and changes constantly with society because it is an economic and political construct. Historically, the white dominance was vindicated because of false biological account that white people were superior (Frankenberg, 1993, pp. 13). This biology justified colonization as well as the enslavement of people of colour that soon followed. The justification shifted to culture as the reason that made people inferior and if they integrated with American culture they would achieve success on merit like white people. However, this belief kept blaming people of colour for their position in society.People of colour were first seen as different from white people, then there was an embrace of colour blindness, and finally people realized that they needed to be able to see the differences in society so they can explain them. This last movement’s purpose was to make people aware of race; this was led by the people of colour themselves. They did not want to be invisible because there situation was not improving because people were ignoring the underlying problem. The racialization of people of colour and white people was constructed with colonization. The European culture was embedded into the way the United States constructed its country. This constructed whiteness as belonging and being a person of colour as an outsider (Dua 2005, pp. 60). The dominant western culture –which was white- positioned itself to dominant over the other races. This created the standard citizen that belonged and made people of colour not included in the so called superior western culture. Frankenberg`s argument illuminates how the dominant class rationalized whiteness as not being racialized. Colonization formed the dominant race and reproduced it through society. By normalizing whiteness the white people did not need to consider how it benefited them and subsequently how it negatively affected people of colour. By naming whiteness, Frankenberg will be able to pinpoint how that perception can change so that people can be equal even with there differences. In conclusion, by admitting that white people are racialized will assist anti-racist feminists in their mission to stop the racialization of all people. This would stop white people from believing that they are the only ones that belong in North America and eventually create a system based on meritocracy rather then privilege by virtue of a persons skin.

William Faulkner: The Postmodern Perspective

William Faulkner: The Postmodern Perspective Many critics consider William Faulkner a modernist writer, citing the time period between the 1930s and 40s as the era in which he wrote himself into and out of modernism. Indeed, Faulkners novels during these years reflect many of the typical aspects of modernist literature, and it is incontrovertibly innovative and unique. However, Faulkner appears to be doing more than what the Modernists were employing at the time, especially in the context of his experimentation with language. In fact, the great Southern writer appears to more so on the road to Postmodernism in his later works than anything. During this period between the 30s and the 40s what critics call Faulkners modernist epoch his writing also seems to flow with Lacans poststructural theories of language. Beginning with The Sound and the Fury in late 1929, Faulkner begins his journey through the Lacanian Mirror Stage, aware of the linguistic Imaginary. His effort to craft the imagined world of Yoknapatawpha reflects his ea rly Modernist self in Lacans Imaginary order stage, marking his uncomfortable attitude towards his alienation from the South he once knew. Quentin, whom most critics see as a double to Faulkner, is the incarnation of Faulkners attitude, and his multiple appearances in Faulkners novels marks the stage in Lacans process of linguistic development each time. The age ends with the authors fulfillment of the Lacanian journey, with nowhere to turn but back. Absalom, Absalom! and Afternoon of a Cow prove Faulkners acceptance of the impossibility of Lacans Real, highlighted by a writing style which could be characterized as transitionally postmodernist. Faulkners modernist/postmodernist identity crisis between the 30s and 40s occurs during the authors Lacanian development in language and thought, ending with the recognition of literatures inability to break the symbolic ceiling. While it would be incredibly shortsighted and undoubtedly wrong to refer to The Sound and the Fury as underdeveloped and not modern, the novel is nevertheless Faulkners most immature piece of literature in the context of Lacanian development. Here, Faulkner begins his troubles with language as he is initially trapped in the Imaginary stage. John T. Irwin, in his essay on Doubling and Incest in Faulkners literature, suggests that Faulkner created the character of Quentin as an unconsciously double of himself. Irwin purports that Faulkners own comments about the novel support this parallel between him and Quentin, especially his recognition of his own failures in literature and fate to retell the same stories (Irwin 280). While most critics point to Caddy as the focus of the novel because of her role as the absent center, a Lacanian reading of the text implies that the absent center is actually Faulkner himself since he puts so much of himself into Quentin (and some of the other charac ters as well, though it is most prevalent here). Quentins chapter, which becomes progressively more self-reflexive and anxious, reveals Faulkners own worries and discontent with language. It ends with his ultimate alienation from everyone and everything Quentins suicide which is how Lacan explains the mirror stage as ending. Lacan describes the completion of the mirror stage as the formation of the Ego through subjectification, during