Theoretical Perspectives Of Multiculturalism And Multiracialism Politics Essay

Theoretical Perspectives Of Multiculturalism And Multiracialism Politics Essay Within any multicultural society lie numerous complexities. From the States definition to the implementation, limitations within the multicultural theory and other contributing factors can however complicate its compatibility to academic, political rhetoric and social reality. For Australia and Singapore, geography, history and political culture set these countries apart in the definition and employment of multiculturalism. Australia is a country with a diverse ethnic and cultural makeup; Singapore on the other hand has a longstanding adherence to the four founding ethnic groups. But within respective cases, discrepancies emerge within the context of academic and public interpretation, making the multicultural affair both a loved and loathed subject. By juxtaposing multicultural Australia with multiracial Singapore, this chapter will introduce a broad overview of the multicultural/ multiracial debate that has challenged the reality of these contemporary nation-states. It will begin with the discussion of Benedict Andersons theories of imagined political belonging. This will be followed by a close analysis of the measures that have been sought to reconcile the nation-state framework within Australia and Singapore. The chapter will then explore the theoretical debates that exist within the State administration before concluding with an overview of these approaches by drawing upon their similarities, divergences and their impacts on their respective societies. Globalisation and cultural homogeneity The conventional notions of citizenship and national identity have been synonymous to the ideology where national belonging is limited to a single nation. More recently however, the processes that drive migration, the influx and settlement of transnational workers and global economic development have resulted in increasingly heterogeneous communities within nation-states (Castles and Davidson 2000; Soutphommasane 2005). Faced with such dramatic challenges to the imaginations of homogeneity, the traditional idea of citizenship is increasingly undermined as states find it difficult to manage their internal framework based on a presumption of ethnic and cultural homogeneity. The core vision of nationalism is the idea that it consists of individual citizens that share a distinct and autonomous national culture. Benedict Andersons whose works influence us on the way we think about nation-states, observes that a nation is a makeup of a political community that is imagined as essentially sovereign and limited through the stimulation of deep emotional attachment: Nationality, or so, as one might prefer to put it in view of that words multiple significations, nation-ness, as well as nationalism, are cultural artefacts of a particular kind. [These artefacts] once created à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ became modular, capable of being transplanted, with varying degrees of self-consciousness, to a great variety of social terrains, to merge and be merged with a correspondingly wide variety of political and ideological constellations (1991: 4). At the heart of Andersons argument is the idea that nationalism is built on what is almost purely an emotional connection that binds communities together. The imagined nets of kinship between persons and the State allows diverse communities to connect with each other without actual knowledge of their fellow members, and these invisible ties that motivate them to risk their lives for the nation-state in times of warfare under the perceived imagining of their nationhood (7). Such imaginings which are based on the ideological construct is at the core of nationalism. When they are absent or otherwise eclipsed by difference, these imaginings are imposed or buttressed by the State. In another influential discourse, Ernest Renan (as cited in Eley and Suny 1996: 42) suggests that national identity cannot exist without first submerging difference, including cultural and ethnic distinctiveness that could prove divisive.  [1]  The existence of national identity is dependent on the States ability to organise a universal set of values and cultures for its society, or as Castles and Davidson indicate, One has to be made into a national before he or she can become a citizen (2000: 27). Without these national imaginings, the legitimacy of the State probably would not have prevailed. Under the pressures of globalisation and the changing character of migration towards the end of the twentieth century, the traditional notion of citizenship where political belonging is limited to one nation began to evolve. As mass international migration leads to the proliferation of cultural and ethnic diversity within national communities, it consequently became increasingly untenable for nation-states to maintain the ideology of a homogenous national culture (Soutphommasane 2005: 401). Such shifts in migration patterns have undermined even the strongest argument about homogeneity. Japan for instance, where the State has long made claims about the homogeneity of its population, is now forced to recognise the reality of ethnic minority workforces that have become increasingly prominent in Japanese society (Castles and Davidson 2000: 157)  [2]  . Scholars and political elites have also begun to recognise that new measures were necessary to recognise such social changes, especially the need to accommodate cultural pluralism brought about by the movement of people across national boundaries. In relation to this, scholars have critically studied the multifaceted processes of migration and have produced a vast number of works in this field, including new and plural systems of identification and belonging (Lawson 2000), transnational communities and hybridisation (Bailey and Smith 2004), and new patterns of belonging and citizenship (Castles 2002; Joppke 1999; Law 2002). The multicultural debate: the case of Australia Affected by the processes of globalisation, a number of countries have begun to expand the traditional notion of universal citizenship in legislation and public rhetoric to include every individual, especially minorities, into a re-badged national culture under the new form of multicultural citizenship. Multicultural citizenship acknowledges the practise of culture and formation of identities in a variety of social and cultural contexts, departing from the antecedent understanding of monoculture and homogeneity (Soutphommasane 2005: 403). It also recognises minorities, ostensibly furnishing such communities with stronger voices in decision-making at the local, national and international level (Moodod 2007). The shifting nature of State-society relations in Australia, under the broader ambit of multiculturalism, provides us with one of the most obvious examples in the development of multicultural institutions and policies. Up until the mid-twentieth century, Australian society had been relatively homogenous, with over 90 percent of the ethnic dynamic identified as British during the post-war period in 1947 (Dunn and Forrest 2006: 210). And for most of Australian culture and institutions, the Anglo identity poses as a dominant influence. However in the beginning of the 1970s, the demise of the White Australia policy and the nations demand for skilled labour attracted an influx of non-white groups into the Australian society (Anderson and Taylor 2005: 470). It gradually became difficult for the State to sustain the myth of its national identity on the basis of Anglo-Celtic origins. The dominant community had to accept realities of ethnic diversity and a cosmopolitan identity, although resistance towards this continues at all levels of Australian society to this day. Incidentally, multicultural citizenship is a subject of controversy in the political and academic lexicon. The idea of multiculturalism, which was introduced in Australia as a public policy to manage cultural differences, was condemned in some quarters as being oppressive, undermining the quintessential Anglo-Celtic heritage of the nation (Bulbeck 2004; Johnson 2002), as well as being a threat to national security (Noble and Poynting 2008). The issues of immigration and social cohesion have become widely familiar to the Australian media and public. Today, multiculturalism continues to be a recurring subject of contest as recent events in Australia, such as the Cronulla Riots in 2005 and the assaults on Indian students in Melbourne in 2009 have shown. In each instance, the friction caused by deeply entrenched and unmanageable differences have brought the issue of cultural divides back into the public sphere.  [3]   The interpretation of multicultural citizenship in Australian political administration has a long tail, and has assumed diverse meanings under various political leaders. When the Whitlam government first unveiled multicultural programs in the 1950s, the purpose of the policy was to direct welfare services and forms of assistance to disadvantaged groups, namely migrants from non English-speaking backgrounds and those with little political and social representation. However when the Fraser government came into power in 1975, this political understanding of multiculturalism changed. Instead of simply being about the provision of welfare services, multiculturalism became a bipartisan policy that underscored the significance of cultural preservation for various ethnic groups, with a pragmatic approach to foster minorities voices within the society (Castles and Davidson 2000: 170). It was during this period that multiculturalism functioned as a policy directive, in hope that it would facil itate access for minorities and marginalised groups to fully participate and benefit from social, economic and political aspects. This continued to the 1980s until multiculturalism began to encompass a wider definition than the mere representations of cultural and ethnic entities. By then, it also (controversially) began to push into a new national ideology where it represented the buttress of national culture and identity in Australia (Galligan and Roberts 2003). From a policy that had been specifically associated with migrant resettlement services since its emergence, multiculturalism in the 1980s progressed to the advocacy of accepting and celebrating cultural diversity within Australian society. [Multiculturalism is] a model to be worked towards-a vision for the futureà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Multiculturalism should not just mean majority group assistance for minority cultural groups, but rather should be a way of perceiving Australian society as a whole Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, 1982 (as cited from Galligan and Roberts 2003). The Keating government was keen on creating a new national identity based on the diverse nature of cultural groups within its society, its independence from the British monarch, its propinquity to Asia and its necessity to flourish in an increasingly globalised economy (Johnson 2002: 175). In a radical departure from traditional notions of Australian national identity, Keating wanted a national identity to acknowledge the British and Irish heritage in Australias history, judiciary system and culture, but yet was also distinct from core political values that privileged British identity (176). The new Australian identity, according to him, would illustrate his hope of Anglo-Celtic Australians embracing multiculturalism for the future social and economic benefits of the nation. Keatings policies were unpopular, garnering backlashes from politicians, scholars and public. This largely relates to the notion of multiculturalism displacing the legacy of Anglo privilege with a more cosmopolitan and inclusive national identity. There were concerns that broader conceptions of Australian identity could overhaul distinctive values and qualities that make up the uniqueness of Australian culture and subsequently disregard mainstream Australians for the interests of non-Anglo ethnic groups (Johnson 2002: 177). Hence, fear and tension began to heighten as the dominant group felt progressively pressured to surrender their privileged position under the escalating diversity of ethnic groups. Within the political framework, Keatings vision for new Australia reached an important juncture in 1996 when two public figures publicly opposed to his policies Pauline Hanson and John Howard. Following this marked a drastic decline in the significance of multiculturalism as the usage of the term became eschewed in Australian politics (Castles and Davidson 2000: 165). Beyond what could be described as reflexive ripostes to threats at cultural power, criticism surrounding the idea of multiculturalism have also much to do with its indistinct and constantly-evolving definition. (Ellie Vasta: 212) In some cases, it was deemed to have been introduced almost accidentally by political elites to accommodate the fluctuating diversity of the society. A term that is developed on-the-spot, the understanding of multiculturalism is therefore inconsistent. On one level, it is assumed as an appropriate designation for welfare policies and on another, it merely becomes a term that describes the multiple cultures that exists within Australian society. Hence multicultural critics such as Zubrzycki 1995) blame multiculturalism for being a presupposed concept with its principles couched in jargon, and the extent of its effectiveness is not largely known. Another polemic of multicultural citizenship reveals further dilemmas in the accommodation of cultural differences within a common civic culture. According to the National Agenda for a Multicultural Australia (1989), multiculturalism must be expressed with an overriding and unifying commitment to Australia, to its interests and future first and foremost. Nonetheless Soutphommasane (2005: 408) argues that while it is important for a national culture and a sense of shared belonging to anchor a multicultural society, multicultural citizenship cannot be observed under a civic culture that is impervious to change. If so, this could undermine the political representation of minority cultures at the institutional level, contradicting multiculturalisms pledge to include citizens from diverse cultural backgrounds and provide them equal voices as the majority. Built-in cultural biases within Australian political institutions which have witnessed the entrenchment of traditions first established by the Anglo-Celtic elites would continue to pose a problem for multicultural citizenship unless it provides the basis for a more inclusive form of political identity for multicultural citizens (Soutphommasane 2005; Castles and Davidson 2000). In essence, it is never possible to classify multiculturalism as something that is either good or bad in a society. A recent survey conducted by The Age indicates that most Australians continue to support immigration despite the political kerfuffle that coloured its history (Edwards 2009). This partly points to the fact that peoples perception and experiences of migrants are often fluid and contextual (Wise 2005: 183) and as a result, they may display versatile responses between positive and negative