Is It Possible to Prove the Existance of God Essay Example for Free

Is It Possible to Prove the Existance of God Essay Is it possible to prove the existence of God? Throughout time many philosophers have been searching for an answer to creation and whether it is actually possible to prove (or not prove) if God exists. Some of the philosophers include Thomas Aquinas, William Paley and Blaise Pascal they came up with various different theories and arguments to prove the existence of God and why they believed he did exist. Another philosopher Karl Marx thought that his theory could convince people not to believe in God. One philosopher, Thomas Aquinas believed that God did exist and that he could prove this simply by arguing that the Universe could not have been made by nothing at all, saying that it was impossible for something to come from nothing. He believed that the universe was caused to exist by something which itself is uncaused, or else there would be an infinite regress. He thought that the only way to explain the start of the universe in a rational way was to say that it was created by God. I think that Aquinas may be right, but I doubt that he is right as he is saying that God was created by nothing but I feel that something must have created God and therefore there must have been an infinite regress. There is also no solid evidence or proof that God does exist and since there isn’t I think that not even Aquinas is 100% sure that God exists. Also, Aquinas’ theory seems rather contradictory as he says that the Universe must be caused by something and cannot just simply be made by nothing but that God is an uncaused causer. Another Philosopher, William Paley, like Aquinas was convinced that God does exist and that he could prove it. Paley ‘invented’ the thought experiment to encourage people to agree with him that God exists. He called his argument that Teleological argument (coming from the Greek word ‘telas’ meaning purpose). Story Imagine you are walking across open countryside with some friends. Then you suddenly come across something lying on the grass. You are so impressed with the workmanship that you are your friend. Who do you think made this watch? † The friend says†Nobody made this watch it was always there† Paley said that the universe, like a watch is too complicated and intelligently designed to have no creator. Paley used the Analogy of the watch to argue the existence of God. Paley argues that if a simple watch has a creator then the universe, which is so much more complicated and in some ways more beautiful than a watch must have a creator and that creator must be God. I think that Paley’s theory does seem reasonable but I do not fully agree with it completely. I think that the world must have a creator but not necessarily God anything could have been the creator and that the creator might not be Omnipotent, Omnibonevelant and Omniscient the creator could have simply just created the universe and then just left it or done nothing else to it. Another philosopher who also likes Aquinas and Paley ‘believed’ in God and thought that he could use his theory to encourage others to do so was Blaise Pascal. However, Pascal’s theory was very different to Aquinas and Paley’s. Pascal believed that God’s existence can neither be approved nor disapproved and whatever you decide about this problem will be uncertain and that your answer can be nothing more than a gamble. Pascal said that you cannot avoid making a gamble on God’s existence and you have to place your bet whether you like it or not. Pascal soon came to the conclusion that it would be better to believe that God existed than not to as you will not lose anything by doing so. He thought that if you believed that God existed and then after your death he actually did you would have a big gain by going to heaven. If, however God didn’t exist and you believed that you did you would not lose anything apart from some of your time praying and going to religious places etc. Pascal also thought that if you did not believe in God and came to know after your death that he did you would be most likely to go to hell therefore have a big loss. He called his theory Pascal’s wager. I strongly disagree with Pascal’s theory mainly because he only believed in God for selfish reasons and wanted people to believe in God only because of the happiness they would get in heaven which is not the actual idea. Also I think that God does not decide to put people in heaven and hell based on whether they believe or not but by the good deeds they have done in their life, so people who believe in God just for reasons like Pascal’s probably would not go to heaven anyway. I think that Pascal seems rather greedy to believe in God just to go to heaven after his death. The last philosopher I’m going to talk about is Karl Marx. Marx thought that that â€Å"Religion is a tool of oppression† meaning that Religion is something that you do not actually need but use to distract yourself from other things and something that someone just gets pleasure and happiness from. So he thought that everyone should just reject religion and this would make people aware of their own true situation and this may give them a chance to improve the conditions in which they live. Marx used quotes from the bible to back up quotes from the bible to back up his theory. â€Å"Blessed are the poor in spirit inherit the earth† Marx would argue that this quote is trying to say that it is not the rich and powerful who are most fortunate but actually the poor, as they will go to heaven because of all the suffering they have endured. He would say that the poor are often given quotes like this to make them content with their own miserable lives and that religion makes a virtue of poverty and meekness and unacceptable lives have been glamorised. Therefore I do not agree with Marx argument mainly because his theory may have been applicable at that time but it is not now, as people do not use religion just to have a distraction or something to comfort them when everything else is a mess. To conclude I think that although there are many different theories for whether God exists or not it is not actually possible to prove that God exists and that if you believe in God you should not just believe that he exists because of some theory but because you actually believe he exists and want to believe in him. Although it is probably not possible to prove whether God exists or not (unless he came down to earth and told everyone) the most convincing way would be to experience a miracle. Miracles can prove that God exists to a certain amount because most miracles would be far too big to be just a coincidence. Even though there are many stories about miracles in the news and in religious books such as the bible you cannot actually be sure until you experience one yourself. Miracles may not prove that God as people know him exists (Omnipotent, Omnibonevelant and Omniscient etc) but they do prove that there is an all powering/ supernatural being.

Effect of PM Question Time on Government Decision Making

Effect of PM Question Time on Government Decision Making As Norton has noted, Parliament ceased to be a policy-making legislature in the nineteenth century and is now a ‘policy-influencing’ legislature. Parliament is thus expected to subject policy to a process of scrutiny and influence.[1] This essay will assess the extent to which the present mechanisms available to parliament to call the government to account can be said to have a meaningful ability to effect governmental decision making. In order to evaluate the role of parliament in this matter, some of the procedural mechanisms of the House must be examined. Question Time in the House of Commons is one of the principal means by which information is obtained from ministers by Members of Parliament.[2] Prior notice of the questions is given to ministers, however, supplementary questions may then be asked on matters arising out of the minister’s reply, of which notice will not have been given. Question Time is widely publicised and therefore has the effect of drawing public attention to matters of particular concern. The process can also highlight the capabilities of individual ministers as they will need to ‘think on their feet’ in order to answer the supplementary questions. In April 1995 the then Health Secretary announced that several London hospitals were to be closed to curb public expenditure. The announcement of this unpalatable policy was made through a written answer rather than orally in the House. At Question Time the Health Secretary was accused of ‘lacking moral courage’[3] and the episode gain ed considerable publicity. Question Time is the only regular occasion upon which the government is obliged to account to Parliament for its management of the nations affairs.[4] Other merits of the system are that it provides an opportunity for the opposition to select issues as well as an opportunity for backbench MPs to question ministers. This in turn allows for local and regional issues to be given hearing in full parliamentary session. It also offers ministers the opportunity to become aware of issues which might otherwise have gone unnoticed. Parliamentary questions are very useful in highlighting existing governmental policy and bringing any controversial issues surrounding it to the attention of the media and hence the public. This allows effective scrutiny of government. However, the process does not provide a direct mechanism for effecting governmental decision making, although indirectly, the resulting public pressure may provide a mechanism for influencing policy change. Further limitations are tha t it operates on a rota system, with departments being subject to questions only once per 3 or 4 weeks; time restraints make ‘in depth’ questioning impossible; and, sensitive questions can be avoided.[5] Moreover, government backbenchers are able to reduce the time available for opposition questions by presenting favourable questions to ministers. Each Wednesday the House of Commons hosts Prime Minister’s Questions which lasts approximately 30 minutes. This procedure allows the Leader of the Opposition to put up to three questions to the Prime Minister. This presents an opportunity for immediate argument between the parties and can affect MP’s perceptions of their leaders.[6] Other MPs are then able to ask questions of the Prime Minister. As above, this allows for raising public awareness of issues and for questioning government policy. However, similar problems also exist, with the use of government backbenchers to praise government action rather than question it. This process has lead Loveland to conclude: â€Å"That MPs and ministers feel it appropriate to waste the Commons’ evidently limited and supposedly valuable time on such nonsense is in itself regrettable. That such questions are also manifestly an insult to the intelligence of voters provides further justification for the contention that the House of Commons is a quite inadequate vehicle for the sensible representation of political opinion in a modern democratic society.†[7] Another way in which parliament may effect governmental decision making is via debate. There are several types of debate which happen in the House of Commons. Debate will occur after the second reading of legislation, yet there are other provisions as well. Emergency debates may exceptionally occur where a matter is deemed to be of urgent national importance. There are also daily adjournment debates, where backbenchers can initiate short debate on matters for their choosing. Selection is by ballot through the Speaker’s Office. Members may also express concerns about issues by tabling a written motion requesting debate ‘at an early day’. However, such early day motions rarely result in debate and instead are primarily confined to shoeing the strength of parliamentary feeling on particular issues.[8] Where pressure grows significantly the government may feel inclined to respond but again the influence is often indirect. Carroll provides an evaluation of debate as a whole.