Frq Apush Farmers vs Industrialization Essay Example for Free

Frq Apush Farmers vs Industrialization Essay The Gilded Age, a time of industrious growth and a surge of new immigrants. Americans had witnessed the death of rural life dominated by farmers and the birth of an urban and industrial America dominated by bankers, industrialists, and city dwellers. Overproduction led farmers into debt leaving them just an overflow of crops due to the repressed prices. Tariff Policies forced farmers to buy manufactured goods for survival. Farmers lost their status and power due to industrialization. Let’s just say farmers felt betrayed by their government and not letting them have voice. Overproduction was the most vexing problem during this time. The American farmer produced too much for their own good. As levels rise, the use of farm machinery increased it allowed the farmer to grow even more, new farming techniques, and the spread of railroads l made markets full of produce. As more and more crops were in the markets, it made the prices fall for the produce. Farmers were growing more and making less money. Of all the problems a farmer faced, overproduction was the gravest. Not making enough to recoup expenses because of depressed crop values, farmers attempted to compensate by producing more. This made the problem worse. The lack of income drove farmers into ever-deepening debt. Farmers fell victim to a tariff policy of the U.S. during the Gilded Age. It forced them to buy all the manufacture goods they needed for survival on a market protected by tariff legislation at high prices while selling what they produced on an unprotected market at reduced prices because of oversupply and foreign competitors. The government put a tax on the manufactured goods being imported into the U.S. by other manufactures. They hoped to make them more expensive than the American goods. For consumers would buy American goods. During this process it made American rapidly industrialized. Famers felt doubly discriminated against because they felt the tariffs were applied primarily to manufactured goods while their interests were left to fend for themselves. One of the hardest impacts due to industrialization for farmers was that they had to deal with the recognition that rural and agricultural America was given way to an urban and industrialized American. Dominated by the interests of big business, and government. Famers found the major political parties during the time unresponsive to their demands that government deal with their problems. Farmers no longer controlled the social, economic, or political systems. Which was a constant struggle for them to be heard, and did not feel appreciated. Farmers were impacted by industrialization in many ways causing many problems. Making a huge amount of them very unhappy during the Gilded Age.

Genetic Engineering: Genetic Criticism :: Literature Essays Literary Criticism

Genetic Criticism      Ã‚  Ã‚   Source study is a unique approach to a work of literature because it seems to have little to do with the completed work itself. Source study, or genetic criticism, has as its focus all of those things that influenced, or may have influenced, a literary work. By this branch of criticism, Wilfred Guerin explains, "... we mean the growth and development of a work as seen through a study of the author's manuscripts during the stages of composition of the work, of notebooks, of sources and analogues, and of various other influences (not necessarily sociological or psychological) that lie in the background of the work" (292). A genetic critic hopes to find clues as to the author's intention by noting and examining the choices an author has made during the production of a work. One of the assumptions made by these critics, Guerin adds, is that such research will lead to "a richer, more accurate appreciation of the work" (292). In practice, the light of appreciation , accumulated from such research, shines most brightly on the artist, while the work itself fades into the background.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Perhaps this focus on the writer is not such a bad thing. Chauncey Sanders writes that the study of a writer's sources leads to a clearer understanding of an artist's originality or lack of the same (165). While it may be useful to spot literary robbery, Sanders believes that genetic criticism has a more important role: "It should not be confined to the discovery of such plagiarisms . . . but rather it should involve the analyzing of a piece of literature with a view to discovering whence came the inspiration, the material, and the technique whereby the work came into being" (162). Again, though, it is the artist who is the main subject of this type of research. "We must learn and study the sources of a Chaucer or a Shakespeare," writes Sanders, "in order to appreciate the nature and extent of his originality" (364-365). Any greater understanding of the work would result only indirectly from this approach to literature, an approach which seems especially susceptible to becoming a mere celebration of the artist.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   John Holmes' analysis of Robert Frost's composition of "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening" illustrates how genetic criticism tends to reveal more about the poet than the poem.

