Young Goodman Brown Symbolism Essays - Young Goodman Brown

Young Goodman Brown Symbolism Nathaniel Hawthorne's work is typically fraught with symbolism, much of it deriving from his puritan ancestry. Not surprisingly, Hawthorne was obsessed with the themes of sin and guilt. John Roth notes that ?A number of recurring thematic patterns and character types appear in Hawthorne's novels and tales? (Roth 76). Because he is speaking of what we would later come to call the unconscious, Hawthorne extensively employed the use of symbolism, which bypasses the conscious to tap into its more dream- like process below (Roth 76). In his short story ?Young Goodman Brown,? the main character Goodman Brown goes off into the woods and undergoes what will be a life changing experience. ?Young Goodman Brown,? was written in the nineteenth century but is undoubtedly set in the seventeenth century, and for the early Americans in this time period the forest was a symbol of the test of strength, courage, and endurance. It took a lot of courage to survive there, and the young person entering the forest would not emerge the same. But the story is more symbolic than realistic, and the dangers that Goodman Brown encounters in the forest are not Indians or bears; they are dangers of the spirit. It is no accident that such an experience should have taken place in the forest, because there is a long and extremely profound tradition in American literature where experiences of this nature haven taken place in forest settings. Psychologist Bruno Betelheim observes that ?Since ancient times the near impenetrable forest in which we get lost has symbolized the dark, hidden near-impenetrable world of our unconscious? (Betelheim, 94). However, this does not appear in ?Young Goodman Brown.? Instead of bravely battling down the dangers of the forest and emerging a more mature person, Goodman Brown emerges a ruined man. It should not go unrecognized that Goodman Brown's wife, a light hearted, genuine woman, has the name Faith. Faith is not by any means an unusual name for a woman, especially in puritan times, but it becomes significant in the story because she is presented to us first as a very young bride with pink ribbons in her hair, almost like a child. Her pink ribbons symbolize her youth, and her name symbolizes her husband's childlike spirituality at the beginning of the story. Christianity historically has been a religion of obedience and devotion much more than one of logic, as much as the framers of the age of reason would try to argue otherwise. When the story opens, we see Faith characterized by childlike confidence and purity, which can be contrasted with ?the man with the snake-like staff,? who attempts to persuade Goodman Brown by ?reasoning as we go? (Hawthorne 106). Faith does not attempt to dissuade her husband out of his intentions through reason, but through affection; with ?her lips? close to his ear,? she asks Goodman Brown not to go into the forest on his mysterious errand (Hawthorne, 108). But we are left to wonder what his errand is. Hawhtorne never tells us, but clearly Goodman Brown has planned for whatever it is. He knows that the point of the journey is less than beneficial, because he feels guilty about leaving his wife on ?such an errand? (Hawthorne, 108). Terence Martin speculated that ?Goodman Brown's Journey into the forest is best defined as a kind of general, indeterminate allegory, representing man's irrational drive to leave his Faith, home, and security temporarily behind, for an unknown reason, to take a chance with one or more errands onto the wilder shores of experience? (Martin, 92). Q.D. Observes that the ?theme of the story is simply going to the devil for reasons such as lust, certainly, but more for knowledge? (Lang, 91). Goodman Brown also seems to know whom he is going to meet there, because when he meets the man with the snake-like staff, he is startled by the ?sudden appearance of his companion? who was nonetheless ?not totally expected? (Hawthorne, 109). Snakes of course signify the devil, and if this individual was not the devil himself, he is certainly a representative of him. His staff is later described as twisted as well. What is here are all the elements of the quest story: the journey into an uncharted and dangerous realm, symbolizing the unconscious, and, shortly after the journey begins, the meeting with the guide who knows this forbidden and mysterious territory well (Martin 100). However, at this point the story veers significantly away from its traditional path. Goodman Brown announces that he does not want to go

