I hold my duty as i hold my soul both to my God Essay Example for Free

I hold my duty as i hold my soul both to my God Essay Polonius statement, found in Act Two, Scene Two, reflects the symmetry and order of the society he lives in. He inhabits a world of certainty and medieval convention. The play can be seen to challenge the statement, both in the action and in the characters, particularly in the character of Hamlet himself. It is Hamlet, the renaissance man of the play, whose controversial attitude is constantly seen to challenge the medieval certainties that could still be seen in Jacobean society. Value was placed on duty to the monarch and to God; the institution of marriage was sacred and scientific reasoning was absolute and definite. All these things are challenged in Shakespeares Hamlet. The social and cultural climate of Jacobean society was such that certainties and conventions were held in high esteem- Shakespeares Hamlet is written in the context of, for example, the social hierarchy of the time, the medieval court, and religion. All of these are challenged in the play by both the characters and the plot. Even the very form of the statement challenges these certainties, for the couplet is a chiasmus- the symmetrical structure reflects the very nature of the society in which Polonius lives. In Shakespeares time society was beginning to ask some of the questions which Shakespeare addresses through the character of Hamlet. Most people embraced a rational, scientific line of thinking Elizabethans were not always heavily superstitious. For example, in Act one, Scene one, Horatio expresses doubt at the existence of the ghost: Before my God, I might not this believe Without the sensible and true avouch Of mine own eyes. They also began to question the old hierarchy and the natural order of things- such as God and gracious king upon the dawn of the Renaissance. The idea of society as a fixed structure and everything being ordained in the world was indeed a strong certainty. Hamlet has a clear vision of things as they are he is a realist, a Renaissance man, unlike characters such as Claudius and Polonius who Shakespeare portrays to be lacking in vision. Shakespeare shows the court to be full of people who think that all these things are absolute simply because they have always been a certain way. Hamlet is also the main vehicle through which Shakespeare conveys his views. Hamlet has indeed been brought up with medieval and religious certainties too. Or that the everlasting had not fixd His canon gainst self- slaughter. A modern audience may very well see Hamlet as being rather tame- a twenty-first century rebel would not acknowledge proprieties such as the divine ban on suicide- but Hamlet seeks more than revenge. He is a melancholy individual, who searches for the answers to some of these questions; through the title statement, Shakespeare challenges his contemporary audience and the modern audience to question these certainties too. Hamlets clear vision is in direct contrast to the other characters, in the sense that he is the only character who is prepared to question these certainties and to try and define, in a sense, what the true meaning of life is, what it is all about. Shakespeare challenges the statement of duty to God and king by implying, through the character of Hamlet that life is underpinned by something other than the monarch and the church. Hamlet is totally aware of the beauty of the world yet at the same time has a pessimistic outlook on the gifts of man as we are all destined to die anyway: What piece of work is a man, How noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable, in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god: and yet to me what is this quintessence of dust? The character of Polonius is underpinned by values such as duty to God and king- this is illustrated not only in Act Two Scene Two but also in Act One Scene Three: This above all : to thine own self be true, As it must follow the night the day Thou canst not then be false to any man. This quotation illustrates a simplistic outlook on life. The main way in which Shakespeare challenges this outlook is, ironically, in Polonius death. In Act Three, scene four, Polonius is casually and ignominiously killed by Hamlet : O, I am slain. Polonius expresses surprise as much as anything, while Hamlet s words reinforce the irony of Polonius self- importance: I took thee for thy better. Take thy fortune: Thou findst to be too busy in some danger. Polonius is clearly at home in this ordered society and shows a passive acceptance of the status quo. He has a simple medieval outlook on life and clearly values his duty to his God and king; however, he dies by ridiculous accident. Although throughout his life he has clearly endeavoured to serve these two entities to the best of his ability, he still dies an unnatural, brutal death. Shakespeare is therefore illustrating the irrelevance that these values have to life, both in Shakespeares era and now. The statement which Polonius makes in Act Two Scene Two about duty to God and King allows the reader to infer a lot about the character of Polonius and the world in which he lives- he does not seek new