assessments of their migrant neighbours. Drawing experiences from an ethnography fieldwork conducted within a culturally-diverse suburb of Sydney, Wise also concludes that no clear division can sit between the merits or deficits of multiculturalism even though multiculturalism continues to stand as one of the prominent topics of debate in Australias political history. One People, One Nation: the multiracial framework in Singapore Unlike Australia, ethnic pluralism has always been a distinctive and defining feature of Singapore society since its founding as a colony. Long before Singapore established itself as an independent nation-state, its society was already made up of diverse ethnic groups originating from different parts of the Malay Archipelago, Asia, the Middle East and Europe due to trading links between these countries, international migration and settlement (Lai 2004: 1). For Singapore, ethnic pluralism has also been the central challenge to societal cohesion and nation-building. In the colonial era, ethnic communities were deliberately kept apart from one another as a matter of public policy. However in the years leading to the nations independence, as events of internal unrest and racial riots plagued Singapores social order, the ruling regime the Peoples Action Party (PAP) recognised that a cohesive nation was imperative to state survival (Lai 2004: 5). Hence upon independence in 1965, Singapore immediately included the idea of multiracialism in its Constitution, and the notion served as a foundation for other policies (Chua 2003: 60). However, Singapores approach in managing its multiethnic population remains strikingly different when compared to Australia. Multiracialism in Singapore represents an aspiration of the political elites to unite ethnic and cultural differences together, emphasising on bridging social divisions and advocating a shared sense of national culture. While multiculturalism in Australia which is essentially a public policy to manage diversity as well as to police racial discrimination and racism among diverse ethnic societies (Castles and Davidson 2000l; Chua 2005; Moodod 2007), multiracialism in Singapore can be thought of as being the States chief instrument of control in social life; it is developed as a tool of necessity due to Singapores heterogeneity and represents the States opportunity to recognise cultural differences. The policy of multiracialism allows the State to suppress potential tensions among ethnic groups, pre-empting public dissent and disallowing the issue of race to threa ten the States legitimacy of rule (Barr 2006; Chua 2003). On the face of affairs, the Singapore State has been quite successful in maintaining social order and stability with this pragmatic ideology, and has managed to avoid public race-related conflicts since the start of the 1970s. Within the context of Singapore, it is firstly important to distinguish the differences among ethnicity, race and culture because these terms are often used interchangeably in public and official discourse. While ethnicity and culture are forms of social construct where communities or groups seek identification and develop relationship with each other based on differences and day-to-day interactions (Lai 2004: 2), race on the other hand is identification based on the physical attributes of a person, namely the colour of a persons skin (Franklin 2003: 470). Due to colonial history, multiracialism remains as the official term within the political administration of Singapore instead of multiculturalism. Similarly, the State employs the term race instead of ethnicity and multiracialism instead of multiculturalism. Multiracialism expresses the States intention to create social order in the face of potentially divisive issues such as race, religion, ethnic origin and culture (Trocki 2006). The CMIO model of multiracialism is an essential component of the States ideology of pragmatism. Developed as an intentional decision of nationhood, CMIO multiracialism scheme a convenient political tool for the State to homogenise cultural differences within a racial group by attributing race to essentially one culture, language and to a lesser extent, religion (Lai 1995: 179). Prior to Singapores independence in 1965, the ethnic population in colonial Singapore was diverse with many languages and cultures practised within a single race. The Chinese race for instance, constituted of the Hokkiens, Teochews, Cantonese (Chua 2005: 5) as well as other linguistic communities who shared different culture and traditions (Trocki 2006: 139). Under the CMIO framework however, these differences were streamlined and orga nised around the elements of colonial history, language and geography. The heterogeneous population was categorised into four major race groups Chinese, Malay Indian and Others. Each race is attributed to one culture and one language the Chinese race is associated with Mandarin which is the official race-language; the Malay race with the Malay language; and Indian race with the Tamil language. Within the States interpretation, the CMIO model is looked upon to be the most effective approach for managing its society. In contrast to assimilation where the minority races are overridden by the dominant, CMIO model gives fair treatment by recognising all racial groups as equal in policy. It ensures that the interests of minorities and their interests are protected so they are not disadvantaged in the society, as well as providing equal opportunity for them to advance. Most importantly, the CMIO model illustrates the States efforts for encouraging race consciousness and the divisions within the society, advocating tolerance for such differences, and the desire for individuals to mutually accept each other for the benefit of the nation (Chua 2003: 17). However while the CMIO framework allows for the simplification of racial interpretation in both private and public lives, scholars have observed that it is in fact problematic. In recent years, multiracialism classification of CMIO surfaced once again in the light of academic debate as the nation steers itself towards integration of the world economy under the processes of globalisation. The Singapore states desire to attract what it calls foreign talent has opened the door to a high density of transnational relations as economic policies have resulted in a large influx of migrant workers (Yeoh and Chang 2001; Yeoh 2004): It is precisely for our childrens sake that we must take this open, cosmopolitan approachà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ However talented we may be, it is impossible for us to produce in our next generation the same constellation of talent, the same richness and diversity of backgrounds and abilities, just from the children of three million Singaporeans. -The Straits Times, 25 August 1997. Scholars have expressed concerns that the presence of transnational workers could invite a population that is increasingly too heterogeneous to be defined within the parameters of the CMIO classification. As Yeoh (2004) points out, a cosmopolitan Singapore shifts away from the older stance of multiracialism and the nations quest to build a cohesive society based on the four founding races (2442). For the government, it has long since been its ambition to assume individuals to have a fixed and unequivocal ethnic identity under the CMIO model; cosmopolitanism on the other hand invites fluid and complex forms of identification that can no longer be homogenously recognised. Increasingly, individuals of heterogeneous backgrounds would feel suppressed by the state-imposed CMIO model which limits them to negotiate and choose