Grand Bargain - Details and Explanation

Grand Bargain - Details and Explanation The term grand bargain is used to describe a potential agreement between President Barack Obama and congressional leaders in late 2012 on how to curb spending and reduce the national debt while avoiding steep automatic spending cuts known as sequestration or the fiscal cliff set to take place the following year to some of the most important programs in the United States. The idea of a grand bargain had been around since 2011 but the real potential emerged following the 2012 presidential election, in which voters returned many of the same leaders to Washington, including Obama and some of his fiercest critics in Congress. The looming fiscal crisis combined with a polarized House and Senate provided high drama in the final weeks of 2012 as lawmakers worked to avoid the sequestration cuts. Details of the Grand Bargain The term grand bargain was used because it would be a bipartisan agreement between the Democratic president and Republican leaders in the House of Representatives, who had been gridlocked on policy proposals during his first term in the White House. Among the programs that could be targeted for substantial cuts in a grand bargain are the so-called entitlement programs: Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Democrats who resisted such cuts would agree to them if Republicans, in return, sign off on higher taxes on certain high-income wage-earners much like the Buffett Rule would have imposed. History of the Grand Bargain The grand bargain on debt reduction first emerged during Obamas first term in the White House. But negotiations over the details of such a plan unraveled in the summer of 2011 and never began in earnest until after the 2012 presidential election. The disagreements in the first round of negotiations reportedly were the insistence by Obama and the Democrats on a certain level of new tax revenue. Republicans, particularly more conservative members of Congress, were said to have vigorously opposed raising taxes beyond a certain amount, reportedly some $800 million worth of new revenue. But following Obamas re-election, House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio appeared to signal a willingness to accept higher taxes in return for cuts to entitlement programs. In order to garner Republican support for new revenues, the President must be willing to reduce spending and shore up the entitlement programs that are the primary drivers of our debt, Boehner told reporters following the election. We’re closer than anyone thinks to the critical mass needed legislatively to get tax reform done. Opposition to the Grand Bargain Many Democrats and liberals expressed skepticism over Boehners offer, and restated their opposition to cuts in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. They argued that Obamas decisive victory allowed him a certain mandate on maintaining the nations social programs and safety nets. They also claimed the cuts in combination with the expiration of both the Bush-era tax cuts and payroll-tax cuts in 2013 could send the country back into a recession. The liberal economic Paul Krugman, writing in The New York Times, argued that Obama should not easily accept the Republican offer of a new grand bargain: President Obama has to make a decision, almost immediately, about how to deal with continuing Republican obstruction. How far should he go in accommodating the G.O.P.’s demands? My answer is, not far at all. Mr. Obama should hang tough, declaring himself willing, if necessary, to hold his ground even at the cost of letting his opponents inflict damage on a still-shaky economy. And this is definitely no time to negotiate a grand bargain on the budget that snatches defeat from the jaws of victory.

Are alternative energy sources the answer to ending human dependence Research Paper

Are alternative energy sources the answer to ending human dependence on oil - Research Paper Example People who argue that alternative sources cannot end human dependence on oil show skepticism towards alternative energy sources. They argue that no significant breakthrough is yet to come, and therefore it might not be possible for the world to end its dependence on oil. Both schools of thoughts have different arguments for their point of view. In this paper we will explore arguments given by both the sides in great detail, and will try to conclude whether alternative sources of energy can, in fact, end human dependence on oil or not. Alternative Energy Sources Can end Human Dependence on Oil In this section we will present arguments given in favor of the alternative sources of energy. Firstly, this school of thought highlights the dangers of pollution, which is a consequence of our dependence on oil. Alternative sources of energy should be appreciated because they can significantly reduce pollution that is a direct consequence of oil. Using oil as a source of energy is extremely har mful for the society and therefore alternative sources of energy should be explored. Natural oil also creates problems for the environment and makes life difficult for the people in general. Many skin and lung diseases are common in people who live in highly polluted regions. This is all because of human dependence on oil. The impact of dependence on oil is extremely harmful for the sustainable world. Many oil companies are busy extracting oil reserves that are beneath the seas and oceans. This causes problems for the sea life and is detrimental for underwater animals. Sea pollution also affects human economy as fishing is a source of income for a large number of people all over the world. This is another dangerous consequence of increasing dependence on oil. All these points are made by people who support alternative sources of energy in order to make the world realize about the dangers of use of oil. They believe that people in general have long been fixated with the idea of using oil as energy without realizing its dangers. It is therefore vital, according to this school of thought, to make people understand dangers of oil use. There is a lacking of belief that alternative sources of energy can replace oil, and this is why alternative sources of energy are not popular today. Dangers of oil are presented as argument in favor of alternative sources of energy. Another argument made by supporters of alternative sources of energy is that there is already technology available that can reduce human dependence on oil. They argue that in fact today we can use alternative sources of energy to reduce human dependence on oil because the technology is already available. For example solar energy, electrical energy, wind energy, and bio fuels are good alternative of oil , and all of them can play a role in decreasing pollution, associated with use of oil, significantly. All the above mentioned sources of energy are renewable sources and technological advancement is consta ntly lowering the cost these sources making it feasible (Turk & Bensel, 2011). This is quite an argument given by people who favor the use of alternative sources of energy. They argue that technology is already available and its feasibility is also improving every day, and this is why alternative sources of energy can play a significant role in reducing human dependence