[9] He states that the merits of debates are that: they force ministers to explain and justify policy initiatives to the House; they provide an opportunity for the opposition to expose flaws in government policy and decisions and present suggestions; they help to educate public opinion; they provide an opportunity for government ministers to display dissent, enabling policy changes to be considered; and, they give MPs the opportunity to present the views of constituents and interest groups. However, the demerits of debate according to Carroll are high in number: in the main it is the government, rather than parliament, which decides what will be debated and when (there are twenty Opposition Days when the Opposition chooses the subject for debate); most debates are dominated by the frontbenches; there is not time to engage in full detailed debate or to debate crises as and when they arise; they are often poorly attended; they attract little public attention. Furthermore, Carroll alleges that policy is formed and decisions made before parliamentary debate takes place. The government therefore defends its decisions during debate regardless of any merits of alternative proposals or exposed defects in its decisions and therefore debates appear to have ‘very little immediate effect in terms of influencing government thinking or action’.[10] Perhaps the most effective scrutiny of government is through select committees.[11] These committees are chaired by senior backbenchers and consist of between 9 and 13 backbench members. They allow in depth analysis of departmental action and investigate a wide range of topics.[12] Examples of issues investigated by select committees include the ‘Westland Affair’[13], although the government refused to allow witnesses from the Department of Trade and Industry to give evidence; and the Arms to Iraq controversy, where the Select Committee on Trade and Industry examined the sale of equipment to Iraq during the first Gulf conflict. Media interest may also influence the topics investigated by select committees, as evidenced by the examination of the decision to go to war in Iraq by the Foreign Affairs Select Committee in 2003.[14] Select committees are empowered to send for persons, papers and records and can expect full government co-operation. Furthermore, persons giving evidence must take a formal oath. However, as illustrated above, the co-operation of government, although expected, is not always assured. Once a select committee has investigated an issue it will publish a report. Around one third of these reports result in debate in the House, which are subject to the analysis above. Carroll has provided further evaluation of the merits and demerits of select committees,[15] stating in support that: they provide a systematic infrastructure for detailed scrutiny of government conduct; they are the only parliamentary forum in which ministers and public servants may be questioned ‘in depth’ on topics not determined by party leaders; there is a less party-political atmosphere; the members gain expertise in a particular area; the reports attract media attention. However, the demerits include: they cannot impose any sanctions or direct pressures on government if dissatisfied with departments’ conduct; as noted, few reports result in debate; the government can dictate when persons will not give evidence; they are poorly supported in terms of resources; facilities and rese arch staff. From the analysis above it may be seen that although Parliament has several option open in terms of scrutinising government action, these procedures offer little in terms of direct effect of government decision and policy making. The Select Committee on Modernisation of the House of Commons has produced a report which suggests reforms to make better use of non-legislative time and strengthen the role of the backbench MPs.[16] So far this has resulted in minimal reforms such as a reservation of time for Topical Questions in departmental question time and a consideration of ways in which opportunities to debate the plans of government departments may be guaranteed.[17] However, without further reform, Parliament is currently unable to influence government decision making in any significant per-event sense. Bibliography Allen, M. and Thompson, B., Cases and Materials on Constitutional and Administrative Law, 9th Edition (2008), Oxford University Press Barnett, H., Constitutional and Administrative Law, 6th Edition (2006), Routledge Cavendish Bogdanor, V., The British Constitution in the Twentieth Century, (2003), Oxford University Press Bradley, A.W. and Ewing, K.D., Constitutional and Administrative Law, 14th Edition (2007), Pearson Carroll, A., Constitutional and Administrative Law, 4th Edition (2007), Pearson Education Lord Hutton, â€Å"The media reaction to the Hutton Report†, (2006) PL 807 Loveland, I., Constitutional Law, Administrative Law and Human Rights: A Critical Introduction, 4th Edition (2006), Oxford University Press Norton, P. (ed), Parliament in the 1980s, (1985), Blackwell Pollard, D., Parpworth, N., and Hughes, D., Constitutional and Administrative Law: Text with Materials, 4th Edition (2007), Oxford University Press 1 Footnotes [1] Norton, P. (ed), Parliament in the 1980s, (1985), Blackwell, pg 8 [2] Barnett, H., Constitutional and Administrative Law, 6th Edition (2006), Routledge Cavendish, pg 405 [3] cited in Loveland, I., Constitutional Law, Administrative Law and Human Rights: A Critical Introduction, 4th Edition (2006), Oxford University Press, pg 157 [4] Carroll, A., Constitutional and Administrative Law, 4th Edition (2007), Pearson Education, pg 160 [5] Carroll, supra pg 161 [6] Loveland, supra pg 158 [7] Loveland, supra pg 159 [8] Pollard, D., Parpworth, N., and Hughes, D., Constitutional and Administrative Law: Text with Materials, 4th Edition (2007), Oxford University Press, pg 281 [9] Carroll, supra pp 162-164 [10] Carroll, ibid note 9 [11] Bogdanor, V., The British Constitution in the Twentieth Century, (2003), Oxford University Press, pg 172 [12] Bradley, A.W. and Ewing, K.D., Constitutional and Administrative Law, 14th Edition (2007), Pearson, pg 219 [13] Defence Committee, HC 518, 519 (1985-86), London: HMSO; Trade and Industry Committee, HC 176 (1986-87), London: HMSO; Treasury and Civil Service Committee, HC 92 (1985-86), London: HMSO [14] Lord Hutton, â€Å"The media reaction to the Hutton Report†, (2006) PL 807 [15] Carroll, supra pp 168-170 [16] Allen, M. and Thompson, B., Cases and Materials on Constitutional and Administrative Law, 9th Edition (2008), Oxford University Press, pg 321 [17] Allen and Thompson supra pp 321-322

Critique of Sexual Difference | Analysis

Critique of Sexual Difference | Analysis Sexual Difference Representation Explain how and why the critique of sexual difference intersected with a (postmodern) critique of representation in the later 1970s and early 1980s. Consider why photography had an important role and the significance of image-text relationship in this type of practice. As Craig Owens states in his paper ‘The Discourse of Others: Feminists and Postmodernism’ (Owens, 1983), the 1970s and 80s saw a coming together of the (mainly) feminist and queer theory critiques of sexual difference and the erosion of perspectivalist and univocal theories of vision and representation. As this paper shall assert, both of these positions can be seen to be traceable back to a single ontological and aesthetic rupture: the breakdown in what Lyotard was to term the grand or â€Å"meta narrative† (Lyotard, 1984: xxiv) and the subsequent rise in notions such as polyvocity (Deleuze and Guattari, 2004), heteroglossia (Bakhtin, 2000) ecriture feminine (Cixous, 1980) and differance (Derrida, 1997). This paper will also assert, through of the work of Roland Barthes especially, that photography had a major significance in exemplifying the kind of aesthetico-ontological concerns and strategies of postmodernity and poststructuralism; chiefly through such notion s as the punctum (Barthes, 2000); â€Å"the obtuse meaning† inherent within still visual images (Barthes, 1983) and the play of meaning between image and linguistic sign. This paper represents then an attempt to not only understand photography’s place within critical theory over the last two decades or so but how this provides a mirror to the wider movements of philosophical thought. The critique of sexual difference can be seen to emanate from a wide variety of authors (Foucault, Derrida, Kristeva, Wittig etc) however, within the mandates of this paper, I should like to look at two main theorists that have special relevance: Luce Irigaray and Helene Cixous, both of whom have been seen to challenge the phallic hegemony and its role in normative representation. As Elizabeth Grosz (1994) points out, one of the chief critiques inherent within the second wave feminist movement of the 1970s and 80s was its contention that the philosophical and social subject had always been thought of gendered, as Grosz states: The enigma that Woman has posed for men is an enigma only because the male subject construed itself as the subject par excellence. The way (he fantasizes) that Woman differs from him makes her containable within his imagination (reduced to his size) but also produces her as a mystery for him to master and decipher†¦ The construction of the male universal subject, asserted many feminist thinkers, resulted not only in the normalisation of phallocentricism but a privileging of its many dependants (reason, univocity, vision and so on). By positing Woman as the symptom of man through such notions as (among others) the castration complex and the psycho-sexual other, a phallocentric regime suppressed many of the discourses and thought processes associated with the feminine. Thinkers such as Luce Irigaray and Helene Cixous attempted to challenge this position by asserting the prominence of other discourses and narratives that avoided or sometimes even challenged, the dominance of the male point of view. In ‘The Laugh of the Medusa’ (1980) for instance, Cixous suggests that women’s writing and artistic creativity (disciplines such as photography for instance) should recognise the value of multiple readings, intertextuality and indistinct poetic expression, for her the notion of sexual difference was inextricably tied to textual and visual representation and both were dominated by a single, male-centred, vision, as Cixous details: Nearly the entire history of writing is confounded with the history of reason, of which it is at once the effect, the support, and one of the privileged alibis. It has been one with the phallocentric tradition. It is indeed that same self-admiring, self-stimulating, self congratulatory phallocentricism. This same theme is continued in the essay ‘This Sex Which is Not One’ (1985) by Luce Irigaray where the example of the female genitals is cited as existing as an intensive binary, each part relying and drawing stimulation from the other, thus challenging the oneness and singularity of the phallus. Irigaray also makes the point that, for female sexuality, touch is more meaningful that vision, the first suggestion that there maybe some cross over between the critiques of sexual difference and representation. As Owens (1983) suggests, postmodernity and the critique of representation also aimed to challenge the accepted (male dominated) field of vision by, firstly, exposing the links that exist between representation and phallocentricism and then by asserting the value of multi-perspectives, multiple readings and other modes of viewing. The postmodern image, as Jameson (1991) states, is one that has lost its originary connection to a real world and exists instead in a circuit of self referencing images whereby â€Å"The world†¦momentarily loses its depth and threatens to become a glossy skin, a stereoscopic illusion, a rush of filmic images without density.