their own identity, leading to consequences where individuals feel unrecognised and separated from their ethnic classification (Lai 2005: 11). Under such circumstances, there would be Chinese and Indian migrant workers that do not subscribe to the CMIO-defined Chinese category, as well as those who feel that CMIO-defined Others is an insufficient representation of their race. Meanwhile the local community is also aware of the paradigms weaknesses: What [does] the CMIO classification in Singapore for? Are you against or for that? I do think its ridiculous that children of mixed heritage have to be forced to take their fathers races as theirs. I think the CMIO classification is merely for the govt to carry out their plans, such as HDB racial policy and so on. However I find it totally unnecessary. Sgforums.com, 27 February 2005. The indication of forced in the writers assertion explains her belief that social reality is actually more complex than the States simplified view with the CMIO multiracialism model. Instead the writer views the model as a coercive method for nation-building policies, as well as overwriting individualism for the societal good. Another contributor expresses her views on the limitations of the CMIO multiracialism model, and how it critically de-emphasises the importance of dialects that exist within the Chinese language other than the official race-language, Mandarin: An abundance of knowledge of Chinese traditions, values and history is contained in the oral and written embodiments of these southern Chinese languages, such as surviving literature, operas and stories. Sadly, the chain of passing down this heritage is being lost rapidly in Singapore. -Sgforums.com, 7 March 2009. Deng is exasperated that the governments move to suppress the use of dialects with the Mandarin language has a cost to bear. While the present Chinese community are mostly bilingual in English and Mandarin something that the government hopes to achieve, dialects also quickly become a language unknown to them. Chua (2003) describes this phenomenon as one of the consequences of the state-imposed CMIO multiracialism model where the understanding of racial harmony is minimalist and lacks substantial cultural exchange, deep understanding and even less cultural crossing of boundaries (75). This reinforcement is built on the tolerance of differences, as well as the governments aspiration to prioritise a shared sense of commonality and national identity before ethnic identities. The CMIO classification model also has internal contradictions if one approaches the idea of cultural difference within anthropological paradigms. As Franklin (2003) indicates, culture is in essence a complex notion which is malleable, flexible and also contestable (477). Rather than being fixed, it carries a mobile meaning which overtime can be moulded, lost, changed under the conditions of everyday life. Likewise, ethnic identity is a makeup of longstanding history, culture and tradition that equip members with an exclusive shared sense of belonging and membership (Lai 2005: 10). Hence it is not possible for identities, under the circumstances imposed by the State, to be effectively curtailed to a homogenous identity shared by a particular race group and subsequently, a homogenous identity shared by the national community. In reality, identities from cultural context can never be completely displaced by national identities (Bader 1997). The States ambition of protecting minority interests with the CMIO multicultural model also promises more optimism in rhetoric than in reality. Multiracialism in practice does not translate into equality for all races; accounts of marginalisation, especially among minorities, continue to pose a significant problem for Singapores ethnic-relations.The introduction of the Speak Mandarin program towards the end of 1970s which was intended to serve as cultural ballast for the non-English educated Chinese is suggested to reveal biases in its implementation that would in turn disadvantage non-Chinese race groups (Trocki 2006: 153). The program which is seen as an effort by the government to align Singapore with Chinas emerging affluence and to create Chinese cultural elites became less significant when it comes to other second languages. Despite the fact that the Malay and Tamil languages are the nations official languages, there was lesser push from high status institutions to promote thei r usage (Gopinathan, Ho and Vanithamani 2004: 236). Similarly, Michael Barr noted significant levels of cultural bias within the education system which often put non-Chinese children at a disadvantage (Barr 2006). He argues that the disparate portrayal of uplifting Chinese and the boisterous non-Chinese in the school textbooks, along with racial stereotype, depictions of prejudice and racial consciousness, would detrimentally deprive minorities of inspiring role models, undermining the States meritocracy ideal and its emphasis on equality as a method for encouraging harmony and understanding among all race groups. Australia and Singapore compared This chapter has illustrated the differences between the management of multiethnic population in Australia and Singapore. While multiracialism in Singapore has been inscribed in the Constitution since the beginning of its sovereignty and has been incorporated in many of its public policies since, multiculturalism only emerged in Australia during the 1970s as a policy to control differences. Secondly, for reasons of colonial history, Singapore uses the word race in replacement of ethnicity and uses multiracialism instead of multiculturalism as the official term within the political administration. And thirdly, Singapore functions on a political culture disparate from Australia. Being a one-party state, the Singapore government rules in a politically-hegemonic position with little risk of being displaced by alternative sections of parliamentary power, therefore establishing a form of governance that is deviated from the Western understanding of an open and liberal democracy. And unlike Australia, the Singapore government predominantly uses multiracialism as an instrument of social control. And such elements can be illustrated in the CMIO model where the government streamlines cultural differences to simplified classification, as well as controlling and advocating languages deemed as beneficial for the national interest. For Australia, the definition of multiculturalism evolves overtime in political administration as a consequence of responding to realities. However even when both countries have a different inherent understanding of multiculturalism, they present weaknesses and dilemmas that contradict respective political intentions of managing a multiethnic society where minorities risk domination of the majority at the socio-political level, and are subsequently put to a disadvantage. And in both countries, both governments emphasise greatly on national culture and language by placing individuals allegiance to the nation before their own ethnic and cultural values. But in the process of doing so, scholars in both contexts noted the costs of doing so. In the case of Australia, minorities risk being displaced by the dominant Anglo-Celtic group as well as underrepresentation at the political level especially if local institutions remain unreceptive to change. And in the case of Singapore, the importance of dialects and its values that are increasingly displaced by the State-imposed CMIO model, resulting in a minimalist understanding of r acial harmony where race groups do not engage, interact and have a deep understanding of each others cultures.

