A Brief Study of The Saudi Arbitration Law 1983 Free Essay Example, 4000 words

The case was rejected by the Commercial Department due to the presence of an arbitral agreement. The claimant raised an appeal on the ground that the respondent did not initially request for arbitration in the first hearing. This appeal was rejected by the Examination Committee which approved the judgment of the Commercial Department pursuant to that the first hearing was an exchange of documents and information regarding the case and did not contain any defenses or requests by the respondent. It is useful to point out that the SAL 1983 and the succeeding Implementing Regulations did not provide for writing as a condition of validity of arbitration or confirmation. Although the provision of Article 5 of the SAL 1983 stated that the arbitration instrument shall be filed to the authority originally competent to hear the dispute, as well as signed by the parties or their representatives. 12 With consideration to these two issues, it seems that writing is not a condition of arbitration, 13 but a condition of enforcement. Therefore, the arbitration agreement can be confirmed with  various means  such as recognition and  testimonial  or presumption based on the general provisions of Sharia. We will write a custom essay sample on A Brief Study of The Saudi Arbitration Law 1983 or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/pageorder now The Principle of Separability is considered  of the most important guarantees of the effectiveness of arbitration clause. It means the independence of the arbitration clause contained within the contract from the rest of that contract. 14 Therefore the nullity and invalidity of the main contract do not influence the invalidity of the arbitration clause. 15 This principle had not been stipulated under SAL 1983 which raised controversy among legal scholars in the Kingdom about the possibility of the recognition of this principle in the case of the invalidity of the contract. 16 However, because of the lack of an explicit provision through the SAL 1983 or even its Implementing Regulations and according to the general provisions of the contracts in Sharia, the nullity of the main contract results in the nullity of all its conditions.  Unless there exists a provision of the independence of the arbitration clause within the underlying contract. Theref ore, the new Arbitration Law of Saudi Arabia 2012 (SAL 2012), 17 as we shall see later, has dealt with this deficiency and stipulated explicitly the Principle of Separability. 18 3. The Arbitral Tribunal Under SAL 1983, the arbitral process can be handled by one or more arbitrators as it is left to the freedom of the parties, but it is stipulated, in the case of more than one arbitrator, that the number of arbitrators should be odd. 19 Based on this law, three conditions should be met in the selected arbitrator. 20 Firstly is for the arbitrator to be experienced.

Gullivers Travels Essay - 1022 Words

At first Gulliver’s travels comes off as a fantasy/adventure, but in actuality it’s a satirical commentary on society in Johnathan Swift. It starts off with Gulliver talking about himself. Later he gets shipwrecked and ends up in Lilliput, where the people are 6 inches tall. At first they think Gulliver is an enemy, but then realize he is no threat. He is taken to the palace and housed in a cursed temple. Gulliver is amazed at how silly the government’s rules are, for example to gain entry to the court the candidates must petition to the emperor. After the emperor gets 5 or 6 petitions he sets up a competition in which the candidates must do the Dance on the Rope, whoever jumps the highest without falling gets the job. The Lilliputians†¦show more content†¦The Lilliputians are supposed to symbolize the Whigs, and Swift thinks of them as stupid and power-hungry. He demonstrates this when they search Gulliver for weapons. In Swift’s time the Whigs s earched the Tories for evidence of their connections with England. He also makes fun of the thinking at the time; the Lilliputians were discriminated against whether they wore either high heels or low heels, and the ones that tried to remain neutral worse one high heel and one low heel. At the end of the book Swift demonstrates his thought on humans, when all the humans were savage and stupid, while the animals were brilliant. I believe that Swift demonstrates all his points very well. The reader is transported to the story, yet unlike most books, Swift doesn’t tell the reader exactly what to think, he insinuates it but lets the reader come to his own conclusions. When I first started watching the moive I thought its only purpose was to talk about the political system in England. But after it want on I saw that there could be a deeper message first is about the Lilliputians the second about Gulliver visits the giants, the third about the flying island and last about Gullivers travels to the land of Houyhnhmland. first one Gulliver gets shipwrecked and ends up on the island Lilliput were some inhabitans of the island finds him and tiesShow MoreRelatedGulliver’s Travels: Exploring Gulliver’s Journey1886 Words   |  8 PagesThrough metaphors in