† The postmodern image elides notions such as authenticity and distinct critical reading because it has lost what Benjamin (2008) described as the aura of original authorial intent. Commensurate with notions such as the death of author (Barthes, 1988) the postmodern critical position asserts the validity of multiple readings and the inherent intertextual nature of image and text, as Owens (1983) states: It is precisely at the legislative frontier between what can be represented and what can cannot that the postmodernist operation is being staged not in order to transcend representation, but in order to expose the system of power that authorizes certain representations while blocking, prohibiting or invalidating others. Among those prohibited from Western representation, whose representations are denied legitimacy, are women. The critique of sexual difference, then, and the critique of representation are inextricably linked, being as they are both attempts at challenging traditional modernist and phallocentric modes of thinking. Each can be viewed as a strategy that seeks to overcome not only specific areas (gender inequality, monolithic modes of representation etc) but the regime that provides their ground. Each attempts to do this through a series of critical re-framings and theoretical positions that uncover the inherent inconsistencies and internal fissures in the dominant discourse. Roland Barthes’ work Camera Lucida (2000) is an ideal example of how such ideas can be translated into literary and photographic theory. In his notion of the punctum, for instance, Barthes details how time, sentiment and personal interest can alter our reception of a photograph far beyond the intents of either the photographer or the photographic model. The punctum, or as Barthes details â€Å"a partial object† (Barthes, 2000: 43) is that which exists outside of the normalised view of what is representable in a photograph, it elides direct visual recognition and changes with each viewer and viewing; Barthes describes his experience of a photograph by William Klein from 1954 of poverty stricken children in New York’s Little Italy for instance, despite the overtly socio-political message of the photograph (an adult hand holding a gun to a smiling boy’s head) what could be considered the traditional representational, rational meaning, Barthes can not help but â€Å"stubbornly see one child’s bad teeth† (Barthes, 2000: 45). In his notion of the â€Å"third meaning†, also from his essay of the same name, Barthes points to the ironic and sometimes comical accidental elements of a photograph or a still image of a film, what he calls the obtuse meaning, speaking of a still from Romm’s Ordinary Fascism, he says: I can easily read (in this still) an obvious meaning, that of fascism (aesthetics and symbolics of power, the theatrical hunt), but I can also read an obtuse meaning: the (again) disguised blond silliness of the young quiver-bearer, the flabbiness of his hands and mouth†¦Goering’s thick nails, his trashy ring†¦ For Barthes then, that which was not intended to be represented – the inherent phallic instability of the Nazi party – can be discerned in photography, not in the elements that form the centre of the picture (the ‘studium’) but those at the periphery that elide the rational and studied gaze. As Shawcross (1997) details, Barthes’ notions here reflect the desire to challenge the kinds of discourses we have looked at above, it stresses the importance of multiple readings when dealing with photographic images and also attempts to challenge traditional (Western phallocentric) notions of single point perspective. In allowing such multiple readings, asserts Barthes, the photographs brings into question the relationship between image and text and, more rightly, exposing the play that exists between the two. In a process that Barthes calls â€Å"anchorage† (Barthes, 1977: 38) text pins down the multi-faceted meaning of an image, suppressing the natural polyvocal nature of a photograph and re-establishing the rational search for a unique interpretation. In the series of photographs by Gillian Wearing, for example, where ordinary members of the public were photographed holding up textual messages such as â€Å"I’m Desperate† and â€Å"Help†, it is the text that is assumed to be the underlying truth behind the photographic image, highlighting the extent that textual and linguistic signifiers have historically dominated visual ones. Feminist photographers have often played with the inherent slippage of meaning within the photographic image; the work of Cindy Sherman, for instance, exemplifies many of the issues we have been discussing here. Photographed in a series of ironic and iconic poses and ‘disguises’ Sherman’s work is both postmodern, in that it is self referential and kitsch but it is also considered feminist in that it attempts to rediscover and reclaim patriarchally constructed images of womanhood (the housewife, the screen starlet, the victim etc). As Shawcross (1997) details, by using herself as a model, Sherman also deconstructs the notion of identity and surface appearances – who or what are we reacting to in these images, Sherman the photographer, Sherman the icon, Sherman the disguised housewife or the housewife per se as an image in itself? As Barthes would suggest, the contribution of the photograph to the debate on the relationship between image and text (Sherman tel lingly does not titled any of her photographs) is the very play of interpretation that such photographs expose. Ultimately, then, as we have seen, there could be considered a direct link between the failure of grand narratives such as sexual difference and perspectivalist representation and the rise in critical interest in photography. As an art form that is both indexical and open to manipulation, photography is ideally suited to exemplify debates on the nature of interpretation and semiotics, something that has had a marked influence on both critical theorists and photographers alike. References Bakhtin, M (2000), The Dialogic Imagination, Austin: University of Texas. Barthes, R (1977), Image Music Text, London: Hill and Wang. Barthes, R (1980), Barthes Selected Writings, London: Fontana. Barthes, R (2000), Camera Lucida, London: Vintage. Benjamin, W (2008), The Work of Art in the Age of Technological Reproducibility and Other Writings on Media, Cambridge: Harvard University. Cixous, H (1980), ‘The Laugh of the Medusa’, published in New French Feminisms, London: Harvester. Deleuze, G and Guattari, F (2004), A Thousand Plateaus, London: Continuum. Derrida, J (1997), Of Grammatology, Baltimore; Johns Hopkins University. Durand, R and Criqui, J.P (2006), Cindy Sherman, London: Flammarion. Grosz, E (1994), Volatile Bodies: Towards a Corporeal Feminism, Indianapolis: University of Indiana. Heidegger, M (2007), ‘The Origin of the Workd of Art’, published in Basic Writings, London: Routledge. Irigaray, L (1985), This Sex Which is Not One, New York: Cornell University. Jameson, F (1991), Postmodernism, or The Logic of Late Capitalism, London: Verso. Lloyd, G (1984), The Man of Reason, London: Methuen. Lyotard, J.F (1984), The Postmodern Condition, Manchester: University of Manchester. Owens, C (1983), ‘The Discourse of Others’ available online at http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:Fb1ceOH6t0AJ:www.mariabuszek.com/kcai/PoMoSeminar/Readings/OwensOthers.pdf+the+discourse+of+othershl=enct=clnkcd=1gl=uk Paley, M (1997), Gillian Wearing – Signs that Say What you Want Them to Say and Not Signs That Say What Someone Else Wants, London: Interim Art. Shawcross, N (1997), Roland Barthes: On Photography, Gainsville: University of Florida.

Henry Briggs :: essays research papers

Henry Briggs Henry Briggs was born in Yorkshire, England and attended St. John's College in Cambridge. He graduated in 1581 and 1585 and became a lecturer of mathematics in 1592. In 1596 Briggs became the first professor of geometry at Gresham College in London. By 1615 he was completely engaged in the study, calculation, and teaching of logarithms. He met with Napier and proposed improvements to the logarithmic system developed by Napier. Briggs helped publish some of Napier's work and wrote Logarithmorum chilias prima in 1617. Briggs's major work was Arithmetica logarithmica in 1624. These tables of logarithms were useful tools for those performing large calculations. Briggs spent several years at Merton College in Oxford. He also composed a work on trigonometry (basically tables, both of the functions and of the logs of sines and tangents) that was left unfinished at his death.Thomas Smith, writing early in the 18th century, said that Briggs' parents were "humble of class and rather slender of means." Humble of class could mean too many things to guess, but I take the slender means to state unmistakably that they were poor. Smith indicates that Briggs could not have attended Cambridge without financial assistance from his college. Henry went to school in Cambridge, M.A. St. John's College, Cambridge, 1577-85; B.A., 1581; M.A., 1585. And he left quite a few mathematical manuscripts that remained unpublished. Briggs also devoted some attention to astronomy and saw logarithms initially primarily as a device to aid in astronomical calculations. He published Tables for the Improvement of Navigation, 1610, and North-west Passage to the South Sea, 1622. Briggs was consulted by the Virginia Company about the northwest passage, and from information about tides and currents he deduced the existence of such a passage.

The Monkey Wrench Gang: The Law breaking Heroes Essay example -- Monke

The Monkey Wrench Gang: The Law breaking Heroes Everyone knows that breaking the law is bad and anybody who does is a criminal, but Edward Abbey author of The Monkey Wrench Gang (1975), puts a twist on those thoughts. The Monkey Wrench Gang is an adventurous novel about a gang of environmentalists who set out to destroy bulldozers, bridges, cars, trains, signs or anything that is destroying their beautiful country, the American southwest. Through characterization and description Edward Abbey glorifies the art of law breaking and leaves his readers rooting for his heroic criminals. In the Monkey Wrench Gang there are four main characters: Bonnie Abbzug, Doc Sarvis, Seldom Seen Smith and George Hayduke. As individuals they never become much of a threat but as a team the fire really begins to spread. Out of all these characters Hayduke is the most prominent idealist. Hayduke is a beer-guzzling, veteran of the Vietnam War who has a grudge against the American government. The rebellious slob, sick of the human civilization and their unappreciation for the desert, decides to join forces with the others to save the American Southwest from a wrongful death. "My job is to save the f@#*ing wilderness. I don't know anything else worth saving."-Hayduke (211). Another member of the gang is the intelligent Doc Sarvis who is the money source in all the operations. Doc is a middle-aged doctor with a passion for the Southwest and for his assistant nurse named Bonnie Abbzug, another member of the gang. Bonnie is a 28-year-old woman in her prime who is a "close" friend of Doc. Before they join the gang they destruct several signs that post a threat to the Southwest. On the bumper of Doc's car is a bumper sticker t... ... all the glorified destruction Abbey never stops praising the desert's subtle beauty and enchantment. In all of his descriptions Abbey paints a beautiful picture that feeds the minds of the readers. " The rolling waters shone like hammered metal, like bronze lamé, each facet reflecting mirror- fashion the blaze in the sky. While glowing dumbly in the east, above the red canyon walls, the new antiphonal response to the glory of the sun." (54). A hero is easily defined as anyone who is admired for their courage, nobility, or exploits. Edward Abbey definitely made his characters heroes through description and character. Painting his scenery and characters with meaning and drawing his plot with adventure made the law breaking monkey wrench gang heroic savers of the American Southwest. Abbey, Edward. The Monkey Wrench Gang. Avon Book: New York, 1975.