A Divine Image: a Direct Contrast to the Humanitarian Idealism Essay

In his 1932 article, â€Å"An Interpretation of Blake’s â€Å"‘A Divine Image,'† Stephen Larrabee views the entire poem as a direct contrast to the â€Å"humanitarian idealism† (307) of â€Å"The Divine Image,† with the author making direct line-by-line comparisons of the two. Not until 1959, however, does a critic actually examine Blake’s â€Å"virtues of delight.† In his The Piper & the Bard: A Study of William Blake, Robert Gleckner traces the psychological roots of each of those virtues, while asserting that Mercy, Pity, and Peace are each a part of, but distinct from, the fourth and greatest virtue – Love. Gleckner finally affirms the â€Å"human form divine† as a composite of all of the four virtues. Gleckner returns in 1961 with a comparison between â€Å"The Divine Image† and â€Å"The Human Abstract.† While primarily concerned with â€Å"The Human Abstract,† Gleckner does position the unity o f humanity and divinity in the four virtues of â€Å"The Divine Image† against the fall into fragmentation of the later poem. Gleckner also dismisses â€Å"A Divine Image,† the poem sometimes compared with â€Å"The Divine Image,† as a work with no subtlety of theme. Another comparison between â€Å"The Divine Image† and â€Å"The Human Abstract† occurs in Harold Bloom’s 1963 text, Blake’s Apocalypse: A Study in Poetic Argument. Here, Bloom asserts the deliberate incompleteness of â€Å"The Divine Image† by arguing that its God is a â€Å"monster of abstractions, formed out of the supposedly human element in each of Innocence’s four prime virtues† (41). Bloom continues by exploring the changes in the virtues from one poem to the other, finally exposing them as â€Å"founded upon the exploiting selfishness of natural man† (143). â€Å"The Divine Image† receives due critical recognition for the first time in 1964, when E. D. Hirsch asserts the centrality of the poem to the Songs of Innocence and of Experience by proposing as its them e the divinity of humanity and the humanity of divinity. Hirsch theorizes that Blake’s choice of virtues reveals his identification with God the Son (the New Testament God) over God the Father (the Old Testament God). In his 1967 discussion of the Songs of Innocence and of Experience, Sir Geoffrey Keynes concerns himself primarily with the plate of â€Å"The Divine Image.† Keynes first affirms the theme of the poem as â€Å"the identification of man with God† (Plate 18), and he then continues by arguing that the decoration on the plate – â€Å"a strange flame-like growth, half vegetable and half fire† (Plate 18) – is a symbol of human life. Meanwhile, David J. Smith returns to a comparison between â€Å"The Divine Image† and â€Å"A Divine Image† in a 1967 article entitled, appropriately enough, â€Å"Blake’s ‘The Divine Image.'† According to Smith, the less definite â€Å"A† in the title â€Å"A Divine Image† allows him to compare that poem’s remotely situated God with the immanent God of â€Å"The Divine Image.