which a person undergoes a conflict between his or her own perception of the self and the actual self through experience Lacan refers to this result as alienation (Evans 110). Quentin has undergone this discovery of his own reality that which others have defined him to be and his perception of himself. As Irwin suggests, It is tempting to see in Quentin a surrogate of Faulkner, a double who is fated to retell and reenact the same story throughout his life just as Faulkner seemed fated to retell in different ways the same story again and again (Irw in 281). His death signifies Faulkners assessment of his own fate. He predicts literary failure for himself due to the inability of language fully express everything he attempts to convey. This marks Faulkners first encounter with the futility of language, and his first step in Lacanian development. Through this inner conflict, Faulkner associates with Quentin, and other characters like him. Indeed, he puts a part of himself in every character that he creates, but characters like Quentin best serve as literary representations of him when considering his troubles with language. Lacan holds that in the beginningà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦we exist as part of one continuous totality of being. In this early stage of development, we experience noà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦sense of difference, and, precisely for this reason, the [subject] has no sense of a separate identityà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦there is no I and no other, and, Lacan insists, the two concepts come into existence together (Duvall and Abadie 98). Faulkners state at this point in his literary development is such as Lacan defines it. He has no sense of difference between himself and his work, and therefore he meshes himself with Quentin and his other characters. However, his own repressions appear in Quentins thoughts and words, and Faulkner is unaware o f the amount of similarities between himself and the character. Faulkner revised the introduction [to The Sound and the Fury] several times. In its final version, in which Faulkner doubles Quentins own words in the novel: So I, who had never had a sister and was fated to lose my daughter in infancy, set out to make myself a beautiful and tragic little girl' (Irwin 283). It is clearly through his own connection with Quentin that he learns how to connect with this novel, but the relationship that he develops with the character ultimately blurs the line between himself and Quentin. Faulkner can see the gap between language and reality, but he cannot seem to assure the differentiation between himself and his creations. A year later, Faulkner published his next novel, As I Lay Dying, in which he continues the linguistic struggles and development with the Bundren family. As Terrell Tebbetts suggests, each of the Bundren children suffers his or her own issue with language: Cash can only express himself through lists and figures, and though he seems perceptive at the end by explaining what happened to Darl, Cash recognizes Darls problems with language but presumes that they the fault of Darl, not language (Tebbetts 128-130). But it is better so for [Darl]. This world is not his world; this life his life (Faulkner 149). Cash speaks with a perception that is Faulknerian, as it reflects William Faulkners prediction of his own fate. In this novel, he connects most with Darl through their shared discontent with the shortcomings of language. Darls linguistic troubles are the most serious, as he isolates himself through his inability to express his feelings. His problems cause him to lose his identity, repeatedly asking things about himself such as who am I. Early in the novel, Vardaman asks what Darls mother is (Vardaman describes his mother as a fish), and Darl remarks that he does not have one. I havent got ere one, Darl said. Because if I had one, it is was. And if it was, it cant be is. Can it?' (Faulkner 58). Darls concept of language is that it describes reality, and only reality. He perceives that he does not have a mother because she is dead (hence, the was), yet what he really means is that he no longer has a mother. However, he gets so lost in his attempts to conceptualize this that he arrives at the decision that he does not have a mother. As alluded to earlier, these troubles affect his own identity. I dont know what I am. I dont know if I am or not. Jewel knows he is, because he does not know that he does no t know whether he is or not. He cannot empty himself for sleep because he is not what he is and he is what he is not (Faulkner 46). Darl has entered the mirror stage along with Faulkner, and he is thus aware of the conflicts between his own perceptions and the perceptions of others. Darl is highlighting the gap between the signifier and the signified in language, as Lacan calls it. Darl is our brother, our brother Darl. Our brother Darl in a cage in Jackson where, his grimed hands lying light in the quiet interstices, looking out he foams (Faulkner 146). He has been incredibly objective internally, seeing himself in an omniscient, third-person perspective, but this is a result of the inability to reconcile the real him and the him that others perceive him to be (the Lacanian signifier is their Darl, the signified is the real Darl). Therefore, he becomes the best example in the novel of a character that, by passing through the mirror stage and entering the Symbolic Realm, alienates himself completely (even within himself). Darl is also, then, the most connected with Faulkner, since he becomes aware of the failure of language to ever say what one means (Duvall and Abadie 39). Darl reflects what his mother discovered much earlier: words are no good; that words dont ever fit