Glee Essay

Topic 2. ‘There is nothing ironic about show choir! ’ – Rachel Cohen Is Rachel’s assessment of the musical performances on Glee correct? Discuss the interplay of melodrama, irony and intertextuality in Glee. Your essay should contain detailed analysis of at least two scenes from Glee’s 1st season. Your essay should also make reference to your core course readings on television and postmodernism. Due 14 September heir true voice; and this one was, to me, ultimately about the series demonstrating its own voice and its space within the world of contemporary musicals. I don’t know what exactly I expected when I heard Joss Whedon would be directing, although it did send me diving for my Buffy The Vampire Slayer sing-along DVD. What I didn’t expect was an episode that didn’t feel like Whedon at all but felt intensely like Glee, more specifically the Glee that endeared itself to me in the first half of the season.What has always appeale d to me about Glee, and apparently to Joss Whedon based on this episode and his interview on Fox’s website , was the show’s delicate balance of tongue-in-cheek bitter cynicism, which keeps Glee blessedly away from High School Musical territory, and a sometimes heartbreakingly authentic sentimentality that draws me into a deeply emotional engagement with the characters and a desire to see them triumph.As others on this blog have mentioned, the stunt shows, focusing around a musical theme or dance conceit, are fun but can bring the show away from its narrative engagement and this mix of sincerity and cynicism that musical numbers have often been harnessed in service of. â€Å"Dream On† brought back this dynamic and foregrounded it in contrast to some of the more music-themed recent episodes. Neil Patrick Harris is the king of bitter(sweet) cynicism, and his performance as Bryan Ryan maintained the comedy in what otherwise was in danger of becoming a maudlin episod e.Rachel and Artie’s storylines gave both characters an opportunity for growth. Artie’s triumphantly joyful flash mob scene (fangirl moment – thank you Glee, for a flash mob! ) in particular made his final moments of aching vulnerability that much more poignant. There has been reflection on this blog about the way that Glee sometimes uses, one might even say exploits, disabled characters for emotional endings and to humanize its more difficult characters (Sue and Rachel), and Artie’s storyline comes dangerously close to becoming part of this trend.There are certainly issues with how Artie’s storyline is presented in this episode, and I leave those issues for other commentators more knowledgeable in these areas. Problematic though this is, it is consistent with the series’ ethos from the beginning. The show has always undermined its own after-school special themes, or at least made them less saccharine, by unabashedly drawing on stereotypes a nd refusing after-school special endings: Artie cannot dance, Tina doesn’t do the â€Å"right† thing. All is not well in McKinley High.If it were, it wouldn’t be Glee. That this episode spoke most clearly with what I feel is Glee’s unique voice is made even more important through its intertextuality, which evoked a self-awareness on the part of the series about its place amongst contemporary musicals. Here again we return to Joss Whedon and Neil Patrick Harris. Both figures have had important roles in bringing contemporary uses of the musical to television and the web. They worked together on the web series Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog.Neil Patrick Harris has performed in musical episodes of How I Met Your Mother and Batman: The Brave and the Bold, and Whedon’s musical episode of Buffy often makes lists of the best musical television episodes of all time. In this same episode that the guest director and guest star positioned Glee within th e contemporary use of the musical on television, we discover that Shelby Corcoran is Rachel’s mother. Shelby is played by Idina Menzel, who originated Maureen in Rent and Elphaba in Wicked on Broadway, with Glee guest star Kristin Chenoweth.Menzel and Chenoweth further link Glee to the tradition of the contemporary musical that may be a much more appropriate reference here than for the more obvious, but deceptive, High School Musical. Contemporary musicals have become increasingly mature, cynical, parodic and subversive, trends that Glee falls squarely within. In an episode so drenched in references to the contemporary musical context, it was all the more important that Glee followed the examples of its characters in the last episode and emphasized its own unique voice.Whedon showed himself to be a true Gleek by emphasizing the voice of the show over his own. egardless of whether you are a Gleek (if you don’t know this term, read on), you may have noticed the buzz surr ounding FOX’s musical comedy, which returned Tuesday to the second-best ratings of the night after a â€Å"Gleek Week† of promotional appearances and news coverage. Created by Ian Brennan, Brad Falchuk, and Ryan Murphy, Glee focuses on a diverse group of teenagers participating in a high school show choir, treating the participants in â€Å"New Directions† with alternating doses of warmth and snark.It also is one of the first series in the last few decades to successfully incorporate musical numbers; its music has become a lucrative cross-promotional element of the Glee phenomenon. The series has garnered ardent fans, or Gleeks, around the world — evident in the many websites dedicated to it, such as Gleeks United, Glee Club Online, Forum Francais de Glee, Glee Brazil, and my favorite, What Would Emma Pillsbury Wear? , inspired by the fashions worn by the eponymous guidance counselor with a penchant for all things sterile and for sexy-librarian sweaters.J ust as notable, it appears to have been embraced as particularly American. The cast was invited by First Lady Michelle Obama to sing at the White House’s annual Easter egg roll last weekend, and they followed that up with a Glee-themed episode of The Oprah Winfrey Show (she praised them as the â€Å"hardest working cast on television†). News coverage on the return of Glee and spoilers have followed in most major news outlets—including two dueling reviews in The New York Times—and in scholarly forums (a shout out to In Media Res, which recently hosted a Glee-themed week).What is it about Glee that has inspired this phenomenon? Based on my own experience, as a Gleek and as a scholar focusing on the series in my research, I find the show’s play with diversity equally satisfying and frustrating, and always compelling (arguably, it is â€Å"post-racial† and reinforcing of traditional racial stereotypes). And it seems that for many fans, the showà ¢â‚¬â„¢s focus on underdogs overcoming challenge, sly satire, and feel-good musical numbers are clear pulls.With respect to these and other appeals, Glee is a prime illustration of what Valerie Wee has described as hyper-postmodern media culture. A mash-up of generic influences, intertextual references, music, and ideological content that is both eerily nostalgic and forward-thinking, the series can be read and enjoyed by fans in multiple and diverging ways. This week’s episode, â€Å"Hell-o,† provided a full helping of these and other pleasures.We witnessed cheerleading coach Sue Sylvester (Jane Lynch)’s return to the high school and renewed mission of obliterating the glee club and the long-awaited blossoming of two romantic relationships, Mr. Shuester and Emma and Rachel and Finn, although difficulties naturally arise for both couples. In these and other entanglements as New Directions looks toward regionals, the timing and humor are spot on, not the least of which was the limiting of the musical numbers to songs with the word â€Å"hell† in the title.The hilarious mix that ensues includes â€Å"Hello, I Love You,† â€Å"Highway to Hell,† and â€Å"Hello, Goodbye. † And the narrative may not be important as the sum of Glee’s parts; they include the hyper-postmodern mash-up described above, exciting and talented performers, upbeat music that can be enjoyed in other arenas, sweetly geeky fandom, and the overall ethos of embracing the loveable loser in all of us. Are you a Gleek, and if so, what do you think encourages its appeal? What do you make of the series as a contemporary television, music, or theatrical text?In response to this complicated series we plan to follow Glee, its paratexts, and its fandom on a weekly basis as it continues to air this season. We hope you’ll take part in the discussion Reprinted with permission from our good friends at InsideCatholic. com, the leading online journa l of Catholic faith, culture, and politics. The musical comedy-drama Glee debuted on Fox just over a year ago. The story of a high school Spanish teacher's attempts to resurrect the Lima, Ohio, high school glee club surprised critics by ending its first season ranked at 33 in the Nielsen ratings.Now in its second season, the show's ratings have only gone up, as it climbed to the #15 spot last week. On May 23, the plans for a third season of Glee were announced. While there's no reason its popularity won't continue to climb, the challenge of producing a primetime musical series to appeal to a generation not brought up on the traditional musicals like Camelot, West Side Story, and The Sound of Music is obvious: How do you combine a contemporary story and characters with music and dance in a way that does not send viewers, especially younger ones, groaning in the direction of their PS3s and iPhones?The producers of Glee found their solution in the example of Chicago, the Broadway show where the musical numbers were always performed in the context of a cabaret. The characters of Glee don't burst into song in the manner of, say, Rodgers and Hammerstein; rather, the strongly choreographed musical numbers – five to eight each episode – are usually staged as the glee club's performances or rehearsals. Thus, Glee retains enough of a realistic feel to appeal to a younger audience. The music, a combination of pop and Broadway standards newly rranged by Adam Anders, appeals to all ages and has been a phenomenal success on CD and downloads, with over $2 million in digital sales. The cast of Glee had 25 singles on the Billboard Hot 100 in 2009, more than any artist since the Beatles in 1964. Their performance of â€Å"Don't Stop Believin'† went gold last November, with over half a million dollars in sales. Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of Glee's achievement its ability to keep three generations of viewers – children, parents, and grandparent s – in front of the TV together.The choreography of Zachary Woodlee, sexy without being sleazy, evokes Broadway's Jerome Robbins rather than Bob Fosse, much less the crotch-grabbing antics of tuneless rappers. Viewers with memories of Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire, or even the June Taylor Dancers on The Jackie Gleason Show, find themselves smiling once again. The producers and cast members also maintain tasteful control over material chosen – from older classics like â€Å"Over the Rainbow,† â€Å"One Less Bell to Answer,† â€Å"Smile,† and â€Å"I Could Have Danced All Night,† with newer ones such as â€Å"Proud Mary,† â€Å"Piano Man,† â€Å"Jump,† â€Å"Bootylicious,† and Josh Groban's â€Å"You Raise Me Up. When a Rolling Stone critic snidely chides Glee's leading actor, Matthew Morrison, saying he â€Å"couldn't rap his way out of 98 ° rehearsal,† he seems oblivious to the fact that more than an occas ional nod to rap would immediately begin thinning its audience (starting with me). The choice to offset the Disney-like innocence of Will Schuester, played by Morrison, with the cynical cheerleading coach, Sue Sylvester (Jane Lynch), works perfectly. The conflict between Schuester and Sylvester becomes nothing less than the perennial clash of ars gratia artis (arts for arts sake) with the cultural philistines.The writing for Sylvester's character is so good it has spawned its own wiki thread. Take, for example, her attitude toward intimacy in marriage: â€Å"I, for one, think intimacy has no place in a marriage. Walked in on my parents once, and it was like seeing two walruses wrestling. † But beyond the Schuester and Sylvester rivalry, Glee fails to achieve the generational integration of taste in its characters and storyline that it has attained with its music and dancing. Will's wife, Terri (Jessalyn Gilsig), seems like a refugee from John Sayles' Serial Mom, where the ent irety of middle-class family life is cynically, and hilariously, parodied.The viewer is left constantly questioning how Will, whose fundamental decency and kindness are repeatedly evoked, could have married such a demented twit as Terri. Such jarring contrasts of character abound in Glee. Finn Hudson (Cory Monteith), the lead singer of the glee club and quarterback of the football team, doesn't seem to know a hot tub cannot serve as a medium for impregnating his cheerleader girlfriend, Quinn Fabray; meanwhile, his best friend, Puck Puckerman (Mark Salling), who did get Quinn pregnant, is rampaging though the neighborhood sleeping with the â€Å"cougar† mothers of his classmates.There are also politically correct touches. Kurt Hummel (Chris Kolfer), the member of the glee club who likes to dress in black lace, not only â€Å"comes out† in the course of the first season but also leads the winless football team to their first victory by teaching them all how to dance. Yet Kurt's character is not made into a complete caricature: While his achievement on the gridiron is simply silly, the scene where he admits to his blue-collar father his same-sex attraction is quite affecting – and, I might add, realistic.Not to be outdone, Rachel Berry (Lea Michele), who has the best voice in the cast, is also the most neurotic, having been raised by two homosexual fathers. Rachel eventually discovers that her birth mother is the coach of the rival glee club. Such is the search for postmodern innocence in Glee – there is too much water under the cultural bridge to directly revive the musical idiom and heritage of the 1940s and 1950s that became second nature to so many baby-boomers.Before Glee, of course, there was Stephen Sondheim, who throughout his career as a composer and lyricist struggled with the same question of how to extend the musical to an audience that no longer believed in the univocal meaning of â€Å"I love you. † We can be grate ful to the creators of Glee for making an effort to bring us a popular entertainment with such a high level of singing and dancing. The temptation will be to lose sight of the initial choices that have led to its success and, particularly, the generational breadth of its audience.Just as American Idol has found out the hard way from its plunging ratings, once you start trying to please only the teenagers, the whole enterprise will quickly collapse Mid-April, with its tax deadline, is a time that many people dread; this year, however, millions looked forward to it with great eagerness, because April 13th brought the first episode of â€Å"Glee† after a four-month hiatus. The Fox show, set in the fictional William McKinley High School, inLima, Ohio, is part satirical comedy, part musical, and—since its setting is high school—a bit of a drama. It’s not exactly a high-school musical, and it’s not exactly â€Å"High School Musical,† the Disney so ng-and-dance franchise, although, like that TV movie and its brand extensions, it has a long tail of tie-in merchandise and live performances. It also has over-the-moon fans—â€Å"gleeks,† they happily call themselves—which is a notable thing for a mainstream, non-niche network show that began only last fall.The first post-hiatus episode had more than thirteen million viewers; the second, which featured the songs of Madonna, was close behind. Of course, it doesn’t hurt that the show follows â€Å"American Idol† on Tuesday nights—though the pairing did pain many people a couple of weeks ago, when a live edition of â€Å"Idol† ran long, causing DVRs across the land to cut off the last minutes of â€Å"Glee. † And â€Å"Glee,† although a work of fiction, is â€Å"Idol† ’s spawn, part of the current craze for watching star-making (and dream-crushing) machinery at work. Glee† was created and is written by Ryan Murphy, Brad Falchuk, and Ian Brennan. Of the three, Murphy is the best known, having created the just ended FX psychomelodrama â€Å"Nip/Tuck† (for which Falchuk was a writer and a producer) and the 1999 WB comedy â€Å"Popular,† which was also a sendup of teen-age archetypes—as in â€Å"Glee,† there was a star football player who was torn between sports and the stage—but involved much more extracurricular activity among parents and families.Except for the teachers and the administrators at McKinley High, few adults appear in â€Å"Glee,† which gives the series a cartoonish feel that’s reinforced by the fact that the grownups we do see, well meaning though they may be, are as cluelessly wrapped up in themselves as the young people are. (Oddly, or not, of the group of about ten students we hang out with two have lost a parent.It seems like a lot. ) The success of â€Å"Glee† depends on the energy and the obvious talent of its young (but way beyond high-school age) performers, and on Jane Lynch, who plays Sue Sylvester, the acid-tongued, sneaky, and completely loony cheerleading coach, whose every line of dialogue is quotable (and is duly quoted, minutes after being delivered, on Facebook pages and in Twitter feeds).Sue’s counterbalance, and nemesis, is Will Schuester (Matthew Morrison, who has a solid Broadway background and Leyendecker good looks, including thick, wavy hair that Sue mocks, in elegant variations, pretty much every time she sees Will), a youngish Spanish teacher and a graduate of McKinley High in the days when it had a top-notch show choir. Will makes it his project to bring back that glory, and he starts by tricking the captain of the football team (Cory Monteith), whom he hears singing in the shower after practice one day, into joining his ragtag crew.If Will gets funding for his group, the economy being tough—Sue’s cheerleading crew will lose theirs. Will also wants some of Sue’s girls—the Cheerios—for his group. She tells him that he doesn’t get it—that he can’t blur the lines in the rigid caste system that is high school: â€Å"Your jocks and your popular kids—up in the penthouse. Your invisibles and the kids playing live-action druids and trolls out in the forest—bottom floor. † What about the Glee kids? Will asks. What category are they in? â€Å"Sub-basement,† she says. from the issue * cartoon bank * e-mail this The real engine of the show isn’t the machinations of its characters or its unfolding plot but its basic structure. Because â€Å"Glee† is actually about a group of singers, it doesn’t seem artificial when the cast breaks into song; the music fits into the proceedings organically. The songs—which Murphy chooses—range from oldies to newies, so that there is, theoretically, something for everybody, from â€Å"Sing Sing Sin g† and â€Å"Sweet Caroline† to â€Å"Gives You Hell† and â€Å"Single Ladies. Still, it must be said, even people who love these songs may find something to hate in the style of singing sometimes showcased in â€Å"Glee†Ã¢â‚¬â€the earsplitting, maniacally melismatic car-alarm whine that Whitney Houston popularized—but, thankfully, there are quiet ballads to balance things out. Rachel, one of the choir members, has a bit of that pleading quality in her voice, but it suits her desperate ambition. She’s played by Lea Michele, who, at twenty-three, is a fifteen-year Broadway veteran.Yet her large talent doesn’t extend to the non-singing parts of her performance. I give it up for her gifts, but I don’t feel soul there. Rachel takes herself very seriously, and things very literally; one of the other kids, Artie (Kevin McHale), is wheelchair-bound, and Rachel complains to Will that Artie shouldn’t be singing â€Å"Sit Down Y ou’re Rockin’ the Boat† because he’s already sitting down. Artie’s take is that Will’s choice was meant to be ironic, and Rachel responds, â€Å"There’s nothing ironic about show choir! Of course there is, but there’s more, too—there’s also real glee, when things come together and when the characters get as much fleshing out as the stereotyping and the time constraints allow. With several production numbers per episode, almost all of which have remarkably weak choreography and poorly synched lip-synching, the writers haven’t been able to go very deep into anyone’s lif Read more http://www. newyorker. com/arts/critics/television/2010/05/10/100510crte_television_franklin#ixzz25UpjRdrc And then there’s Glee.Because there are no original songs, they’ve got to reference other works multiple times in every episode. When the show is at its best it takes cultural referents such as the video for Beyonce’s â€Å"Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It)† and turns it into something else by putting it in the context of trying to win a football game. It’s an utterly ridiculous and goofy scene that belies the reality of the way football works, but it’s also enormously satisfying and pretty funny to boot.The show’s musical numbers are to me more successful when they transport their sources to locales away from the stage or the classroom. And even when a musical number starts within the walls of William McKinley High School, if there are sequences that take us to other places and/or elsewhere in time, such as when Kurt recently sang â€Å"I Want to Hold Your Hand† for his classmates, that can also work incredibly well.But when their numbers are stagebound things often become stagnant, sucking the life out of the song and leaving a strong distaste in the mouths of many viewers, or at least those who know the original. Kurt poses for photos when he ’s not transporting us through time via the power of song. The apotheoses of these occurrences take place in the episode titled â€Å"The Substitute,† which features renditions of classic numbers from Singin’ in the Rain (Donen/Kelly 1952), which were themselves new takes on old songs.I’m not saying some texts are untouchable, but if you’re going to cover something so culturally iconic, you might want to do something totally new with it. So Gus Van Sant’s shot for shot remake of Psycho (1998)? Probably not a good idea. Conversely, Martin Scorsese’s reimagining of Ford’s The Searchers (1956) as an urban western in Taxi Driver (1976)? That works. If you don’t approach homage in this way it becomes nothing more than imitation, which might be the highest form of flattery but doesn’t make for good TV or cinema.So Glee’s rendition of Singin’ in the Rain’s title song incorporates a mash-up with Rihan na’s â€Å"Umbrella† and takes place on a stage full of water featuring the cast re-enacting moves from Gene Kelly’s classic sequence while also incorporating new moves into their set-piece number. There’s revision, and there’s imitation, and then there’s shitting on sanctity. I’m no purist and I’m not saying they shouldn’t have done it, but I would argue that despite the attempt at innovation, it doesn’t go far enough in its departure from either original.And the one thing that it’s missing that makes the movie’s original so great is passion you can feel. Kelly’s rendition takes place within the context of his falling in love with Kathy (Debbie Reynolds) and it results in Dionysian abandon, bringing to Technicolor life the giddy exhilaration that comes with new love, whereas Glee’s version is akin to watching craftsmen make shoes: there’s artistry in their production and the fin ished product is expertly made, but it lacks the soul that still makes Kelly’s sequence so resonant.Worse still is their take on â€Å"Make ‘Em Laugh,† which features Will Schuester (Matthew Morrison) and Mike Chang (Harry Shum, Jr. ) in a duet