Gulliver’s Travels, Jonathan Swift showed that the self-indulgence of humanity will lead to their ultimate failure unless they learn to become kinder and more selfless. Each island in Gulliver’s Travels shows a different trait standing alone causing it to be just as bad as being self-indulgent. This type of failure will cause separation and isolation, which could lead to mental instability. The book, Gulliver’s Travels by Jonathan Swift, starts off with a young surgeon who hasRead MoreSatire In Gullivers Travels1455 Words   |  6 Pagesgreatest satirists to ever live, Jonathan Swift used satire in his works to express his disgust in society and the British Monarchy during the 18th century. One of the greatest satires ever written by Swift was Gulliver’s Travels. In Gulliver’s Travels, satire is evident through Gulliver’s voyage to Lilliput, his dialogue with Lilliput’s emperor, and his time spent within the kingdom of Brobdingnag. First introduced in ancient Greece in 423 B.C., â€Å"satire is a literary technique in which behaviorsRead MoreGullivers Travels: Gullivers Identity Loss2237 Words   |  9 PagesSpencer Shelburne British Literature I Novel Paper 12/2/11 Gulliver’s Lost Identity J.R.R. Tolkien once said, Not all who wander are lost. It is to be assumed then that he was not talking about Capt. Lemuel Gulliver. Gullivers Travels by Jonathan Swift is a narrative of the identity crisis. Captain Gulliver is indeed lost, both literally and metaphorically. He sets out on a voyage seeking a way to fulfill his identity as the financial supporter of his family, but once he leaves the structuredRead MoreAbuse of power in Gullivers travels1707 Words   |  7 PagesJonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels presents a narrator, Lemuel Gulliver, who recounts his various sea voyages to fantastical lands. During each voyage, Gulliver encounters different societies and customs to which Gulliver must adjust to. in order to be accepted into their society The entire novel serves as a commentary on how people everywhere have a tendency to abuse the power given to them. Gulliver’s first voyage is to Lilliput. The ship that Gulliver travels on capsizes, and Gulliver findsRead MoreJonathan Swifts Gullivers Travels1210 Words   |  5 Pages The definition of a utopia is an imagined place or state in which everything is perfect. In book four of Gulliver’s travels Gulliver discovers a group of people called the Houyhnhnms and the group displays qualities of a possible utopia. The Houyhnhnms are very rational in their thinking, and try their best to stay away from entertainment and vanity. However the Houyhnhnms could not be considered creators of a utopia because they emphasized unrealistic rules and because of their treatment ofRead MoreGulliver’s Travels by Jonathan Swift1526 Words   |  7 PagesIn the fourth book of Gulliver’s Travels, Jonathan Swift uses satire to draw reader’s attention towards his concerns about humanity and uses irony to reveal his cynical views towards human kind. According to the Great Chain of Being, a term developed by the Renaissance that describes a divinely hierarchical order in every existing thing in the universe, human beings are placed a tier higher than animals (http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english /melani/cs6/ren.html). However, by comparing humanRead MoreMaterialism in Gullivers Travels and Candide1508 Words   |  7 Pagessatirize a part of a culture. Often these writings are aimed at a specific group of people. In the case of Jonathan Swift in Gulliver’s Travels and Voltaire in Candide, their writing is aimed at European society and its preoccupation with materialism. Swift and Voltaire satirize the behaviors of the wealthy upper class by citing two different extremes. In Gulliver’s Travels the yahoos are not even human but they behave the same way towards colored stones that the Europeans do. In contrast, the peopleRead MoreGullivers Travels by Jonathan Swift1367 Words   |  6 PagesWhen Jonathan Swift published his novel Gulliver’s Travels in 1726, it immediately became a success and continues to be popular even today. The range of different topics addressed in his sardonic novel allows readers to easily relate, as many of the issues of Swift’s time during the Enlightenment remain relevant issues. As Swift wrote in another satirical piece The Battle of the Books, â€Å"Satyr is a sort of Glass, wherein Beholders do generall discover every body’s Faces but their Own.† The EnlightenmentRead More Gullivers change throughout Gullivers Travels Essays929 Words   |  4 Pages Gulliver’s change throughout Gulliver’s Travels Throughput the book â€Å"Gulliver’s Travels† by Jonathan Swift, the character Gulliver changes many times. During and after part two and four of the book a noticeable change in Gulliver starts to occur. He himself may not see it but the reader sees it and ones attitude towards Gulliver might change due to Gulliver’s changes. Throughout these two parts, we see Gulliver as an adventurous man that wants to see everything that has been created inRead MoreThe Use of Satire in Gullivers Travels903 Words   |  4 Pages many writers utilize satire to convey their innovative ideas to change certain aspects of society. From the many writers that used satire to condemn the actions of society, Jonathan Swifts, Gullivers travels, stands as one of the best satirical work in human history. Published in 1726, Gullivers travels is an adventure of Lemuel Gulliver whose voyage turns into a series of disasters to various strange islands where he lives with humans and animals of various sizes, behaviors, and philosophies