even what they are trying to say at (Faulkner 99). Addie also saw the gap between experience and language, which proves Coras statement that Darl has the most in common with Addie, but her troubles are more connected with the patriarchality of language, and therefore not as connected with Faulkner as Darl. Also, Addies death is another example of what Faulkner sees as the futility of efforts to connect reality and language. Likewise, despite Darls evolution from the Mirror Stage into the Symbolic Stage, his fate commitment to an insane asylum provides more evidence to prove that Faulkner saw no way to prevent these linguistic troubles from alienating and ultimately destroying his characters and himself. Therefore, Faulkner is still undoubtedly a Modernist at this point, as well as underdeveloped in the progression of Lacanian development, because he sees no escape from such a fate at this point. He would say that language is a hindrance more than a help. Darl masters lan guage internally, but he cannot apply it in reality, thus showing the gap between language and experience a modernist idea: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦the wholeness of the image threatens the subject with fragmentation, and the mirror stage thereby gives rise to an aggressive tension between the subject and the image. In order to resolve this aggressive tension, the child identifies with the imageà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ The moment of identification, when the subject assumes its image as its own, is described by Lacan as a moment of jubilation, since it leads to an imaginary sense of masteryà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦however, this jubilation may also be accompanied by a depressive reactionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ (Evans 115) While Faulkner would not have known the psychological theories of Lacan, the characters of Quentin and Darl seem to fit the characterization of these issues well. However, these two characters are unable to come to terms with their image. While the end of Quentins chapter does not end with his suicide, we learn later that he takes his own life because he foresees no escape. Likewise, Darls uncontrollable laughter at the end of As I Lay Dying is his moment in which he has the opportunity to identify with one part of his fragmented self but proves unable to do so. Darls problem is also left unsolved, as his internal self argues within, demanding an explanation for his false triumph. They are both aware of their precarious states with language. Additionally, the mirror stage is where the subject becomes alienated from itself, and thus is introduced into the Imaginary order. Clearly both characters have entered this stage and find themselves completely alienated from themselves and the w orld. Terrell Tebbetts claims that Vernon Tull is the only character in the novel that can come to terms with this problem, resorting to the constant use of like in his descriptions and an employment of similes while talking (Tebbetts 130). Tebbetts is misled, however, because Tull is actually a Modernist character. By using similes to draw comparisons between things he is attempting to define, he is still grasping for the ideal that Modernists spent their careers trying to reach. Instead, a Postmodernist would take advantage of language rather than constantly highlight its failures (as I will discuss later). Tebbetts believes that Vernon Tull is Faulkners way of saying that the way out of the problem is acceptance, but the solution is more complicated than simple recognition. Besides, characters like Darl, Addie, and Quentin all understood the gap between language and reality, which drove them to their own forms of alienation. As I Lay Dying also features a level of intended humor that is classified as dark, or black, humor. One of the best examples of dark comedy in the novel is when we find Addie Bundren propped up on a pillow in order to watch as Cash constructs her coffin. Then [Addie] raises herself, who has not moved in ten daysà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦She is looking out the window, at Cash stooping steadily at the board in the failing lightà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦He drops the saw and lifts the board for her to see, watching the window in which the face has not moved (Faulkner 28). This moment evokes immediate laughter because Cash, the oldest child of the family, seems like a proud pet retrieving its catch of the day for his master. Likewise, everyone sees the grotesque and gaunt figure of Addie rise as if from the dead in order to view her burial chamber and then return to her former position, seemingly in approval. Even more dark comedy lies in Faulkners intended criticism of the other characters views toward each o ther. Every character that makes a negative comment about another is later shown to be hypocritical, being strange and quirky in his or her own way. Elements of Faulkners early novels, especially As I Lay Dying, show that the author was on the road to self-reflexivity and metafiction. Much of the Addie chapter, through its hypercritical look at the failure of language, is self-reflexive because it is actively commenting on the words and ideas presented in the novel, yet the self-conscious elements seem only present through implication. Faulkner never reaches his potential (or becomes fully aware of what he was doing) with the element of self-reflexivity until Absalom, Absalom! and Afternoon of a Cow. In his novels until then, Faulkner also had a preoccupation with what Modernists referred to as the attempt to make it new, trying to experiment with literature and attempting things unseen before. He is first in the Mirror Stage, looking at the traditional