Analysis of The Stronger by August Strindberg Essay -- Performance Art

The Stronger by August Strindberg is a play that is filled with irony. One of the first things noticed in this play is that the characters have no names, nor are they labeled by any type of status. Rather than having names like most plays, the two characters are differentiated by the letters "X" and "Y." Another ironic thing about this play, is how it is written; the dialogue of the play is not evenly spoken. Instead of the two characters conversing between one another, the play is written almost like a monologue where only Mrs. X speaks. Because Mrs. X is the only speaker, one would think that she is "the stronger," but ironically, she is not. One reason Mrs. X is not thought to be the stronger is that she goes back to her husband after she concludes that an affair had existed ironically thinking that the affair will not disable her marriage. The play implies that Mrs. X believes that the affair has and will somehow continue to make her marriage stronger. She says, "that only gave me a stronger hold on my husband," but actually her knowledge of the affair will eventually weaken the relationship. Knowing that her trust has been abused will normally cause her to question her husband's devotion: Were there other affairs? Is he cheating now? If so, is she someone I know? If not, will he cheat again? These are possible questions that will remain unanswered because Mrs. X has no intention of confronting her husband. This is a fact because in the last line of the play Mrs. X says, "Now I am going home - to love him." This quote also makes it seem like she is going home to live her normal life as if the affair never occurred, but making herself believe that it has disappeared will not solve anything. She believes th... ...would one put oneself in the situation to be vulnerable to such false mentality? It is because emotionally Mrs. X is weak, so to protect herself from any pain, she thinks of a way to logically persuade her mind and her emotions that she is the stronger, but she is not. Mrs. X can not be the stronger because Miss Y clearly shows more strength by saying nothing. Miss Y shows this strength by simply sitting there enduring Mrs. X's accusations and abuse. She sat there and faced it all when she could have easily matched Mrs. X's actions. Miss Y could have refused to listen to Mrs. X's accusations, or she could have made a scene by responding to Mrs. X's abuse. Instead of showing signs weakness, Miss Y chose to say nothing because there really was nothing that could be said to make the situation any better. By choosing to do so, Miss Y proves that she is the stronger.

Dangerous Technology

English 1010 5 October 2012 Dangerous Technology Many people have one. Some have more than one. Odds are pretty good that yours is within reaching distance right now. â€Å"What is it? †, you may ask. The answer is simple: the almighty cell phone. Although cell phones allow easy and quick communication, they are starting to create problems in today’s society: they distract drivers, they interrupt social interaction, and society is unaware of any long term medical issues they could create. One of the most dangerous issues with cell phones is people using them while driving. A distracted driver is a dangerous driver.If someone is reading or sending a text, or even talking on the phone, they are not paying full attention to the road, making it hazardous for themselves and those around them. It has become enough of an issue that many states have passed laws that make using a cell phone while operating a motor vehicle illegal. It is a severe issue with inexperienced drivers, who need as few distractions as possible. Many schools are even stepping up and asking students to pledge not to use their cell phones while driving. Although they are an amazing piece of technology, they are beginning to create social barriers in today’s society.They allow us to always be connected to one another, which is creating a social dependency on being connected. Cell phones are replacing face to face communication. There’s no need to make time in our schedules for people we consider important because they are just a text message away. Many people can’t go without their phones for fear of missing out. It’s like an unspoken anxiety problem. Because of this dependency, cell phones are becoming distractions in social settings. So much that even movie theatres ask their guest to please silence or turn off their cell phones for the presentation.There are some who can’t even be without them to watch a ninety minute movie, for which they paid a pretty penny to see. Just as there are some who can’t make it through dinner with friends without making a call, checking their messages, or even utilizing them for social media sites. At the first hint of boredom in a social setting, people turn to their phones to find a source of entertainment. We’re becoming a society addicted to technology. Cell phones are a fairly new technology really. We do not know if there are long-term, adverse effects of carrying around something that receives and emits satellite signals.They are electronic devices, meaning they emit electricity. Electronic devices are known to produce electromagnetic radiation, something often linked to cancer and tumors. Granted, currently there is no proof directly linking cell phones to cancer. This is just one of issues with cell phones we should be weary of. It’s a potential wolf in sheep’s skin, if you will. Cell phones are seemingly harmless, but who is to say that in another twenty yea rs or so there won’t be widespread cases of cancers all linked to consistent, direct contact of electromagnetic radiation.In conclusion, cell phones are an amazing piece of technology that need to be used more cautiously. Countless vehicle accidents occur every year due to a driver who was distracted by his or her cell phone. Society should learn to make more time for interpersonal relationships, instead of depending on a piece of technology to communicate. Lastly, we should be weary of the effects that could come from carrying around electromagnetic radiation for extended periods of time.