International Business and Enterprise Magnanimous Legal Discontent

Question: Discuss about International Business and Enterprise for Magnanimous Legal Discontent. Answer: Introduction The Oil platform case involving the Islamic republic of Iran and the United States is one that aroused a magnanimous legal discontent in various jurisdictions. This paper is poised to discuss the key facets of the arguments that were evinced by the Islamic Republic of Iran which was the claimant in this case. Facts In 1987 the United States Navy attacked Iranian oil platforms in the Persian Gulf with their guided- missile destroyers that caused an irreparable damage leading to the oil production being brought to an end indefinitely. The United States claimed that the attack was a precipitate of an attack ostensibly held to have been made by the Iranians on Kuwait. In 1988 the Americans made another grisly attack in Nassir and Salman oil platforms which up to date have not resumed operations. The United States antagonistically asserted that the attacks were motivated by the necessity to protect essential security interests and that they were acting in self-defence. Pursuant to the incongruous, outlandish, and unfortunate nature of the actions of the United States, the Islamic Republic of Iran launched a claim against the United States at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Issue The issue that was in contention and up for determination by the court was whether the United States actions of attacking and destroying the oil platform in Iran violated of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights. whether the United States offended the overarching principle of use of force underpinned by International law. Law The facts in issue above triggered the well settled principle of the use of force and proportionality of a states force in response to an attack in international law. The general position is that states are obligate to refrain from the use of force against the territories of other states in breach of their political independence (UN Chatter Article 2(4)) However, it bears noting that the use of force may be permitted in circumstances where the state is acting in self defense of another attack (UN Chatter Article 51). These principles have since gained the force of customary international law. (Nicaragua v The United States of America 1986) The other applicable law that was triggered and applied by the Islamic Republic Iran here is the application of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights that the two states are a party to. The treaty states that there should be freedom of commerce between party states (Treaty of Amity Article X) It has also been stated that a State party may take necessary measures to ensure international peace and other measures that may be necessary to protect its essential security interest(Article XX (1d)). The treaty also acknowledges that the state parties should promote firm and endure sincere friendship (Treaty of Amity Article 1) Application a) Argument on Use of Force and Self-Defense It was the argument of the Islamic Republic of Iran that the use of force by the United States Navy was in contravention to Article 2(4) of the UN Chatter. They objected the argument that the United States was justified in invoking the right to self defense under international law. They argued that for the self defense to have been justified it must have been in response to an unlawful act rather than a lawful one. They contended that the United States had applied self defensive on measures that were lawful contrary to what was set in the Nicaragua case. In addition , the United states was required to seek the assistance of the Iran which is the victim in this case and if the response is not made then it could regarded as a violations of their rights and the self defense would have been justified. It was also argued that there was no real or imminent danger to the United States that ignited the necessity to respond by use of force in the pretext of a self defense. It was therefor Irans submission that there was no necessity to act using such force in those circumstances. They noted that the legality of the right to self defense was well entrenched in the celebrated case of Caroline (1837). It was submitted that the use force by the United States was not in proportion to the necessities of the particular circumstance of the alleged prior attack. Although the United States claimed that it was acting in self defense, it was argued that the degree and form of measures taken and the target that the self defense measures were applied to were out of proportion (Security Council Resolutions 7598 (1966)). The Islamic Republic of Iran further stated that it had no contention in regards to