novel with its content, form, mimetic philosophy of language, and decides that he needs to break from tradition. Then he enters the next stage the Symbolic and attempts to creat e new and modern literature. While in this stage, though, he realizes the futility of language, and that everything he attempts fails. Faulkner repeatedly tries to achieve literary transcendence, but all he writes is merely a symbol of what he truly intends. It is not until Absalom, Absalom! that he not only accepts his state and failure, but he knowingly plays with the postmodern techniques and ideas. In the novel, Faulkner uses language to do what Lacan says it does reflect the condition of the alienated subject, the fractured self (Moreland 47). Nothing Faulkner attempts attains the literary transcendence for which he has been searching, and so he realizes this, comes to terms with it, and makes fun of this problem. Faulkners movement through the Lacanian linguistic progression led him prematurely to postmodernism. While he thought he was being modern by experimenting, he was actually employing many elements that surpassed the realm of modernism. As I Lay Dying was his first clear transitional work, in which it marked a road from modern to postmodern literature, as the novel hinges between the two genres itself (although, as mentioned before, it should be classified as a modern text if it must be categorized. Faulkner resists many of the modernist techniques and philosophies, but his break from the movement was not clean, as he continued to inscribe them. Patrick ODonnell agrees with this, aware of the presence of transitory texts: Yet, there are moments in the works of the high-modernist authors I have mentioned that work beyondà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦that rupture its bonds (ODonnell 34). His example from Faulkner is the way in which some of his novels attempt to shatter the connectionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦bet ween attempting to transcend the past, and being condemned to repeat it (34). This struggle with the past no longer seems to be an issue once Faulkner writes Absalom, Absalom! although it had been a focus of his earlier novel, The Sound and the Fury. ODonnell agrees that the later works of William Faulkner present more significant breaks from modernism, suggesting that Go Down, Moses is actually a postmodern rewrite of Absalom, Absalom! (36). However, Faulkners work after that became much more conservative, reverting to the modernist tendencies which he displayed at the beginning of his career. Even a quick reading of Absalom, Absalom! in comparison to Faulkners early novels reveals large differences between the styles. Much like his presentations of characters in previous novels, Faulkner puts elements of himself into his characters; however, in this novel, he purposely employs a self-reflexive concentration in order to create metafiction. It is here that Faulkner stops concerning himself with epistemology and instead with ontology. Faulkner operates the text differently in Absalom, Absalom! in the way that he exerts absolute control over every aspect of the story and creates a commentary on language and fiction. ODonnell refers to Faulkner not as the author of the text of Absalom, Absalom! but as the unseen drop that falls into a pool of water and gives rise to a series of ripples, borrowing from Quentins own words in the novel (Weinstein 31). In other words, he becomes the catalyst for the things that naturally occur. Faulkner puts enough of himself into the novel that e verything he has put into place takes over for him. From this, he no longer stresses or frets over the futility of language; instead, he allows it to take over. The metafictional aspect of Absalom, Absalom! lies in the unique structure and writing style. Unlike his previous endeavors, Faulkner dares to tell a story within the story a story about storytelling. The act of telling a story is artistic because the narrator imposes his or her own will upon it, and it is therefore subjective as well. Previously he is unaware of the subjective nature of language, and now he not only accepts it, but he employs it as well (his primary narrator has a subjective viewpoint unlike what he has done previously). His approach in this novel allows him to have fun with it, thus achieving postmodern status and completing his Lacanian development. Examples of the metafictional aspects in the novel appear most often during the sections focusing on or narrated by Quentin and Mr. Compson. In chapter four, Mr. Compson tells his son, people too as we are, but victims of a different circumstance, simpler and therefore, integer for integer, larger, more heroic and the figures therefore more heroic too, not dwarfed and involved but distinct, uncomplexà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦author and victim too of a thousand homicides and a thousand copulationsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Perhaps you are right. Perhaps any more light than this would be too much for it (Faulkner 90). This is perhaps the most problematic examples of metafiction in the novel because of its focus. While, indeed, it involves Mr. Compson commenting on literature through criticizing a story, it is also taking a Modernists perspective. Faulkner, through Compson, is calling for a return to myth, arguing that the mythological stories of the past are uncomplex and do not suffer from the ambiguity tha t plagues modern literature. This focus on the importance of myths is a common concentration of modernist writers, as is the call to use these stories and make them new. Likewise, Compson seems to be hinting at the significance of this declaration and its symbolism rather than being direct about his point, and implication