that is at times a near step for step imitation of Donald O’Connor’s version. Again, failing to revise the setting and context in an interesting way leaves their rendition flat. It lacks the visceral joy of O’Connor’s sequence, the best part of which is that it makes the audience do what the title suggests, which is laugh.Will and Chang are great dancers, but as there’s no real reason for the scene other than to show that they can do a rote imitation of the steps, their version is totally devoid of life and spontaneity, making it seem as though it’s performed by technically proficient but non-sentient automatons. There’s no reason you can’t do a scene that’s al most identical to the original, so long as you update it in such a way so as to give the audience a new way to interpret it. Take Spike Lee’s incorporation of the Love/Hate tattoo sequence from Night of the Hunter (Laughton 1955) into Do the Right Thing (1989).Robert Mitchum’s iconic scene is as seemingly inviolable as anything from Singin’ in the Rain, but by transposing it from a depression era white psychopathic murdering preacher in the deep south to Radio Raheem (Bill Nunn), a socially aware young African-American male living in what was at the time contemporary Bedford-Stuyvesant, Lee both pays homage and avoids pastiche, creating something new in the process, a model of artistic quotation that I’m afraid might be falling out of favor in our current media landscape, as evidenced on Glee and elsewhere * Why a blog and not a website? TUESDAY, 30 AUGUST 2011 Project: Art History. † Evolution of musical film genre†. â€Å"Williams and Hall both have argued that culture is not so much a set of things (television shows or paintings, for example) as a set of processes or practices through which individuals and groups come to make sense of things, including their own identities within and even against or outside the group† Stunken ; Cartwright (2009) The intention of the essay is to link evolution in cinema genres with the changes in the structure of popular culture.The quotation expresses the approach to culture as a process in which individuals interact, and this is the way the essay would like culture to be seen. Cinema is the perfect method to analyse popular culture from this point of view. Since its invention, it has given human beings a new and different opportunity of enjoying simulated worlds. Musical genre is particularly interesting because it has been present since the beginnings of cinema as one of the main Hollywood genres, and it has needed to introduce new strategies to survive. There are periods whe n it nearly disappeared before coming back in a new form (Hayward 2000).This essay is structured in such a way that it describes the periods of the genre and how its codes and conventions have been applied in each, and then analyses the main ideas from a social and theoretical point of view. But first, it may prove useful to discuss genre theory. Genre can be considered a strategy created by the cinema industry to identify a category of film. But it also can be described as a cognitive mechanism to help the viewer and filmmaker to know the expectations and hypothesis of the viewers when sitting in front of a screen to watch a film.Any genre is formed by a set of codes and conventions that the spectator has learned and can decode automatically and unconsciously. He or she feels pleasure in identification. This last point of view agrees with the one of the essay, as its aim is to connect the research on genre with what spectators experience when watching a film (Nelmes 2007) (Hayward 2000). It is also interesting to analyse what makes the spectator enjoy watching a film. Hayward (2000) identifies three stages in spectatorship theory. The first stage in the 70's treats the spectator as a passive subject.It is inspired on Freud's idea of the Oedipal complex and on Lacan's idea of the â€Å"mirror stage† that says that our identity is not coming from within, but from the way we see ourselves for the first time from the outside. In our adulthood we are in a constant state of desire that cannot be fulfilled because our unconscious mind cannot be influenced by the world around us. Freud's ideas associate the mirror stage with the relationship between the child and his mother. The male character sees his mother as an object and identifies with the father to try to meet the child's feeling of â€Å"castration† of not having access to the mother (Ward 2003).The spectator identifies the cinema screen with this â€Å"mirror†. The second stage, from the middle of the 70’s, is influenced by Laura Mulvey. She introduces the idea of sexual difference in identification with personalities and criticises the masculine point of view in cinema narrative that fetishizes women. The option for the female spectator is to identify with the passive female or with a masculine third character. In the third stage, from the 80's, we find investigations derived from the debate started by Mulvey. Some ideas talk about the bisexual position of the female child after her mirror stage.She first has the mother as her object of desire and then she has to change to the father as her object of desire. And the male spectator can also position himself bisexually, when identifying with the active and passive modes of the male character. The spectator is treated as an active subject, he or she does not occupy just one position in relation to the characters. Dyer considers that there are three periods in a genre: primitive, mature and decadent (Hayward 20 00). On the experimental primitive period, before the 30's, musical is generated as a hybrid from European operetta and American vaudeville and music hall (Hayward 2000).On the mature period, from the 30's to the 60's, first we find a director such as Busby Berkeley. His films do not pay attention to the plot, but rather, are vehicles for song and dance that are introduced in an artificial way. It is pure spectacle and sensuality. Sex is offered through the gaze (Hayward 2000). Later, songs and dances move with the narrative and are introduced on a more natural way. Fred Astaire develops an elegant, stylised style and Gene Kelly develops a more energetic one. The music was often composed by talented authors brought from Broadway.In the 50's, it is the first time the studio system pay special attention to the youth audience, linked to the rise in the music record industry. Singers as Elvis Presley and Cliff Richard became actors (Hayward 2000). For Altman musicals of the mature perio d are an â€Å"ode to marriage†. The narrative is based on the principle of pairing and mirroring. Male and female are paired, maturity is paired to immaturity. The main characters are mirrored in other couples; settings are mirrored in other settings (Hayward 2000). This conclusion was made following a synchronic analysis, i. . , just focusing in a moment in the film, specifically in the final scene. Recently, this same author has reflected about that approach and has analysed musical films diachronically. He proposes two hypotheses. Following the first one, in musicals main characters are first paired with a â€Å"wrong† partner to be finally paired to the â€Å"right† one. Films such as â€Å"An American in Paris† (Minnelli, 1951) follow this structure. The second hypothesis is more speculative. It is based in the idea that the relationships of the characters turn from homosocial to heterosexual.This structure is found in many films, from â€Å"An Ame rican in Paris† (Minnelli, 1951), to â€Å"Grease† (Kleiser, 1978). In â€Å"Grease†, the main actress and actor belong to a group where all members are women or all men, respectively, and eventually left these groups to become a couple. This can be seen as an evolution from childhood to adulthood. The author also speculates on whether this structure tries to avoid the character moving from a homosocial relationship to a homosexual relationship (Altman 2010). Cohan (2010) considers that the dual register between narrative and performance is one of the distinctive conventions of the genre.It breaks the dominant codes of realism in cinema, whose aim is to guide the audience through the story, so the codes and conventions become â€Å"transparent† to avoid distracting them (Nelmes 2007). The concept of diegesis refers to the fictional world described inside the story. In musicals, filmmakers can add extra-diegetic shots that have no logical reason for being t here. And they can add a diegetic to call public attention to the star, to show that they are amazed when they see and hear the main characters dancing or singing, and to create the illusion that the real non-diegetic audience is part of that public (Hayward 2000).Dyer (2002) distinguishes three tendencies of musicals: one that keeps narrative and number separate, another that identifies narrative with problems and numbers with scape, but trying to integrate the number through signals, and a last one that dissolves this distinction between narrative and number, which makes this narrative also utopian. Richard Dyer writes that the strategy of the genre is to â€Å"provide the spectator with an utopia through the form of entertainment†.Any film reflects these categories: abundance, energy, intensity, transparency and community in opposition to the real society, where we can find: scarcity, exhaustion, dreariness, manipulation and fragmentation. Abundance is shown through the lu xurious costumes and huge settings. Energy is shown through the dance and also the camera work. Intensity refers to experiencing emotions directly. Transparency refers to spontaneity. Community refers to the sense of belonging. This utopia is associated with the specific mainstream ideology of this period: capitalism, economic and social stability (Hayward 2000), (Stacey 1994).Of the decadent period, from the 60's, codes and conventions are questioned. Musicals are more realistic; subjects such as racism and delinquency are treated. Examples are â€Å"West Side Story† (Wise, 1961), â€Å"Saturday Night Fever† (Badham, 1977) and â€Å"Grease† (Kleiser, 1978). We also find Julie Andrew's films such as â€Å"The Sound of Music† (Wise, 1965). This is identified as a family film that follows traditional conventions. But its structure differs from the classical one. There is no more a duality, instead, there is a female main character and the male character has a secondary role.She represents liberated femininity. In Barbra Streisand's films – â€Å"The Way We Were† (Pollack, 1973) – the girl needs a partner but does not always achieve it. When she fails to do it, the film shows her drive for freedom and female independence (Farmer 2010), (Robertsib Wojcik 2010). This reflects how conventions in cinema have changed with changes in society; in the 70's women rebelled against the traditional patriarchal society. It has been almost 50 years since the period of decline of the musical genre begun. It looked as if it was going to disappear. But lately, we are seeing a revival of the genre.Sometimes it is successful, such as â€Å"Moulin Rouge! † (Luhrman, 2001), â€Å"Chicago† (Marshall, 2002) and â€Å"Mamma Mia† (Lloyd, 2008), sometimes it is not, such as â€Å"Nine† (Marshall, 2009). At this point, we can ask ourselves about the reasons for bringing back musicals. Cohan (2010) mentions David R ooney and Jonathan Bing describing them. They mention how development of new technology can help with the task of shooting and editing, and reducing costs. Also, the after-market of the fans of musical can be economically attractive, as they are repeating viewers, so DVDs and soundtracks would sell well – as well as merchandising would do.Another interesting fact is that the youth audience has grown up watching music videos and Disney's animated films. Finally, another reason can be that the golden period of musicals happened during the 30's Big Depression. Maybe it is not a coincidence that in the actual moment of economic