† Smith continues by placing the poetic speaker of â€Å"The Divine Image† in a state of innocence, thus explaining the â€Å"simplistic† unity of the virtues in the poem. John Holloway enters the critical discussion concerning â€Å"The Divine Image† in his 1968 text, Blake: The Lyric Poetry. In his rather straight, new-critical reading of Blake’s poems, Holloway compares the diction and meter of â€Å"The Divine Image† with that of hymns of the period. Holloway asserts that the poem contains no visionary quality because it is too neatly constructed – and because that neat construction invites a retort by the reader. Eben Bass’s 1970 article, â€Å"Songs of Innocence and of Experience: The Thrust of Design,† contains a narrow discussion of the relationship between the reversed â€Å"S† curve of the flame-plant in the plate of â€Å"The Divine Image† and Blake’s dramatization of the â€Å"two contrary statesà ¢â‚¬  of humanity. Robert Gleckner returns to the critical conversation in 1977 with his note concerning â€Å"Blake and the Four Daughters of God.† In this brief article, Gleckner argues that the allegory of the Four Daughters of God may be a source for Blake’s four virtues in â€Å"The Divine Image.† Gleckner continues by positing that Blake’s replacement of two of the â€Å"daughters† – Truth and Justice – with the virtues of Pity and Love might reveal his affirmation of the unity of divinity and humanity, for Truth and Justice may be viewed as Old Testament moral virtues that are bypassed by the New Testament Christ. Zachary Leader approaches the plate of â€Å"The Divine Image† from a different angle when he asserts in 1981 that the plate reinforces the poem’s theme (God as both transcendent and immanent) by positioning a Christ figure at the plate’s bottom (Earth) and angelic figures at the plate’s top (Heaven). Leader argues that the abstract quality of the poem reflects Blake’s dilemma in dealing with the qualities of an abstract God. Heather Gle n’s thorough examination of â€Å"The Divine Image† in her 1983 work, Vision and Disenchantment: Blake’s Songs and Wordsworth’s Lyrical Ballads, posits Blake’s poem as an â€Å"exploration of the dynamics of prayer† (150) by comparing it with Alexander Pope’s â€Å"The Universal Prayer.† Glen demonstrates the similarities between the structure of â€Å"The Divine Image† and the structure of a scientific experiment. She then proves that the poem moves from the abstraction of the four virtues to their embodiment in the human form divine. Finally, Glen reveals the two-edged nature of the virtues of Mercy and Pity by arguing that each contains a presumption of inequality within itself (an argument somewhat similar to that made by Bloom in Blake’s Apocalypse). Stanley Gardner briefly notes the plate of â€Å"The Divine Image† in his 1986 text, Blake’s Innocence and Experience Retraced. Gardner asserts that the design of the plate deals with the â€Å"ideal of reconciliation derived from the fulfillment of Christian compassion† (54). David Lindsay also concerns himself with the abstract virtues of â€Å"The Divine Image† in his 1989 work, Reading Blake’s Songs. Lindsay demonstrates the transforming power that â€Å"The Human Abstract† has upon the virtues of â€Å"The Divine Image† by asserting that the idolatry of the concepts of pity and mercy â€Å"propagates the suffering on which its idols thrive† (80). Finally (and perhaps fittingly), E. P. Thompson positions â€Å"The Divine Image† as the â€Å"axle upon which the Songs of Innocence turn† (146) in his 1993 text, Witness against the Beast: William Blake and the Moral Law. Thompson continues by exposing the â€Å"egalitarian humanism† (153) that underlies â€Å"The Divine Image.† According to Thompson, the poem concerns not divine humanity, but human divinity. Thompson does assert (like Hirsch) that Blake emphasizes the humanity of God the Son over the divinity of God the Father, but he concludes by demonstrating that the poet does not elevate Christ above the rest of the moral creation that shares in the same divine essence.