is the Modernists way of implementing metafiction. The only redeeming factor of the speech lies in his final words, using perhaps to signify his uncertainty, therefore offering a postmodern, skeptical perspective and rejecting absolute truth. The fact that the characters are actively telling the story of Sutpen and commenting on it at the same time is somewhat postmodern, as it is including and drawing attention to the author within the story. There are also times when the narrative from a character goes on for such a long time that the reader forgets who is telling the story, and at this point, the presence of Faulkner as a narrator begins to become more evident. It is also then that comments such as the speech from Mr. Compson take on new and deeper meaning, as the reader begins to associate Faulkner with these ideas more so than the characters. Another more complicated example of metafiction appears again in chapter four, as Mr. Compson says: We have a few old mouth-to-mouth tales; we exhume from old trunks and boxes and drawers letters without salutation or signature, in which men and women who once lived and breathed are now merely initials or nicknames out of some now incomprehensible affection which sound to us like Sanskrit or Chocktaw; we see dimly people, the people in whose living blood and seed we ourselves lay dormant and waiting, in this shadowy attenuation of time possessing now heroic proportions, performing their actsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦impervious to time and inexplicable. (Faulkner 102-103) Faulkner, once again through the mouth of Mr. Compson, is commenting on the state of literature, but more importantly, the uncertainty that literature creates as it all returns to mythology. As he suggests, we as readers have to realize that every story that is told is merely a representation of another, and each is also a mere representation of reality. This also gets back to Faulkners problem with language it never says what you want it to mean. However, it seems now that he has arrived at a fix for this problem The character of Judith, when discussing the story, remarks that words are mere scratches without meaning but it doesnt matter that it is so (Faulkner 131). This differs from the perspective of earlier novels characters because Judith both comes to terms with the meaninglessness of language and decides that it is no longer problematic for her. When asked if she wants Miss Rosa to read the letter, Judith replies, Yesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Or destroy it. As you like. Read it if you like or dont read it if you like. Because you make so little impression, you see (Faulkner 130). Clearly Judith recognizes the futility of language, but she also overcomes the problem, caring not whether Rosa reads the letter or not, because it will not make much of a difference either way. According to Tebbetts, Postmodernists see human attempts to describe and establish truth not only as futile but even as destructive (Tebbetts 131). In other words, if language is strictly symbolic, then it cannot lead us to truth . This comes from a poststructuralist view that truth is a transcendent signifier and does not exist (Lewis 96). The novel embraces this, and Faulkner no longer struggles with the uncertainty of language. Some critics see the novel as having a pattern of uncertainty, which is visible through its use of words like perhaps and maybe. Faulkner had been rejecting this in his earlier novels, but he is finally embracing it here. Faulkner also chooses to utilize the metafiction to inform the reader about his Lacanian journey with language. Lacan says that when the individual is able to split and repress a part of itself, it enters the symbolic realm. The subject becomes aware of its absent center but is driven by desire to fill the void of absence. For Sutpen in Absalom, Absalom! Faulkners momentary stand-in for the duration of this story his enlightenment moment occurs in Chapter Seven, when he is turned away at the planters house (Duvall and Abadie 47). Faulkner, looking back on the past, looks at Sutpen in his Mirror Stage and shines light on his own. Before this moment, Quentin says that Sutpen was no more conscious of his appearanceà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ or of the possibility that anyone else would be that he was of his skin (Faulkner 185). At this point, Sutpen has evolved into the Symbolic Stage, just as Faulkner does in his earlier novels. Faulkners style in the novel is more oral than literary, and the novel flows through thoughts and character dialogue that often seems like Faulkner himself is orally relating the story to his listeners. Critic Conrad Aiken agrees, calling his unique style grossly overelaborate and grammatically annoying (Aiken 135). However, Aiken claims that this proves Faulkners Modernist streak, which is, as proven thus far, shortsighted since Absalom, Absalom! is the authors most postmodern book. What he achieves through this style is the defamiliarization of language, blurring the boundaries of literature. It is these lengthy, seemingly never-ending sentences in the novel that reflect Faulkners aims. Likewise, he also enacts a tactic of delayed disclosure through this approach, starting a section of a story and abruptly stopping to digress onto something else. This way in which he withholds the points and meaning of his sentences, information about characters, and the continuations of half-finis hed stories is essentially Lacanian. A characterization of Faulkners novel as either modern or postmodern requires understanding of what it means to be a postmodern piece of fiction. Postmodern literature is often perceived as a reaction to Modernism, which numerous authors, poets, and scholars