Drug Courts - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 4 Words: 1329 Downloads: 2 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Narrative essay Topics: Drugs Essay Did you like this example? Drug Courts Introduction Drug courts merge treatment with sanctions and incentives. Sanctions comprise compulsory, in addition to, random testing of drug of the offender. Drug courts are an established instrument for improving public health in addition to safety of public. They offer a pioneering means for association amid the prosecutors, judiciary, law enforcement and additional agencies of community corrections, providers of drug treatment and support groups of community. The efficiency of these courts is fine documented ever since they initially started working in the USA 25 years ago. In a instance of restricted resources for state and local budgets, drug courts present a cost efficient means to enhance the chances for the nonviolent criminal to attain constant recovery, in that way lessening recidivism for the offender. The movements of drug court commenced in the 1980s as a retort to the rising figure of drug cases bring before the court. Correctio ns and Law enforcement agencies policies only were not having the outcome on the drug trade that advocates of the war on drugs had expected for. Chief judge of Floridaà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s administrative order from in 1989 executed the first drug court in the USA. (Engen, Steen (2000). The duty of the prosecuting lawyer is to safeguard the safety of publicà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s by making certain that every applicant is suitable for the program and comply with all requirements of drug court. The duty of the defense counsel is to safeguard the due process rights of participantà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s whilst encouraging complete participation. Both the defense counsel and the prosecuting attorney play significant functions in the coordinated strategy of courts for responding to nonconformity. A precise drug program of testing is the mainly objective and competent means to institute a structure for responsibility and to measure progress of each offender participantà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s. Drug testing outcomes are objective evaluations of treatment efficiency, in addition to a resource of significant information for periodic appraisal of progress of treatment. Drug testing is vital to the monitoring of participant compliance by the drug court. It is equally cost-effective and objective. It provides the participant instant information concerning their individual progress, making the participant vigorous and implicated in the process of treatment to a certain extent than a inactive receiver of services. (Belenko (2000). In 25 years ever since the initial Drug Court was established, there has been additional published research on the outcomes of drug courts than on any additional program of criminal justice. The research conclusion is that drug courts effort superior to prison jail, Improved than treatment and probation alone. Drug Courts considerably decrease use of drug and or crime rate and are additional lucrative than any additional strategy of criminal justice. Cou ntrywide, 75% of graduates of Drug Court continue arrest-free as a minimum 2 years subsequent to leaving the program. Drug courts decrease recidivism, expenditures of accommodation of nonviolent drug offenders in prisons, and have an effect on other constructive results. The sum of a impact of court depends on how fine the offenders and staff needs are fair with the components and policies of drug court. A sturdy affiliation with local law enforcement is a decisive constituent of a thriving drug court. Officers of Law enforcement offer an exclusive viewpoint and help to judges and staff of drug court. Law enforcement can advance recommendations to the court and broaden the association of the team of drug court into the community for additional gathering of information and scrutinizing of offenders. Personnel of Law enforcement play significant functions not only in the everyday operations of the drug court, other than as well in showing additional community leaders the public sec urity outcome of these courts. Drug courts directed to additional proficient administration of offenders existing in the society, more reliability is specified to arrests of drug offenders by law enforcement, which are taken additional critically by court systems, superior responsibility is provided to the offender with fulfilling with their provisions of release and probation, superior management and responsibility of public services offered, together with reducing replication of costs and services to the taxpayer, and additional effectiveness for the court system by remove cases that positions major resource demands for dealing out, both primarily in addition to with probation infringements and fresh offenses that or else would take place. Drug courts offer a commanding impact since of the human component. Secure to 100,000 dependent drug offenders have gone through programs of drug court ever since drug courts were executed and above 70% are either yet enrolled or have grad uated, additional than twofold the rate of conventional retention rates of treatment program. Participants of Drug court replicate all sections of the society, from populace who are parents of minor kids, to veterans. In the past men was the main segment of offenders as evaluated to women, even though the rate of participants of female is rising. The majority participants of drug court have been utilizing drugs for many, several years, and several are users of further than one sort of drug. The majority have never been exposed to treatment formerly, even though a large preponderance of men and women have previously served prison or jail time for offenses related to drug. (Belenko, S. (2000). The objectives of drug courts, decrease in recidivism and usage of drug, are being accomplished. Rates of Recidivism have been considerably decreased for graduates and, to a minor degree, for those participants who do not graduate. Rates of Drug usage for offenders whilst they partake in the drug court are calculated by recurrent, random analyses, which are needed of every participant in the program, are as well considerably reduced radically underneath that for offenders of nondrug court. (Marlowe (2006). Recognizing that addiction of substance is a recurring and chronic disorder, the program of drug court sustains incessant supervision above the process of recovery of every participant, in the course of recurrent court hearings status, analysis, and reports from the providers of treatment to the supervise judge. Usage of drug or failures to conform to additional conditions of the program of drug court are noticed and retorted to on time. Instantaneous responses range from improved treatment services, additional recurrent analysis, obligation of community service conditions, and shock imprisonment are a few of the options judges of drug court make use of to act in response to program nonconformity. In suitable situations, predominantly where public security is at is sue or participants deliberately fall short to conform to program conditions, the offenders are terminated from the program of drug court and are referred for customary adjudication, where normal penalties are functional. Reported Data by the oldest drug courts point out that drug use is being decreased for the majority participants, not just graduates of drug court. Conclusions The results of drug courts are attaining far further than the objectives of decreased recidivism and drug usage on the other hand, the birth of drug free persons to participant of drug court , the reunification of many families as parents recover or are capable to maintain guardianship of their children, vocational and education training, in addition to placements of job for participants. More considerably, a lot of the judges who have served as the judge of drug court have appealed an expansion of their assignment, and several have taken on the drug court responsibility as well as their additional doc ket everyday jobs. (Egbert, Church II, Byrnes (2006). References R. L. Engen, , Steen, (2000). The Power to Punish: Discretion and Sentencing Reform in the War on Drugs(1).(Statistical Data Included), The American Journal of Sociology(Vol. 105, pp. 1357-1395). Susan C Egbert,.; Church II, T. Wesley; Edward C Byrnes, [2006] Justice and Treatment Collaboration: A Process Evaluation of a Drug Court: Best Practice in Mental Health;Winter2006, Vol. 2 Issue Academic Journal D. B.,Marlowe, D. S., Lee, P. A., Festinger, K. L., Dugosh, K. M Benasutti,. (2006). Matching judicial supervision to clientsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ risk status in Drug Court. Crime Delinquency, 52,52-76  · Steven Belenko, Jeffrey A. Fagan Tamara Dumanovsky [200] The Effects of Legal Sanctions on Recidivism in Special Drug Courts, Justice System Journal Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Drug Courts" essay for you Create order