recession, the public is going back to watch films that supply escapism (Burgess-Alllen 2010). Feuer (2010) argues that in the decline period, there are reconstructive musicals and deconstructive musicals. Reconstructive musicals can be â€Å"Moulin Rouge† (Luhrman, 2001), â€Å"Chicago† (Marshall, 2002), â€Å"Nine† (Marshall, 2009). Cabaret† (Fosse) in 1972 already has influences of art cinema (Hayward 2000). They are targeted at art-house audiences, while keep the classical conventions, and show an interest in aesthetic and nostalgia for the past. Following the these, â€Å"Moulin Rouge† (Luhrman, 2001) mixes cinematic references, historical intertexts and cultural allusions, this makes it difficult to define which genre it belongs to as it can be considered a musical, a melodrama, and author film, or even a music video (Nelmes 2007).Deconstructive Musicals are oriented towards the teenage public and create new conventions, they do not represent lead performers but amateurs that love singing and dancing, they â€Å"take up the position of spectators of Old Hollywood musicals in a world where it is no longer possible to be Fred Astaire† (Daldry, 2000). Following these, there are productions for TV, such as â€Å"High School Musical† (Ortega, 2006) and, more recently, â€Å"Glee† (Murphy, 2009). Conventions in â€Å"High School Musical† (Ortega, 2006) follow the traditional ones. It follows the principle of duality with two main characters.What it adds new to the genre is a contrast between authenticity, represented by the main couple, and manipulated artistry, represented by another couple. It also adds a reflection of a rigidly hierarchical world, where the characters move between conformism and rebellion. The characters are stereotypes: jocks, cheerleaders, and brainiacs. â€Å"Glee† (Murphy, 2009) takes the idea of â€Å"High School Musical† and exaggerates it. We again find the same stereotypes but they are taken to the extreme of satire. All the characters know that to be someone at the school they have to belong to a group: cheerleaders, football team†¦Wearing a distinctive uniform is important for them. â€Å"Glee† also adds being playful with reality. It highlights being a simulation of reality and reminds us often about it, advising us not to take it too seriously. The narrative is an utopia in the same way as the performances. And this utopia again follows a specific ideology. Subjects that affect teenagers are treated: pregnancy, alcohol, sexuality, family relationships, †¦ (Cohan 2010), (Payne 2010). Another thing these films have changed from classic films is that musical soundtracks are not created specifically for the film, now it appropriates pop music or music from other films.The concept of film genre is directly related to the concept of intertextuality. The film is always going to be framed by the genre as each film belonging to it uses conventions previously used by other members of it (Nelmes 2007). But this can be a contradiction, because intertextuality is also associated with taking the text beyond the boundaries of the genre. This semiotic term was first used by Julia Kristeva, who understands that the text connects in two ways, first the author to the reader and then t he text to other texts (Chandler 2009). The growing preponderance of visuals in ads has enhanced the ambiguity of meaning embedded in message structures. Earlier advertising usually states its message quite explicitly through the medium of written text†¦ , but starting in the mid-1920s visual representation became more common, and the relationship between text and visual image became complementary – that is, the text explained the visual. In the post-war period, and especially since the early 1960s, the function of text moved away from explaining the visual and towards a more cryptic form, in which text appeared as a kind of ‘key' to the visual.In all, the effect was to make the commercial message more ambiguous; a ‘reading' of it depended on relating elements in the ad's internal structure to each other, as well as drawing in references from the external world. † Leiss (1997) This paragraph talks specifically about the use of intertextuality in adverti sing, which is not the subject of the essay, but it is included here because it expresses that the way creatives communicate messages has evolved from being explicit to being ambiguous. Leiss talks about how the â€Å"receiver's brain is an indispensable component of the total communication system†.Explaining it clearly, the spectator is no longer considered stupid. Viewers have a wider visual knowledge that make them able to understand messages transmitted on ambiguous ways. We have grown with the rapid association of images in film, TV, and advertisement (Kolker 2002). The visual knowledge of the spectator has helped to make it more sophisticated. The basis of the plot remains simple but the filmmaker can and must introduce mechanisms to appeal a target audience that has become highly media literate.As a result of the the research can be taken the most interesting ideas about the way contemporaneous filmmakers apply the codes and conventions of the genre. They follow some o f the conventions of films from the classical era: keeping a simple plot, selling an ideology. And they add to the genre: using soundtracks from pop music or other films instead of creating it specifically for the film, the creation of fictional worlds that make reference to another fictional world, playing with reality and stereotypes, playing with the dual register between narrative and performance.It can be found in several essays and articles that talk about contemporaneous musical films being postmodern, as the following one written by Edwards (Cohan 2010): â€Å"The charm and artistic merit of the original High School Musical movie lies in its ability to consider a sophisticated theatrical and musical heritage and consequently revise it for a modern audience †¦ it simultaneously conforms to genre expectations and pays homage to its textual influences while taking a postmodern delight in exposing its own limitations and playing with some gentle pastiche of literary and ci nematic predecessors†.Flanagan (2002) wrote about the features of a film that can be identified as postmodern. The first ones are playfulness and self reference. It reminds us that it is a construction, that is not real, and that we must not take it seriously. The musical film's creators play with the way they integrate the performances in the narrative, with the stereotypes. It follows the tendency of dissolving the distinction between narrative and number, meaning that this narrative is also utopian. The second ones are generic blurring and intertextuality.The use of references to other texts is very usual in musicals. The third ones are popular and commercial media mixed with high culture. Current musical films do not have a soundtrack created for them, but they appropriate music. The fourth ones are fragmentation and death of representation. This refers to the way audience make sense of things through representations of reality instead of doing it through the reality itsel f. And finally uncertainty and the loss of context as consequence of the previous ones. According to this, films such as â€Å"Glee† (Murphy, 2009) can be considered postmodern.But probably to label a film as postmodern is not going to influence the audience as to whether to be interested on it or not, what probably can be considered more important is the â€Å"sophisticated hyperconsciousness† in contemporaneous popular entertainment, i. e. , the high degree of media literacy in the audience that allows playing with the conventions (Collins 1993), (Nelmes 2007). Why is Glee Postmodern In this blog and our discussion of postmodern television, the TV showGlee  has come up as an example.. One of the theories we’ve learned about postmodernism is that it rejects the idea of metanarratives (stories about stories).In postmodernism there is not black and white, good vs. evil, etc. In the show  Glee  there is the character Puck, a football player who seems to be y our typical tough-guy bully. However, even though Puck is a bully and even shoves around some of the other characters that we like, we still do not dislike him. We don’t see him as the villain even though typically the jock/bully is seen as the â€Å"bad guy. † Plurality is another term we learned regarding postmodernism, and this is when there are multiple stories and multiple identities.This show has so many characters, each with their own personal story and all of their stories get told in one way or another. Within Season 2 episode 8 the character ‘David’ is focused on and he is being questioned about whether he is gay or not. The glee club is a dance singing club but within this is another story. This gives the program room to expand and here for example the program deals with modern day issues that are publicised in the media. Grand narratives are clearly contradicted in this episode as homosexuality is put in the limelight and is praised.One of the male characters shows very feminine attributes and in their rehearsal wears a top which says â€Å"Likes Boys. † This is done to try to numb the shock of homosexuals coming out and normalise it so that the program can move forward. There are different races, different personalities, different handicaps; different cliques, all represented in this show and all of their stories are being told. Nostalgia is another postmodern term represented in  Glee. Many of the songs performed on this show are songs from the past for example Les Miserables – Kareoke and Born this Way.The teacher in charge of Glee Club, Mr. Schuester, loves doing songs from when he was younger and this really brings nostalgia to the show. Convergence, the flow of media content across a range of different platforms is also part of this show. You can download the songs performed on the show, many viewers discuss the show online, and many people attempt to win parts on the show by creating videos of thems elves singing and performing and posting them online. There are many forms of media involved with this show other than simply watching the show.Not to mention the fact that you can also watch the show online, just one more form of media regarding this show Glee draws people in by creating stereotypical situations and characters, each with their own flaws that the audience can easily identify with. This identification process allows viewers to become more intimate with the show, especially when the actors begin to sing songs that modern viewers already know and love. Fox originally took a chance on the new musical project, but hedged their bets with innovative marketing strategies and with a huge lead in audience from American Idol.The use of cultural classics and songs that recently premiered on the top 40, drew in the American Idol audience members specifically, and music lovers generally. This target audience was strong in the 18-49 demographic, and particularly strong with women. The strength in these demographics enabled Glee to become the 3rd most expensive show to buy advertisements on. This advertising revenue is supplemented with a steady stream of money made from selling singles on ITunes. This model has been so successful that Glee has now become a tent-pole of its own and anchors the entire comedy lineup on Tuesdays. contrast, in recent years American television has brought us Scrubs, Ugly Betty and now Glee, shows that combine boldly imaginative approaches to narrative with a humour and humanity that is often exhilarating to behold. While we seem to be mired in an endless debate about platforms, content, news values and the multimedia revolution, the Americans have managed to retain an enthusiasm for the dramatic possibilities of television. And what's clear is that those possibilities are founded upon an enduring belief in sharp, savvy writing and deeply committed performances.At