worried was becoming increasingly too conventional and traditional. Likewise, they often saw Modernism as an elitist form of writing, since it was usually difficult and obscure. They cited the many complex literary references as a source of this, and suggested that Modernism was catering only to the highly educated because of these references. Postmodernism, in response, frequently involves pop cultural references, including those to other postmodern works, popular art, television shows, politics, well-known historical occurrences, and movies. Postmodernism is also often jumbled with fragmentation, but the use of fragmentation is much more severe than in Modernism, as there is sometimes no clear plot, characters sometimes seem po intless, the story is broken up and confused (often beyond repair). This extreme level of fragmentation is often used to make the point that literature is often more about what is under the surface, and that knowledge of a novels plot does not guarantee that a reader has gotten all meaning from the work. Even Faulkners avant-garde nature and separation from Modernism does not develop into what postmodern literature is known for. In order to answer the question of where Faulkner falls in the spectrum of modern and postmodern literature, one must turn to scholarship that identifies obvious postmodernism and determine if Faulkner lives up to the standards. Barry Lewis, author of Postmodernism and Literature, provides a great description of postmodernism as it applies to literature. He purports that the literature that best falls into this category was written between 1960 and 1990, and that anything before is transitory (Lewis 96). He suggests that the most important elements of postmodernity are temporal disorder, pastiche, comfortableness with fragmentation, looseness of association, paranoia, vicious circles, and language disorder (95-105). Likewise, Lewis also brings Jacques Derridas concept of play as a postmodernism technique. Instead of the modernist quest for meaning in a world of chaos, the postmodern author denies, often playfully, the possibility of meaning (98). As a result, the postmodern novel is often a parody of the modernist quest. Within Faulkners works, there are elements of each of these characteristics, but they all seem to appear faintly and fleetingly. For example, temporal disorder is overtly obvious in The Sound and the Fury because Faulkner blurs the line between all time past and present are hard to distinguish. However, as Lewis would agree, Faulkner does not achieve the degree of disorder associated with postmodernist fiction. Instead of recognizing that history repeats itself and that there are definite concrete moments in time, Postmodernists rather make all time vague and parody other works obsession with time (98). Faulkners Quentin in The Sound and the Fury would have been very Modernist in this category, since his preoccupation with time is ultimately part of what destroys him. However, Absalom, Absalom! removes this worry completely, being completely unconcerned about the passage of time since it does not matter. In fact, the novels structure, constant ly shifting tenses between present and past ever so seamlessly, is postmodern. Therefore, some of these postmodern qualities appear in the novel, but others do not. Another important aspect of postmodern literature that Lewis points out is pastiche, which literally means to combine and paste together multiple elements. Pastiche, then, arises from the frustration that everything has been done beforepostmodernist writers tend to pluck existing styles higgledy-piggledy from the reservoir of literary history, and match them with little tact. This explains why many contemporary novels borrow the clothes of different forms (Lewis 99). Although there are some critics who suggest that this is part of Faulkners repertoire, arguing that he employs this in Absalom, Absalom! there does not seem to be enough evidence to prove that he is actively making the novel parodic. Indeed, there are clearly elements within the story that suggest that Faulkner had the classic Southern gothic novel in his heard while writing it, such as the final conversation between Shreve and Quentin at the end: Now I want you to tell me just one thing more. Why do you hate the South? I dont hate it, Quentin said, quickly, at once, immediately, I dont hate it' (Faulkner 395). Quentin, who often represents Faulkner, may be repressing something, and it very well could be a shared feeling of Faulkner; however, there has not been enough legitimate evidence or scholarship to prove this relationship. Therefore, the novel is not a parody, which hurts its chances at being classified as a postmodern novel. Modernists treat fragmentation and subjectivity as existential crises a problem that must be solved, which their literature attempts to do. Postmodernists, however, believe that this issue is insurmountable, and the only reactionary action that is worthwhile is to play with the chaotic tendencies. In postmodern literature, playfulness becomes the major focus, thus making any order or incontrovertible truth highly unlikely. Faulkner, at least in his early works and Absalom, Absalom! does not seem to venture very deep into this playfulness. Indeed, there is definitely a presence of this in Absalom, Absalom! but it never reaches the extremeness that other major postmodern works achieve. Compared to a work like Kurt Vonneguts Slaughterhouse-Five, Faulkners fiction does not stand up in terms of where it falls on the modern/postmodern scale. The first chapter of Vonneguts book begins by saying, All this happened, more or lessIve changed all the names. I really did go back to DresdenI went back there with an old war buddy, Bernardà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ (Vonnegut 1). The author blurs the line between where his influence ends and where the narrator (who is, in other words, understood to be separate from the author) begins. The first chapter seems more like a preface by the author, or a later comment on his novel that should come after the text; instead, Vonneguts first course of action is to set himself up as both the author and narrator. It is clearly postmodern because he is forthright about it instead of implying the blurred line. I would hate to tell you what this lousy little book cost me in money and anxiety and time. When I got