Developmental Paper Essay

bstract The basis of this paper will outline the cognitive and personality development of a young adult female, identified as â€Å"Caroline.† This will be in contrast and comparison to Erikson’s Epigenetic Theory of Personality Development is Intimacy vs. Isolation and Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive development. The paper will address what outside factors influence the developing as well as nursing interventions that will help Caroline obtained optimal functioning for each appropriate developmental level according to Erikson and Piaget. Keywords: developmental, Erikson, Piaget, personality, cognitive, intimacy, isolation, formal operations The Developmental Level: For the purpose of this paper, I will identify the person I am outlining as â€Å"Caroline.† Caroline is a young adult. The developmental level during this stage of Erikson’s Epigenetic Theory of Personality Development is Intimacy vs. Isolation; the virtue being love. A normal adult in this stage will have a strong sense of self and be able to form intimate, close relationships with other individuals. Success in this stage will lead to strong committed relationships (Cherry). Erikson believed that a person must successfully complete one stage in order to complete the next. According to Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive development, Caroline is in the formal operations period. A normal young adult in this stage would manifest adult like thinking, is not limited by own perception or concrete references for ideas, combines various ideas into concepts, develops morality or restraint and cooperation in behavior, uses rules to structure interactions in a socially acceptabl e way, solves problems mentally and considers alternatives before acting, relates concepts or constructs not readily evident in external world, increases intellectual ability to include art, science, humanities,  religion, and philosophy, and is increasingly less egocentric. Caroline is in her early adult hood years. A tremendous time for self-discovery, independence, and in some cases, loneliness. Caroline’s personality and cognitive development have blossomed in ways and have been hindered in others. This is due to many factors; biological, social, genetic, situational. The list goes on. One thing is certain, there is always a good reason why individuals do the thing they do. If we as people look beyond others actions and instead look at what causes their actions to manifest, I believe we would be much more accepting and less judgmental as a whole. Throughout this paper I will be discussing ways Caroline compares and contrasts to Piaget and Erikson’s theories, how this impacts her development, and nursing interventions that could help her through these stages. Compare and contrast: After careful observation of Caroline, it does not show evident that she has developed a true sense of self to be able to complete the stage of intimacy with another individual. Even with platonic friendships it seems that when her and an individual start to become close on more of a spiritual and emotional level, she retreats to isolation because she feels that she cannot trust herself or others. According to Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development, I see that Caroline is mastering the formal operations period to a certain degree. In many ways Caroline would be a poster child for what an example of someone in the formal operations period would think like, and in other aspects of the period, she does not show to be operating in this period what so ever. Three examples of how Caroline compares to these levels would include the following: 1. When it comes to romantic relationships, Caroline strives for a deep emotional and physical connection with another human being. However, deep down she is unable to fully commit to another because she doesn’t have a clear understanding of who she is. Subconsciously, she gravitates towards men that are not emotionally available. This includes anyone who is in a relationship, is going to move away, or is obviously not interested in giving her a committed relationship. She wants the commitment, but she is used to men in her life not being available so she is drawn towards that because that is what she is used to. At the end of the day, this leaves Caroline frustrated and isolated. The  crisis between intimacy and isolation, according to Erikson, is clear in Caroline’s life. 2. Caroline is extremely cognitively driven, artistic with her words, and philosophical and spiritual with her beliefs. She looks beyond the world that is seen and challenges her way of thinking with the unseen world. She finds happiness through her writings and connections through spiritual conversation. This side of her is a small glimpse of her essence and what her inner being craves; to be emotionally, artistically, and spiritually stimulated. This very much so aligns with Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development. 3. A contrast to the Formal operations period is that she does not seem to solve problems mentally and considering alternatives before acting. Caroline bases a lot of her talk on impulsivity and is emotionally driven when making decisions. Caroline is a â€Å"feel good† kind of gal, and if it feels good in the moment, she will grab it. If it does not feel good, she will alter whatever her situation is to make herself feel good, no matter how bad or good the outcome will leave her. This contrasts with the norm because someone who is successfully mastering this stage would weigh the outcomes before acting, consider the outcomes, and go towards which action would better benefit their being as a whole. Even though Caroline knows something is hurting her, she will continue to repeat this action, hoping for a different outcome. This is mainly in regards to abusive relationships, but can be applied to the work place and friendships with other females. What Impacts Development Three factors that have or are currently affecting Caroline’s stage of development: 1. As I mentioned previously, it is vital for Caroline to develop and true sense of self before she can successfully build intimacy with other individuals. Caroline feels whole with her writings, and spending time with people who truly love her, but she has not fully embraced her inner being. From observation, Caroline has a very low self-esteem. She strives to please others. When others are pleased with her, she is pleased with herself. When others are no pleased with her, she will do what she can to reverse that opinion. She seeks to please others before pleasing herself and that is a clear manifestation of not having a concrete, strong sense of self. 2. Caroline is far away from her family, which live several states away. She stayed in the state she resides because of a romantic  relationship. This romantic relationship has ended. For Caroline, she does not have a firm sense of belonging a t her current location. Being away from loved ones and not having a steady partner can cause an individual to feel isolated and lonely. 