first sight, Glee (C4) follows a stupefyingly familiar path. It's se t in a midwest high school, amid the over-fictionalised world of geeks and jocks. And in a nod to the High School Musical fad, it focuses on a glee club, or singing society. However, Glee takes these tropes and cliches and stretches them in surprising directions to create a whole new form, as different to its original source as a butterfly is to a caterpillar. Last week, teen pregnancy, the difficulty of coming out in high school, and sexual attraction between teacher and pupil were plot themes but, unlike many American shows, not moral â€Å"issues†.Glee is possessed of a liberal heart but its balls, as well as some of its most memorable lines, belong to the politically incorrect coach, Sue Sylvester (played by Jane Lynch). Like two opposing grammarians, kitsch sentiment and killer sarcasm wrestle over every line. Yet, at the point where conventional drama plunges into pathos, Glee slips into song. At one moment the school quarterback was singing â€Å"I'll Stand by Youâ₠¬  to the ultrasound of his unwanted child (which isn't his), the next his friends were rallying round in a stirring rendition of â€Å"Lean on Me†.A lot of the humour stems from snappy social observation, but the show also boasts the kind of verbal extravagance that, in the wrong hands, can sound written rather than said. Typical was the scene in which a former schoolgirl stalker, who once responded to rejection by eating a lethally hot pepper, advised her equally deluded successor: â€Å"Let me tell you a few things I learned from two years of intense psychotherapy and an oesophagus transplant. The reason that line worked is the same reason the songs and outrageous storylines work: because the characters are immersed in their own reality. They never act as if they've said something funny. There's no pause for laughter, no nods or winks, as Glee shows the same faith in its audience as it does in its characterisations. Laughter isn't forced, so isn't false. In common with U gly Betty and Scrubs, there is plenty of cultural commentary and knowing asides but failure to spot the reference doesn't undermine the scene. The action just moves swiftly on.If Glee is postmodern, it doesn't bother knocking twice. The show has attracted a lot of plaudits, particularly in America, so it's probably soon due for a backlash. This might be an opportune moment, then, to say that the hype is deserved. It's a rare and heartening pleasure to watch so much energy and emotion expended in the unfashionable cause of family entertainment. Some of its fans might say Doctor Who performs a similar feat, though really the nearest British television comes, or attempts to come, to Glee is in shows like Strictly Come Dancing.Where US networks can be persuaded to invest in good writing and acting, our TV executives prefer to back the all-dancing duo of celebrity and reality. Only in an atmosphere in which originality is viewed as marginal or suspect could a series like Life of Riley (B BC1) be produced. It may seem unfair to pick out this harmless sitcom as an illustration of the failings of British comedy drama, but perhaps not quite as unfair as the decision to recommission another series. Why is Glee Postmodern?Glee is an American musical-comedy drama series. It started in 2009 and is produced by Ryan Murphy, Brad Falchuk and Ian Brennan, who originally wanted Glee to be a film, but decided to make it more interesting as a series. The episode I have chosen to focus on is the ‘Britney/Brittany’ episode, which pays tribute to Britney Spears when a member of the club Brittany Pierce experiences an anesthesia-induced hallucination in which she recreates iconic Spears moments, and comes to self-realization.I believe that this episode shows examples of being postmodern, as for a start the songs are in the past, and therefore have been created from an idea that’s already happened, Postmodernism postulates that many, if not all, apparent realities a re only social constructs and are therefore subject to change so Glee supports this view, it highlights that it is taking the original idea (song) that we all know from Britney Spears, and constructing it into their own, like the ‘Toxic’ version they performed on stage, straight away it’s obvious that this episode is showing pastiche, as the hole episode is making tributes to classic pop culture, and it gives us as audience ( or those who are old enough) a nostalgic feeling. One of the theories learned about postmodernism is that it rejects the idea of metanarratives (stories about stories). In postmodernism there is not black and white, good vs. evil, etc. There is the character Puck, a football player who seems to be your typical tough-guy bully.However, even though Puck is a bully and even shoves around some of the other characters that we like, we still do not dislike him. We don’t see him as the villain even though typically the jock/bully is seen as the â€Å"bad guy,† and in this episode, he shows examples of this by fitting in with the rest of the club and wanting to perform the Britney songs, when typically you’d expect the ‘jock’ to go against this idea as it wasn’t ‘cool enough’.Plurality is another term regarding postmodernism, and this is when there are multiple stories and multiple identities, and this is shown in this particular episode when although the focus is on Britney, there are several storylines going ahead with each individual character like with Will coming to terms that the girl he loves if with someone else, and then the high school problems the glee club members are all facing.The characters are also known for having multiple identities, this episode especially shows the members like Brittany and Rachel dressed up mimicking Britney Spears, and Santana also comes across as being tough, but in this episode she performs with Brittany in ‘Me Against the Musi c’ and we find out she is also in love with Brittany. Many of the songs performed on this show are songs from the past. The teacher in charge of Glee Club, Mr.Schuster, loves doing songs from when he was younger and this really brings nostalgia to the show, but in this episode he rejects the idea of doing Britney week, as he believes she gives out the wrong messages, but eventually he comes around and performs with them, which causes outrage to the school, which is also very postmodern, although Glee is a fun, light-hearted comedy series, it can also have many adult references in, especially in this episode, which I believe to be very postmodern as it ignores the typical conventions of a ‘high school drama’ and actually takes the stereotypes to an extreme but twists them.Glee has also been quoted to be described as hyper-postmodern media culture. A mash-up of generic influences, intertextual references, music, and ideological content that is both eerily nostalgic and forward-thinking, and this episode is a prime example showing all these things, the fact that the students go to the dentist to get their teeth fixed which is an ‘underlying’ important message, influencing the audience to take care of their selves, its then twisted when they get put under an anesthesia, and hallucinate Britney Spears fantasies, Glee is known for taking simple, conventional ideas and turning them to almost inappropriate. Like two opposing grammarians, kitsch sentiment and killer sarcasm wrestle over every line. Yet, at the point where conventional drama plunges into pathos, Glee slips into song† was quoted by a news article, showing how Glee takes a completely different take on high school drama. Convergence, the flow of media content across a range of different platforms is also part of this show.You can download the songs performed on the show, many viewers discuss the show online, and many people attempt to win parts on the show by creating videos of themselves singing and performing and posting them online. There are many forms of media involved with this show other than simply watching the show. Not to mention the fact that you can also watch the show online, just one more form of media regarding this show. In conclusion, I believe that Glee is postmodern because it uses examples of hyperreality, pastiche, intertextuality and is not your ordinary high school drama.

Cause and extent of sleep deprivation

Emotional issues such as anxiety and depression can often lead to sleep deprivation or in worse cases, insomnia. Studies suggest that sleep loss may have an effect on the cardiovascular, endocrine, Immune, and nervous systems. The scope of employee assistance program needed The Intermediate EPA is able to identify and manage the causes of sleep deprivation that affects workplace performance. The workplace Is therefore an ideal setting in reaching a large group of individuals with potential mental health problems, emotional or other impairing issues.An overview of a program that could be Implemented A program that can be implemented referring to Sleep Deprivation is a lunch-time information session. The session would only last half an hour, and would cover the causes of sleep deprivation and how it affects the work place. We would talk about different ways to combat sleep deprivation so that employees now have broader knowledge of the issue and can easily work their way to fixing the issue. These sessions would be held once every three months to help keep the employees awareness levels up. Sources needed to implement and maintain this program would be computers/ laptops; to conduct research on the topic of sleep deprivation, and to compose slide presentations as well as typing up/print fact sheets for employees to keep and take mom with them. Books can also be used to research the history of sleep deprivation so the key speaker is able to answer any difficult questions asked by employees. Personnel needed to develop the program The overall personnel required to attend would be all employees, however the program would also be compulsory.The organizations manager and health and safety committee leader would be conducting research on the topic of sleep deprivation and organizing a presentation room for it to be held in A Key speaker would be the person that addresses all employees and presents all the information o them, also answering any questions or issues that may be raised. The key speaker would be chosen by the manager but someone of importance and is responsible, preferably a team leader within the organization.Administrative structure and support needed to evaluate and monitor implementation and progress of the program Cost factors involved in developing and implementing the program List of Expenditures for developing and maintaining the lunch time information session: – Promotional materials (flyers to be given out to employees) – Extra wages for the key beakers, manager and health & safety leader – Productivity loss due to employee participation in program Approaches to promote the program to employees and build participation Emails session.There would also be a flyer regarding the EPA on the organizations intentioned. Failure to attend and participate would have consequences such as having to clean the staff room lunch area for a couple of days etc Potential benefits to the organization of successful implementa tion of the program. The key benefits of this program would be that all employees are more aware of the issue (sleep deprivation).Since ways to combat sleep deprivation would be covered as well as take home information flyers, certain employees who do suffer from this now have more information. They wouldn't have had to conduct their own research or spend their own money to help fix this issue, therefore are more likely to help themselves. If employees are sleeping better they tend to have more energy, are more focused and will work better. This would increase productivity, as well as employees taking less sick days resulting in less absenteeism and Presentments also.