An Analysis of Burger King :: Business Management Studies

An Analysis of Burger King Burger King is a reliable burger company which has had its ups and downs. In 1974, it came out with a slogan of "Have it your way" and at this time it also had a 4 % market share. Burger King's idea was to have the customer have their burger done their way rather than a standard burger. In the early 80's Burger King was trying to keep sales growing so they had to keep changing their advertising. In 1982 "Battle of the burgers" and "Aren't you hungry for a Burger king now?" were the slogans used. In 1983 "Broiling vs. frying" and 1985 "The big switch". All these ads throughout the years helped increase market shares from 7.6% to 8.3% from 1983 to 1985. "Search for herb" was a slogan used by BK about a person that has never tasted a whopper burger, this campaign was supposed to increase market share by 10% but in reality only increased it by 1% it was a disaster. In 1986-1987 "this is a burger king town" and "best food for fast times" brought a lot of attention to the company. In 1988 "We do it like you do it" was used often but a year later they came out with two new slogans which confused the customer. In 1989 "Sometimes you gotta break the rules" and "BK tee vee" with MTV and Dan Cortese with "I love this place". This was another huge setback for BK because people on the go and parents found this ad loud and irritating. BK at this time has failed to establish a solid image that would differentiate it from its competitors. Ads if anything only confused consumers as to what advantages BK offered. In 1993 it had a market share of 6.1% were McDonalds had 15.6% and BK's sales were growing slower than its rivals. Failed advertising campaigns weren't the only problem's, they also had internal problems. Management lacked focus and direction and has struggled with marketing mix decisions. Franchises became confused and angered, service was slow and food preparation wasn't consistent. Burger King lost its core product-flame broiled burgers, made the way the customer wanted them. Another thing that hurt them was the fact they didn't lower prices to keep competing with their competitors this led to a below average sales growth. Many in store promotion also failed. In 1993 a new CEO was introduced, this allowed for huge turnaround and in fact it did. He helped please the franchises and responded to their problems and listened to their recommendations. Then later he lowered prices and hired a new advertising agency.

Teenage Dating in the 1950s Essay -- Relationships

Teenage Dating in the 1950s Teenagers in the 1950's are so iconic that, for some, they represent the last generation of innocence before it is "lost" in the sixties. When asked to imagine this lost group, images of bobbysoxers, letterman jackets, malt shops and sock hops come instantly to mind. Images like these are so classic, they, for a number of people, are "as American as apple pie." They are produced and perpetuated by the media, through films like Grease and Pleasantville and television shows like Happy Days, The Donna Reed Show, and Leave It to Beaver. Because of these entertainment forums, these images will continue to be a pop cultural symbol of the 1950's. After the second World War, teenagers became much more noticeable in America (Bailey 47). Their presence and existence became readily more apparent because they were granted more freedom than previous generations ever were. Teenagers like these were unique. They were given a chance to redefine the ways things were done in America. One of the conventions they put a new spin on, and consequently revolutionize, is the idea and practice of dating. The 1950's set up precedents in dating that led to what many consider "normal" dating today. ORIGINS OF DATING Dating is definitely an "American phenomenon." Few other countries carry on this practice with as much fervor as Americans do. Then again, few other countries have the same social conditions as America. Since the turn of the century, there has been a greater freedom between men and women, for example, both attend the same schools with the same classes. Both sexes become accustomed to the other at early ages which is very conducive to the practice of dating (Merrill 61). Dating essentially replaced the pra... ...isible. They drove cars and had money to spend. They were a new source of power, independent from their parents and ready for a change. Works Cited Bailey, Beth. From Front Porch to Back Seat. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1988. "Cross Country Report on Teens." Seventeen Sept. 1959: 134-135. "Do I have the right to love?" Seventeen May 1959: 136. Gould, Sandra. Always Say Maybe. New York: Golden Press, 1960. "How Much Do Boys Spend on Girls?" Seventeen June 1959: 75, 121. McGinnis, Tom. A Girl's Guide to Dating and Going Steady. New York: Doubleday, 1968. Merrill, Frances E. Courtship and Marriage. New York: William Sloane, 1949. Sadler, William. Courtship and Love. New York: Macmillan, 1952. Smith, Ken. Mental Hygiene: Classroom Films 1945-1970. New York: Blast Books, 1999. "The Art of Pursuit." Seventeen Feb. 1959: 72-73, 131.