Grizzly Bear Facts (Ursus arctos horribilis)

The grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) is a subspecies of brown bear found in North America. While all grizzlies are brown bears, not all brown bears are grizzlies. According to some specialists, the grizzly bear lives inland, while the North American brown bear lives on the coast due to its reliance on food sources like salmon. Meanwhile, the Kodiac brown bear lives in the Kodiac Archipelago of Alaska. While habitat affects their appearance and behavior, there is no genetic difference between these bears. Thus, most scientists simply refer to any brown bear living in North America as a North American brown bear. Fast Facts: Grizzly Bear Scientific Name: Ursus arctos horribilisOther Names: North American brown bearDistinguishing Features: Large brown bear with a muscular shoulder hump.Average Size: 6.5 ft (1.98 m); 290 to 790 lb (130 to 360 kg)Diet: OmnivorousAverage Life Span: 25 yearsHabitat: Northwestern North AmericaConservation Status: Least ConcernKingdom: AnimaliaPhylum: ChordataClass: MammaliaOrder: CarnivoraFamily: UrsidaeFun Fact: Adult male grizzly bears weigh about twice as much as females. Description Brown bears are easily distinguished from black bears by their large muscular shoulder hump, short ears, and rump that is lower than the shoulders. Because they eat a lower protein diet, grizzly bears tend to be smaller than coastal brown bears, but they are still very large. The average female weighs between 130 and 180 kg (290 to 400 lb), while males typically weigh between 180 and 360 kg (400 to 790 lb). Grizzly bears range in color from blond to black. Most bears are brown with darker legs and gray or blond tipped hairs on their back and flanks. Their long claws are well-adapted to digging. Lewis and Clark described the bear as grisley, which could have referred to the grizzled appearance of the bears gray-or-gold-tipped fur, or to the gruesome ferocity of the animal. Distribution Originally, grizzly bears ranged across much of North America, from Mexico through northern Canada. Hunting greatly reduced the bears range. Presently, there are about 55,000 grizzly bears, mostly found in Alaska, Canada, Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho. Grizzly bear range over time. Cephas Diet and Predators The grizzly bear, together with the gray wolf, is the apex predator in its range. Grizzlies pursue large prey (i.e. deer, bison, moose, elk, caribou, and black bears), smaller prey (i.e. voles, marmots, ground squirrels, voles, bees, and moths), fish (i.e. trout, bass, and salmon), and shellfish. Grizzly bears are omnivorous, so they also eat grasses, pine nuts, berries, and tubers. Grizzly bears scavenge carcasses, and they will eat human food and garbage when available. The bears have been known to kill and eat humans, but about 70% of human fatalities are caused by females defending their young. While adult grizzlies dont have predators, cubs may be killed by wolves or by other brown bears. Grizzly bears eat grass as well as meat. Keith Bradley / Getty Images Reproduction and Life Cycle Grizzly bears reach sexual maturity around five years of age. They mate in the summer. Embryo implantation is delayed until the female seeks a den for the winter. If she does not gain sufficient weight over the summer, she will have a miscarriage. Grizzly bears do not truly hibernate, but the females energy is diverted toward gestation while she sleeps. She gives birth to one to four cubs in the den and nurses them until summer comes. The mother stays with her cubs and fiercely defends them for about two years, but then she chases them away and avoids them if the bears meet later in life. A female does not mate when caring for her cubs, so the grizzly has a slow reproductive rate. Female bears live somewhat longer than males. The average lifespan is about 22 years for a male and 26 years for a female. This disparity is most likely caused by the injuries male bears incur while fighting for mates. Grizzly bears can breed with other brown bears, black bears, and polar bears. However, these hybrids are rare because the species and subspecies dont usually have overlapping ranges. Conservation Status The IUCN Red List categorizes the brown bear, which includes the grizzly, as least concern. Overall, the species population is stable. However, the grizzly is considered threatened in the United States and endangered in parts of Canada. Threats include habitat loss from human encroachment, human-bear conflict, pollution, and climate change. While the bear is protected in North America, reintroducing it into its previous range is a slow process, partly because the grizzly has such a slow life cycle. Even so, the grizzly was delisted from the Endangered Species Act in June 2017. As an example of the species recovery, the grizzly population in Yellowstone National Park has risen from 136 bears in 1975 to about 700 bears in 2017. Sources Herrero, Stephen (2002). Bear Attacks: Their Causes and Avoidance. Guilford, Conn.: Lyons Press. ISBN 978-1-58574-557-9.Mattson, J.; Merrill, Troy (2001). Extirpations of Grizzly Bears in the Contiguous United States, 1850–2000. Conservation Biology. 16 (4): 1123–1136. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00414.xMcLellan, B.N.; Proctor, M.F.; Huber, D. Michel, S. (2017). Ursus arctos. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN. 2017: e.T41688A121229971. doi:10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-3.RLTS.T41688A121229971.enMiller, Craig R.; Waits, Lisette P.; Joyce, Paul (2006). Phylogeography and mitochondrial diversity of extirpated brown bear (Ursus arctos) populations in the contiguous United States and Mexico. Molecular Ecology, 15 (14): 4477–4485. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.03097.xWhitaker, John O. (1980). The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mammals. Chanticleer Press, New York. ISBN 0-394-50762-2.