the fact that United States reported the measures taken to the Security Council as required by article 51 of the UN Chatter. It was brought to the attention of the court that, in fact, the measures taken by the United States could not be defined as a self defense but are regarded as an unlawful reprisal. It defined a measure of self defense as a one that aims to protect which was in contract to the reprisals that are aimed to punish and or wrong committed (Bowett 1972). It was also argued that the response was a premeditated plan of actions and it has been stated in the Corfu Channel case judgment that a premeditated and pre planned measure, where it is carried out as planned ceases to protective and cannot amount to a self defense measure (Corfu Channel Merits Judgment, 1949). It was submitted that the united states were not in a proper position to argue that the measures were necessary to protect its essential security interest as required in Article XX (1d). The actions of the United States were a prima facie breach of the treaty and the use of force went beyond the threshold set for a lawful self defense. The Republic of Iran went on to argue that United States could not invoke the provisions of Article XX (1d) to justify a breach of the obligation that has been bestowed upon them by Article 2(4) of the UN Chatter. b) Argument on generation of active commerce between Iran and the United States Article X of the Treaty of Amity obligates the parties that in their in any measures they undertake they should ensure that they generate an active commerce between them. The State of Iran sought the guidance of the Nicaragua case where it was held that the destruction of the mining ports in Nicaragua by the Unites States was in breach of the freedom of active commerce as was guaranteed by the 1956 treaty. It was thus the argument of Iran that the attack on the mining activities in the oil platforms was an obstacle and a hindrance to the free navigation of commerce activities. They further argued that the attacks on the petroleum installation was a barred the commercial exploitation of its natural resources. It was also noted that Iran had specific contracts it had entered into for the supply of petroleum and the contracts were them frustrated rendering it impossible for them to fulfill their commercial obligation to other states and therefore they could not enjoy the freedom of commerce provisions in the treaty. It was noted in their submissions that the oil production storage and transportation were all destroyed and therefore the fundamental economic and commercial activities entirely ceased to operate. c) Arguments for Breach of Article IV (1) Article IV (I) obligates the parties to the treaty to accord fair and equitable treatment to the nationals and companies of other member states and to their properties and any other enterprises. In doing the treaty obligates the states to refrain any unreasonable measures that will negatively impact on the property of other nationals. It was the argument of the Republic of Iran that the United States had entirely breached this provision through the attacks they made that caused damages that had devastating effects. It was submitted that where a state is acting outside its territories, it should be guided by the aforementioned provisions where it is about to exert state powers the property of the other state within its territory. The use of force by United States was also argued to be in breach of this provisions and the treaty declares such measures as unreasonable and discriminatory measures to all intents and purposes. The attacks offended the principle of fair and equitable treatment in the above provision. From the above arguments, Iran was sufficiently certain that the measure that was applied by the United States was whole an unlawful measure and even if it is a lawful measure where it is excessive and extreme it becomes in violation of Article IV (I). Iran submitted that the complete destruction of an economic activity that is beneficial and dependable to a state economy is the perfect definition of a conduct that is unfair, unjust and inequitable. d) Remedies sought By Islamic Republic of Iran It is a general principle in international law that the breach of an international law obligation involves the party that has caused the breach to adequately make reparations (Factory at Chorzow, Judgment 1927) The republic of Iran thus requested for a declaration be made that the united states violated the treaty of Amity. It was argued that the declaration of illegality perpetrated by the United States was necessary as remedy because of the gravity of the illegal measures that the United States had pursued. It was argued that this form of reparation was recognized by international law tribunal and courts alike. In the case of New Zealand against France (1990) the tribunal ordered reparation in the form of a declaration be made against France which was in breach of its international obligation. The Republic of Iran also made a request for an award of compensation from the United States. This is flows from the fact that the attacks and destructions that were made affected the economic interest of Iran. In