experience. These medieval certainties are also challenged in the character of Claudius. He is obviously not on the side of God- indeed, he seems to contradict the very reasoning of the church by the brutal manner in which he murders the king. It is ironic therefore that he seems to declare himself king by divine right as he actually dies with a guilty conscience: Theres such divinity doth hedge a king That treason can but peep to what it would, Acts little of his will. Here it appears that Claudius has conveniently forgotten exactly how he became king. Shakespeare is challenging the idea of kingship. He is showing the court to be full of people who think things are the way they are because they have always been done that way, such as Polonius, Gertrude, Claudius, and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. The character of Claudius highlights the corruption of the medieval court. The intrigue and machiavellian machinations of the court are self justifying to all these people; for example, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern deceive Hamlet and go behind his back simply because they are serving their king. In Shakespeares time deception and violence were commonplace if they would benefit the king. Although Claudius seems to take the moral high-ground throughout the play he has no good intentions toward Hamlet at all. Shakespeares Hamlet also challenges the institution of marriage- it is shown in the conduct of Gertrude and Claudius not be a sacred union but a justification for excessive promiscuity. Hamlet is distraught by his mothers rapid re- marriage to his uncle after his fathers death: To post with such dexterity to incestuous sheets. Shakespeare invites us then to question the notion of a stable royal marriage, and the values that society had then and the values we have now. Hamlet is disgusted by their sexual excesses and, moreover feels he has been tainted by them: O that this too too sullied flesh would melt, Thaw and resolve itself into a dew. Shakespeare is challenging the morality of the royal marriage- the fact that Gertrude marries the kings own brother shortly after his death seems to suggest the absence of love. In Hamlet, the degree of emotion and true respect in marriage is shown to be weak- it is easily overruled by lust, as the ghost of the previous king states: Let not the royal bed of Denmark be. A couch for luxury and damned incest. Hamlet is an unconventional revenge tragedy- Shakespeare subverts the genre. Hamlet is reluctant to take revenge whereas Laertes is hot- headed, impulsive and ready to avenge the murder of Polonius: It warms the very sickness in my heart That I shall live and tell him to his teeth, Thus diest thou. Shakespeare undermines the concept further by showing that Hamlet is not in fact a coward- his ideas are slightly more subtle. He is indeed hesitant about avenging his fathers murder- he passes up an opportunity to kill Claudius in Act Three, scene four, as he does not want to kill him in an act of redemption. This goes against the traditional idea of medieval and Jacobean revenge: A villain kills my father, and for that To heaven. Why, this is hire and salary, not revenge. This is a challenge to the genre because Hamlet is prepared to bide his time in order to achieve the perfect murder- he wont be spontaneous and impulsive. This is shown by the fact that he passes up an opportunity to kill Claudius. Shakespeares Hamlet has a good degree of relevance to life in the twenty- first century. Although some of the major themes, such as the court and incest, are no longer applicable to modern life, we can relate to some of the underlying themes such as love, sorrow and resentment; we can relate to the emotional distress. Reasoning in Medieval Denmark where the play is set nor indeed in Jacobean society is not so different to our reasoning today- the majority of people today may not believe in ghosts but characters in the play, such as Horatio, and some people in Jacobean society do not believe in ghosts either. In Act one, scene five, Hamlet makes this very thought- provoking comment to Horatio: There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. We have our certainties today- in the form of scientific reasoning; but our certainties are equally open and capable of being challenged. One of the main themes in Hamlet is death- we are still uncertain about what happens after we die. The character of Hamlet himself has a romantic, post modernist way of thinking; everything is relative and there are no certainties- only thoughts: Nothing is good or bad. Thinking makes it so. In a sense here Hamlet can be compared to the Romantics. Keats wrote in the context of Shakespeare: Twixt damnation and impassiond clay. (On Sitting Down To Read King Lear) This in a sense is what underpins Shakespeares Hamlet- the idea that whatever certainties are held in any given era will always be questionable, and open to discussion. Our certainties will always be challenged because nothing is definite, or absolute. This romantic concept is based on the idea that this is what life is about- challenging certainties in order to try and discover the ineffable truth about this world and the next.