3. I am not sure exactly what Caroline’s relationship with her father is or was like, but I would imagine it to be one of low emotional or spiritual connection. Her dad was most likely not a constant in her life and not available to her as a girl in was that she needed, but was not aware of. There is always a good reason why people do the things they do and I would not be taken a back if Caroline was this way with other men in her life because normal to her is not available. Her body, soul, and mind is used to inconsistency and has developed patterns within itself to be drawn to these inconsistencies and behaviors. It has also been shown that engaging in sexual activates with a partner before the proper time, especially before monogamy, can cause much inner turmoil and depression. Sexual activity must be performed in the right context in order for it to be beneficial for the human being. (Carter) Nursing interventions: 1. Before talking to Caroline, if she were my patient and I the nurse, I would first need to assess her physical and mental status. She would need to be fully alert and oriented in order to proceed with the nursing process. I would assess her level of consciousness and willingness to cooperate. I would need to assess her support system, whether it be family, friends, or coworkers. A strong support system is vital to growth and development in any stage of life. 2. In order for Caroline to be eager to listen to what have to offer and cooperate with enhancing her inner self, there would have to be established trust. I would do this by sharing intimate parts of my life and laying the foundation of a healthy, trustworthy relationship. There will be little to no willingness to exchange in such personal matters until trust between us is established. It will also make her much for comfortable to share intimate details of her life with me. 3. I would provide Caroline with therapeutic communic ation. This would include appropriate touch as much as she is comfortable with, paraphrasing, asking open ended questions that encourage communication, maintaining eye contact when appropriate, and not pushing situations when she does not feel at ease. These actions will hopefully cause Caroline to feel more comfortable to share thoughts,  feelings, and encouragement to implement action to better her inner self. 4. In order to master the stage of isolation, Caroline needs to be confident in herself and cater to her inner self. She needs to participate in activities that benefit her in a healthy way and bring healing to where she feels broken. I would encourage her to write in her journal for at least thirty min before she goes to bed. 5. I would encourage her to do simple things to increase healthy living. This would include waking up early, going to bed at a decent hour, getting adequate exercise, eating a diet high in whole grains, fruits, and vegetables, and drinking plenty of water. I would encourage her to avoid alcohol and any other mind altering substances that cause her behavior to be irrational. Addressing the underlying cause of irrational behavior can be much more effective then addressing the irrational behavior as it self. 6. Because Caroline reaches for wholeness in sources that leave her feeling empty, I would ask Caroline to put herself first when she is seeking attention from empty sources. I would have her sit with herself and her emotions and work through them without desperately reaching out to things that cannot fulfill her. In order to be happy with someone else, it is vital that she become happy with herself. 7. Caroline loves to read and with this passion for books I would strongly suggest investing in self-help books that will mentally stimulate her to building a strong, happy inner self. There are so many self-help books that caters to every type of inner self difficulty and roads to self-discovery. Sometimes simply finding a book that speaks directly to your soul can bring some of the most healing and freedom. If Caroline were to follow these nursing interventions and invest whole heartedly to developing a strong inner being, I believe she would begin to see amazing results within a weeks’ time. Of course it would be a journey. Self-reflection is not always easy and can be hard, but in the end it is extremely rewarding. Coming face to face with our inner demons and conquering them is one of the best things you can do for yourself, future partner, and future children. In order to have healthy relationship you must be a healthy person and if Caroline wants to be healthy, she will be. References: Cherry, Kendra. â€Å"Intimacy Versus Isolation – Stage Six of Psychosocial Development.† About.com Psychology. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 May 2014. Carter, Don. â€Å"Intimacy Skills and Human Development Stages.† Intimacy Skills and Human Development Stages. Internet of the Mind, n.d. Web. 03 June 2014.

Retailer Companies Essay

Amazon Amazon is an online retailer however there have been talks and news articles of the company planning to open a warehouse store in New York City. However being an online only retailer means the company can meet any customer target and offer shopping to anyone. This removes travel time, travel costs and parking costs which appeal to more customers. This can also appeal to younger shoppers aged 16+ who are unable to drive and must pay out a large charge in travel fare. There is also a larger reach in the consumer area and they now have the ability to reach a worldwide target. Also being an online only business they can give specific and limited discounting to their products. New Look New look is a multiple store that usually located in an in town area. Being located in town has many advantages and disadvantages. One of the advantages to being an in town store is the easy access by both public and personal transport. However a disadvantage to this is the large travel costs both paying for tickets on trains or busses but also petrol and parking costs. A second advantage in the allotted sale space can be increased and the store can have a larger floor space. However due to this the store costs more to rent and run meaning there are only a small amount of discounts the store is able to give. Pandora Pandora is a multinational company using a multiple store which is usually located in out of town areas. Because of the area where they are placed they have a long travel time making the easiest travel option the car however you can travel to them on public transport but many involve changes and larger fares. However due to the travel costs the areas slightly reduce store costs and also allow free parking. This means that although travel time and cost is high it holds more appeal due to the lower prices and free parking. Best One Newsagents Best One Newsagents is a franchised business that is based in local  locations. The areas that these stores are in are specifically placed in accordance to the surrounding area. They will be in an area where there are many houses surrounding them so that customers have east when going to the store. Due to the fact of them being a local store they are smaller than others and are able to sell items at cheaper prices. This appeals to the customers so that they can get bits they need without going to supermarkets and paying a higher price. eBay eBay is an online only auction site where people are able to sell unwanted items securely. This means they can sell items that people are looking for E.G a new iPad Air would usually be sold at retail price for  £399 but on eBay a new but used one could be sold at up to a 90% discount and that could be a set price or they could use the auction and consumers could bid to see who will be the one to purchase the item. As this is a selling site you will need to receive the money and many use PayPal as it is a secure way to pay the money however you can just pay cash if you are collecting the item.