My Problem with Her Anger

English W131 Mrs. Dunn 18 October 2012 A Critique of Eric Bartel’s â€Å"My Problem with Her Anger† When most people get married, they go into the marriage with the expectations and hopes that everything will go as planned, that they will always get along, and that the responsibilities will be evenly divided between both spouses. And for two working spouses who have children, they share the expectation that no one parent will be more of a caretaker than the other.Eric Bartels, a feature writer for the Portland Tribune in Portland, Oregon, feels as if he has personal experience as to what it is like to be on the receiving end of his wife’s irrational—or at least in his eyes—anger. Bartels informs his readers of the anger his wife projects on him, which he believes should be saved for people who are portrayed as angry people and who do not tend to care about the people they are taking their anger out on.While Bartels does a well job at being understanding of where his wife is coming from with all of her anger, he personally does not take any of the blame for the problems in the marriage. Eric Bartels explains how he feels himself to ultimately be the more dominant parent and his wife has much built-up anger that she constantly takes out on him. After working many hours, along with helping to take care of the kids, he gets yelled at by his stressed out wife about the things that he did wrong and the things that he could have done right.Bartels provides probable cause as to why his wife is so angry, such as motherhood and professional success, while also admitting that he did make mistakes before the marriage. Bartels ultimately feels that he does not deserve any of her anger because he has not done anything wrong making her the only one with faults and who is being the harsher one in the marriage. In this article, Eric Bartels does a poor job at showing her side of the story and admitting to lashing out on her every now and then.He only provides the reader with instances where she was the big bad wolf, per say. After bathing his kids and whi le putting the kids to bed, his wife â€Å"walks into the bathroom and scornfully asks no one in particular ‘Why is there still water in the bathtub? ’† (438). Another time his wife â€Å"stomped into the kitchen as I was cleaning up after a dinner that I may well have cooked and served and announced in angry tones that she needed more help getting the kids ready for bed than I had been providing† (438).So while his wife is portrayed as this woman who snaps at her husband at any moment she can, he is portrayed as this perfect, innocent little angel who just can’t catch a break. Bartels does not mention instances where she has been on the receiving end. He only points out a few slip ups he had before the marriage, such as â€Å"I would occasionally lose my cool, kicking a cooler door closed or angrily sending an empty bottle smashing into a bin with an ear-splitting explosion†).So although he admits that he had a bad past and lost his cool bef ore the marriage, he doesn’t take any fall for the marriage issues and wrongly blames his wife for it all. While Bartels does a poor job at owning up to any of the tension in the marriage, he does understand where his wife is coming from with her anger. He understands the hardships of marriage by saying â€Å"I think it’s fairly well established by now that marriage is a challenge, a creaky, old institution that may not have fully adapted itself to modern life, one that now fails in this country more often than not.Put children in the picture and you have an exponentially higher degree of difficulty† (439). He also understands the troubles caused from motherhood by saying â€Å"Motherhood asks the modern woman, who has grown up seeing professional success as hers for the taking, to add the loss of a linear career path to an already considerable burden: child rearing, body issues, a shifting self-image and a husband who fell off his white horse long, long ago. I suppose this would make anyone angry† (439).So although he does not approve of her anger and is not pleased by it, he understands why she might have so much built up anger that she feels the need to take out on her husband. So in essence, he is arguing fairly. When Eric Bartels decided to get married, he was not aware of all of the problems that would arise and the wrath that he would experience from his wife. Bartels informs his readers of the anger his wife projects on him, which he believes should be saved for people who are portrayed as angry eople and who do not tend to care about the people they are taking their anger out on. While Bartels does a well job at being understanding of where his wife is coming from with all of her anger, he personally does not take any of the blame for the problems in the marriage. Even though his wife is very bitter for certain reasons, Bartels still loves his wife and is willing to make things work in the end.