Poor Communications and Conflict Essay -- Functions of Communication

Is most conflict in an organisation is caused by poor communication? If we had perfect communication would conflict cease? Consider for example, an e-mail asking for some information â€Å"yesterday† to stress how important this request is. The sender thinks e-mails are great as they travel at the speed of light and spell things out in black & white. The recipient may consider that if its in a e-mail then it can’t be that urgent because servers can loose, misdirect or delay an e-mails transmission. They may also consider that as the information was wanted â€Å"yesterday† its already too late to be effectively utilised. Both parties saw the same communiquà ©, neither read the same message. Each will blame the other for failing to communicate properly and conflict may result. E-mail flame wars are a high tech twist on whispering campaigns. And like the system of claims & loyalties in a feudal states the smallest e-mail spat can spiral out of control with careless use of the C.C. and B.C.C functions. Drucker (1977)says that there are four fundamentals of communication: communication is perception of the recipient not the utterance of the instigator communication is expectation in that recipients will heed only what they are expecting to hear communication makes demands of the recipient that they become someone, do or believe something communication and information are different and largely opposite - yet interdependent Employees need to know a number of things such as what is expected of them, how they are performing and how can they advance. If these are not communicated, on a regular basis, then role or expectation conflict will develop and motivation decline as the employee is berated for failing to meet the goals their superiors [are convinced they] assigned them. But if this is all the communication they receive they may begin to feel like machines. According to Pearson & Thomas there are three levels of communication that employees need, these being: Must know discussed above. Should know which includes significant staff changes and company/market developments. Then could know which although having no operational impact makes life more interesting. Office gossip is only a could know but probably the communication that really binds a company together. Barring security, legal and share price sensitive data everyone should... ...’s healthy. If people fight each other openly in your presence for what they believe in that’s healthy. But keep all the conflict eyeball to eyeball [as opposed to back stabbing] Towsend,R Orders flow down a company hierarchy. Communication of the understanding of such flows upwards. Crosswise people share information on getting things done often in contravention of policies Employees need direction, information and entertainment accurately and truthfully delivered by both the formal and informal company chains of communication. References DRUCKER, P (1977) People and Performance The best of Peter Drucker on Management: Heinemann. DRUCKER, P (1974) Management Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices: Butterworth. PEARSON, B & THOMAS, N (1991) The Shorter MBA: HarperCollins TOWSEND, R (1988) Further up the Organisation: Harper & Row Bibliography BUHLER, PM(1999) Supervision, Vol. 60 Issue 2, p16, 3p KREITNER, R et al (1993) Organizational Behaviour: McGrawHill PUGH, DS (1971) Organization Theory: Pelican PUGH, DS & HICKSON, DJ (1964) Writers on Organisations: Penguin THOMAS, AB (1993) Controversies in Management: Routledge

Administrative and Politics Dichotomy

For many years, the political-administrative dichotomy has been one of the most disputed theories of public administration. Despite serious debates and critiques, the differences between politics and public administration have been present over the past decades. The question still remains today whether or not politics and public administration can work together for one common good-to serve the people for which hey govern.Today, politics and administration are linked in many ways. A few examples are: administrators initiate policy, administrative acts have political consequences, and administrators shape policy after the fact and civil servants are not politically neutral. Skelley, B. D. (2008) Another aspect of the administrative-political divide is the philosophical ideals in the western culture of the Greek civic-culture (political) and political-administrative relationship has been an important question for over a century now. Skelley, B. D. 008) Woodrow Wilson, in his article â⠂¬Å"The Study of Administration† (1887), wrote of how to position public administration in relation to politics. His idea is the forefront to which the idea that public administration is somehow distinct from politics. Public administration is supposed to be the instrument used or the delivery vehicle for translating policies into action, while politics is about making the policies. Demir, T. & Nyhan, R. (2008) The dichotomy is still influencing public administration due to numerous public administrators are laiming neutrality from political influences.Neutrality refers to the ability to do government work, do it to the standard that has been set, rather than to one's own standard or for other loyalties or personal gain.