Can Tony Harrisons Poem V Be Considered An Elegy For A Passing Culture - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 8 Words: 2268 Downloads: 1 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Literature Essay Type Argumentative essay Level High school Did you like this example? When first broadcast on Channel 4 in 1987 Tony Harrisons long poem v. caused a furore, mainly in the popular press. Famously, the Daily Mail condemned it as featuring a torrent of four-letter filth (Harrison, 1989, p.40), and a number of other, principally tabloid newspapers published critical articles and columns which helpfully totted up for their readers the number of swear words used in the poem. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Can Tony Harrisons Poem V Be Considered An Elegy For A Passing Culture" essay for you Create order In the House of Commons an Early Day Motion was proposed on 27th October 1987, calling upon Channel 4 not to broadcast the poem on the grounds that it featured a stream of obscenities (Harrison, 1989, p.60). For a brief period Harrisons poem was a battleground fought over by conservative and liberal opinion concerning freedom of expression in the media. That so much attention was paid to the use of bad language in the poem may be at least partly explained by Harrisons innovative development of the film poem medium (see Harrison, 1995), which meant that v. gained the sort of exposure otherwise closed off to contemporary poetry in Britain. This suspicion is to some extent supported by the observation that the poem had appeared in print in 1985 and caused not much of a stir beyond the fairly small readership for contemporary poetry. However, the main point here is that such a focus upon the controversial nature of the language of the poem might distract us from its main concerns and strengths. In a newspaper article written in support of v. Blake Morrison described it as a real state-of-the-nation poem (Harrison, 1989, p.57), and said that the real shock delivered by the poem is that it describes unflinchingly what is meant by a divided society (Harrison, 1989, p.56). Such an assessment identifies the political character of v., a poem written at the time of the Miners Strike in 1984-5, which is often considered to be not only the most bitterly fought industrial conflict of the post-war era in Britain, but also the event which brought about the end of that era and of a whole class and its way of life, especially in the North of England. It is for this latter that v. may be said to be an elegy, an elegy which has both personal and collective dimensions. Traditionally, as a genre the elegy has been seen as providing consolation to those who have lost someone they have loved or valued. According to Jahan Ramazani, the elegy has had the propensity to translate gr ief into consolation (1994, p.3). Ramazani cites such examples as John Miltons Lycidas and Percy Shelleys Adonais as elegies which end with their subjects affixed in the firmament or in the landscape as permanent, transcendent entities whose light will never fade (1994, pp.3-4). Much the same tendency may also be found in Rupert Brookes self-elegy The Soldier (1914), in which the speaker offers the compensation that after his death theres some corner of a foreign field/That is forever England (see Ramazani, 1994, p.70). For the purposes of a discussion of Harrisons v., however, it is arguably the most famous example of the elegy in the English language which has the most relevance Thomas Grays Elegy written in a Country Churchyard (1751). That relevance is partly founded on the fact that Grays poem was apparently prompted by the writers contemplation of the churchyard in Stoke Poges where his mother was buried, just as Harrisons poem arises from a visit made to the family plot in H olbeck Cemetery in Leeds. Moreover, like Harrisons, Grays poem is a self-elegy concluding with a self-composed epitaph for the speaker, as well as being an elegy for the nameless rude forefathers (Price (ed.), 1973, p.662, l.16) mouldering away in their unmarked, or crudely inscribed graves in the churchyard. In these ways, Grays poem combines both personal and impersonal or collective elements. Tony Harrison has explicitly acknowledged his use of Grays Elegy in discussions of v. (see, for example, BBC, 2011). In doing so, Harrison focusses upon his use of Grays metre, stanza and alternate rhyme scheme (although, it should be said that he employs rhymed iambic pentameter organised into quatrains in many of his best known poems). For Harrison, to write using such versification is important in making his poetry accessible to a wider audience, but also it may be said that he employs such forms for subversive purposes à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" to take the traditional forms of poetry and fil l them with explicitly political, if not confrontational content. In an interview with John Tusa on Radio 3 in 2011 Harrison talked of v. as a rage in an urban churchyard (BBC, 2011), and of his purpose being to find a voice for that rage rather than melancholic reflection. If the humble dead scattered about Stoke Poges are for Gray largely anonymous, for Harrison they are family, or substantial people, in more than one sense. However, in the poem Harrison communicates his sense of division with regards to his relationship with the people who occupy the grave-plots in Holbeck Cemetery and to his origins in the working class community of Beeston Hill in Leeds more generally. It could be said that v. is an elegy for his parents (both of whom had died only a few years before the poem was written), and is also an elegy for the working class community and culture from which they and Harrison came, a community slowly dying from the process of de-industrialisation hastened along by the Tha tcherite economic policies of the 1980s. However, in addition it may be said that the poem constitutes an elegy for the poets own lost connection with and belonging to the community and family in which he was brought up. At the beginning of the poem the speaker takes us on a tour of the tombs and memorials of the solid citizens who made up the community of Beeston Hill in the past à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" Wordsworth, who built church organs, Byron, who tanned/luggage cowhide in the age of steam (1989, p.7). Of course, Harrison makes effective ironic use of these names, playing with our recognition of them as the names of central figures in the canon of English poetry, whilst simultaneously pulling the rug from beneath the feet of our expectations. As Helmut Haberkam points out, Harrisons description of himself as bard in the opening stanza of the poem suggests the romantic idea of the vates (1994, p.92), or prophetic poet, which was popularised by the likes of Thomas Gray in the 18th c entury (Gray even wrote a poem of that name). However, Harrison immediately undermines this (quite literally) in the following stanza by revealing that the graveyard sits above the galleries of an old coal mine which one day in the future will cause his grave and those of the distinguished dead to drop/into the rabblement of bone and rot (1989, p.7). So, rather than being set apart as a figure with a specially privileged vision, Harrison implies that he in fact will end up where he began, amongst the rabblement of butcher, publican, and baker (1989, p.7), thus, according to Haberkam, validating the idea of the poet as a socially responsive and responsible contemporary (1994, p.92). However, the scenario developed in the poem by Harrison from this point on radically puts into question his entitlement to represent poetically the community and culture to which he used to belong. We learn that whilst his father would come home with clay stains on his trouser knees every week after ha ving tended his mothers grave, Harrisons visits to their graves have been more sporadic and of shorter duration (odd ten minutes such as these (1989, p.12)). What seems to be implied is that the work of remembrance is precisely that à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" a matter of the hard graft of ritual and routine, of tending graves in practice but also, by so doing, maintaining links with the past and the dead by making them part of our lives in the present. Although Harrison is horrified by the obscene and racist graffiti he finds sprayed on the graves, he is forced to ask the question whos to blame, the drunken Leeds Utd fans who rampage through the graveyard, or people like himself, who left Leeds for work or fuller lives (1989, p.12), people whose relationship with their origins might be said to be, at least, ambivalent. In order to convey this ambivalence towards his origins and his sense of loss, Harrison à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" whose first successes, it should be remembered, were as a dramat ic poet à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" employs dialogue and character. The sight of the racist and obscene graffiti causes the anguished Harrison earnestly to question their meaning and their cause: But why inscribe these graves with CUNT and SHIT? Why choose neglected tombstones to disfigure? What is it that these crude words are revealing? What is it that this aggro act implies? Giving the dead their xenophobic feeling or just a cri-de-coeur that man dies? (1989, pp.16-17) However, at this point another voice à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" that of an unemployed skinhead interjects violently: So, whats a cri-de-coeur, Cunt? Cant you speak/the language that yer mam spoke (1989, p.17). From this point in the poem onwards, Harrison is engaged in an increasingly desperate dialogue with the skinhead (his alter ego (1989, p.31)), who taunts the poet for his claim to represent people such as himself: Dont talk to me of fucking representing/the class yer were born into any moreà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦/Who needs/yer fucking poufy words. Ah write me own. (1989, p.22). For a poet who throughout his writing life has documented his struggle to give voice to the experience and culture of the community in which he was brought up (in the well-known poem Them and [Uz], for example (Harrison, 2003 (3rd ed.) pp.102-3), the skinheads question is a crucial one, and one for which the only answer Harrison has seems to be to re-enact that struggle dramatically and poetically. Michael Thursto n writes that whereas Thomas Gray can peacefully contemplate his elegiac resources in the quiet context of graveyards, Harrison is called on to defend both poetry and his own poetic practice against claims lodged by a spokesman for historys victims (2009, p.148). By this reckoning, the traditional compensations made available by the elegy form à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" the assurance offered by the poet that the subject of the elegy will achieve a permanence and a transcendence in the shape of the elegy itself à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" are dependent upon a tacit agreement that the poet may legitimately represent the absent subject. This assurance, however, is denied to Harrison, for whom all the versuses of life (1989, p.11) the political conflicts that divided Thatcherite Britain, class v. class as bitter as before,/the unending violence of US and THEM,/personified in 1984/by Coal Board MacGregor and the NUM (1989, p,11) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" these conflicts extend into the graveyard itself and into the poetry and the language employed by Harrison. According to Terry Eagleton, Harrison is a natural Bakhtinian, for whom language itself is a terrain of struggle where opposing accents intersect (1991, p.349). The skinhead with whom Harrison engages in the poem may well be alienated from the community which spawned him (from both its past and its present) but, unemployed and xenophobic as he is, he may also be more representative of that community than the poet could ever hope to be. Moreover, the skinhead sees Harrison himself as the class enemy, as one of those who speaks down to him, treats him like he is dumb (1989, p.19). He has his own words and way of expressing them, which in the end may be just as valid as those brief chisellable bits from the good book (1989, p.10) engraved on the gravestones which the graffiti obscure, or those of Harrison himself. However, although the conflict enacted by Harrison in the poem would seem to put into doubt his right to commemorate and to speak for the community which the skinheads very presence would appear to mark as having past, this in itself is rendered ambiguous by the revelation that the foul-mouthed disaffected skinhead and the polyglot cultured poet are one and the same (He aerosolled his name. And it was mine. (1989, p.22)). The words that the skinhead has spoken throughout the poem have been Harrisons, and the skinhead himself, as Harrison has made clear, is what he may have become if he had not benefited from the 1944 Education Act which enabled him to go to Leeds Grammar School (BBC, 2011). So, in the end, the skinhead is revealed as the ghost of the life that Harrison did not lead à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å" one where he stayed in Leeds, found himself subject to social and economic forces beyond his control or understanding, and was ultimately dumped on the slag heap. The poem has been, by this account, an elegy for that lost life. Bibliography BBC (2011) The John Tusa Interviews: Tony Harrison. [Online]. Available from https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00nc89r [Accessed 30th October 2015] EAGLETON, T. (1991) Antagonisms. In ASTLEY, N. (1991) Bloodaxe Critical Anthologies: 1: Tony Harrison. Newcastle: Bloodaxe Books (pp.348-50). GRAY, T. (1751) Elegy written in a Country Churchyard. In PRICE, M. (1973) The Oxford Anthology of English Literature: The Restoration and the Eighteenth Century. New York: Oxford University Press (pp.661-5). HABERKAM, H. (1994) These Vs. are all the Versuses of Life. In BARFOOT, C. (ed.) In Black and Gold: Contiguous Traditions in Post-War British and Irish Poetry. Amsterdam: Rodopi Press (pp.79-94). HARRISON, T. (1989) v. (2nd Ed.). Tarset: Bloodaxe Books. HARRISON, T. (1995) The Shadow of Hiroshima and other Film Poems. London: Faber and Faber. HARRISON, T. (2003) Selected Poems (3rd Ed.). London: Faber and Faber. RAMAZANI, J. (1994) Poetry of Mourning: The Modern Elegy fro m Hardy to Heaney. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. THURSTON, M. (2009) The Underworld in Twentieth-Century Poetry: From Pound and Eliot to Heaney and Walcott. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.