Dan Flavin, Fluorescent Light Sculpture Artist

Dan Flavin (1933-1996) was an American minimalist artist known for his sculptures created using solely commercially available fluorescent light bulbs and their fixtures. He created works that ranged from a single bulb placed at an angle from the floor, to massive site-specific installations. Fast Facts: Dan Flavin Occupation: SculptorStyle: MinimalismBorn: April 1, 1933 in Jamaica, Queens, New YorkDied: November 29, 1996 in Riverhead, New YorkSpouses: Sonja Severdija (divorced 1979), Tracy HarrisChild: Stephen FlavinSelected Works: The Diagonal of Personal Ecstasy (The Diagonal of May 25, 1963) (1963), Santa Maria Annunciata (1996)Notable Quote: One might not think of light as a matter of fact, but I do. And it is, as I said, as plain and open and direct an art as you will ever find. Early Life and Education Born in the New York borough of Queens, Dan Flavin grew up in a devout Roman Catholic family. As a young child, he showed an interest in drawing, particularly wartime scenes. In 1947, Flavin entered the Immaculate Conception Preparatory Seminary in Brooklyn to study for the priesthood. Six years later, he left the seminary along with his fraternal twin brother, David, and enlisted in the U.S. Air Force. There, he trained as a meteorological technician and studied art through an extension program provided by the University of Maryland in Korea. Artist Dan Flavin at the Paula Cooper Galler in 1992 in New York City, New York. Rose Hartman / Getty Images After returning to the U.S., Flavin left the military and ultimately enrolled at Columbia University to study art history as well as painting and drawing. Before graduating, he left college and began working jobs in the mailroom at the Guggenheim Museum and as a guard at the Museum of Modern Art to gain entry into the New York art scene. Minimalist Light Sculpture Dan Flavins early drawings and paintings show a strong influence of abstract expressionism. He also created assembled mixed media sculptures that relate to the movement. Some speculate that Jasper Johns use of light bulbs and flashlights in his assemblages might have impacted the creation of Flavins early works with light. In 1961, Flavin began to design his first Icon pieces with his wife, Sonja Severdija. He first exhibited the light sculptures in 1964. They consisted of box constructions illuminated by incandescent and fluorescent lights. Untitled (To Don Judd, Colorist) (1987). Wikimedia Commons / Creative Commons 2.0 By 1963, Flavin stopped working with canvas. He used only fluorescent light bulbs and fixtures. One of the first works in his mature style was The Diagonal of Personal Ecstasy (The Diagonal of May 25, 1963). It consisted of a yellow fluorescent light placed on the wall at a 45 degree angle with the floor. Flavin dedicated the piece to sculptor Constantin Brancusi. Dan Flavin later explained that his discovery of the potential of the fluorescent bulb was a significant revelation. Hed always admired the readymade sculptures of Marcel Duchamp, and he realized that the bulbs were objects in a basic form that he could use in an infinite number of ways. Many of Flavins most significant works are dedications to artist friends and gallery owners. One of those, Untitled (To Dan Judd, Colorist), is a tribute to another artist who, along with Dan Flavin, helped define minimalist art. The pair were close friends, and Judd even named his son Flavin. Interior of Santa Maria Annunciata in Milan, Italy. Wikimedia Commons / Creative Commons 3.0 In a clever reference to another of the most prominent minimalists of the 20th century, Dan Flavin created Greens Crossing Greens (to Piet Mondrian Who Lacked Green). Mondrian worked almost entirely with primary colors, black and white, ignoring blended colors like green. Later Life and Work Later in his career, Dan Flavin focused on large-scale installations utilizing colored fluorescent lights. One of his corridor constructions, Untitled (to Jan and Ron Greenberg), was created for a solo show at the St. Louis Art Museum in 1973. Flavin often designed sculptures but didnt construct them until someone purchased them or provided a location for construction. As a result, he left behind drawings and designs for more than 1,000 sculptures when he died in 1996. The last work completed before Dan Flavins death was the lighting of the Santa Maria Annunciata church in Milan, Italy. It is a 1932 Romanesque Revival building, and Flavin completed his plans two days before his death. The church completed the installation one year later. To Saskia, Sixtina, Thordis (1973). Philippe Huguen / Getty Images Legacy Dan Flavins decision to work solely with fluorescent light bulbs as the medium for the construction of his sculptures makes him unique among major 20th-century artists. He helped define minimalism using such limited materials, and he introduced the idea of impermanence to his work. Flavins works only exist until the lights burn out, and the light itself is the analogous element to other sculptors use of concrete, glass, or steel. He influenced a wave of later light artists including Olafur Eliasson and James Turrell. Source Fuchs, Rainier. Dan Flavin. Hatje Cantz, 2013.