the case of the Diplomatic and Consular Staff (1980) the court held that where it is found that a state is liable causing injury to another state it is prudent that an award of compensation be made against that state. It was argued by Iran that the compensation must be in monetary terms and it therefore claimed for compensation for the damages that were caused by the destruction of the oil platforms, the cost of replacements and the costs for reconstruction. The republic of Iran also made request for compensation for the loss of life of the personnel that was working at the oil platform and the injuries that others suffered. Judgment and conclusion The International court of justice took a controversial approach that aroused a magnanimous legal discontent in the legal fraternity. The court held that the United States was in breach of the threshold required for the use of force in self defense and was therefore in violation of international law. The court also held that the United States did not provide sufficient evidence to prove that Iran made an armed attack and therefore their response which was under the guise of a self defense was unwarranted and unnecessary. The requirement of necessity and proportionality in the use of force are principles that have been well affirmed and exemplified by the court in this case. The oil Platform case in general is an educative case that echoes principles of international law that are vital in the modern day with the emerging military activities in the Middle East and Afghanistan. References Bowett, D, W, 1972 "Reprisals Involving Recourse 10 Armed Force", American Journal of International Law, Vol. 66, Caroline Case (1837) 2 Moore Digest of International Law Corfu Channel, United Kingdom v Albania, Judgment, Merits, ICJ GL No 1, [1949] ICJ Rep 4 United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran, Judgment, (1980) 1. C. J. Reports, Factory at Chorzw, Germany v Poland, Jurisdiction, Judgment, (1927) PCIJ Series A No 9, ICGJ 247 France-New Zealand Arbitration Tribunal, (1990) 82 I.L.R. 500 Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), I.C.J. Reports (2003) Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) I.C.J. Reports (1984) Security Council Resolutions (1966) Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights 1995 United Nation Chatter 1945

Let Me Say It Right Now. Everything You Thought Was The Limit Of Human

Let me say it right now. Everything you thought was the limit of human kind is wrong. The strongest weapon is not the nuclear bomb. The strongest material is not steel. Your brain is not the fastest computer on the earth. The sky is not the limit. Humanity has not reached it full potential. How can I make these statements? I am informed. There is a revolution coming, it may be bloody, but more than likely it will not be. There will be casualties, maybe not human ones. This is not a military revolution; this is a revolution in every aspect of life as we know it. It will make the Industrial revolution look like a stumbling block in our history. This revolution has already begun, and hopefully when you?re done with this paper you will be prepared for it. If you?re not then you can be surprised by it like everyone else. Nanotechnology has begun to emerge and it will forever change your life. The only question is how. Starting basically, nanotechnology is an anticipated manufacturing technology giving thorough, inexpensive control of the structure of matter. The term has sometimes been used to refer to any technique able to work at a submicron scale. Nanotechnology will enable the construction of giga-opperational computers smaller than a cubic micron; cell repair machines; personal manufacturing and recycling plants; and much more. Nanotechnology has many life-altering possibilities. It can be linked to many fields of study and, in fact, is being developed in present day laboratories by the combined efforts of many fields. Many of the fields have to do with the application of microscopic ideas and techniques, such as microbiology. The three biggest areas of nanotechnology application are that of medicine, manufacturing, and general lifestyle. To understand more about how this technology can effect these areas you need to first understand the basics behind the technology. The discovery of nanotechnology is actually quite new. The first small uses of were developed in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The first breakthrough experiment was when IBM (Yes the computer people) was able to draw a write the letters I, B, and M on a nickel crystal surface using individual Xenon atoms. The three letters were a combined 50 billionths of an inch wide. This simple, and seemingly pointless experiment, finally gave evidence that individual atoms could be manipulated by human hands. This spurred a great leap into the design of nanotechnology theory. Eric Drexler began the first comprehensive study of nanotechnology theory in 1986 when he wrote his book entitled ?Engines of Creation.? In his book Drexler outlined the basic principles behind current nanotechnology theory. Drexler states that life as we know it now shows us that nanotechnology is possible. The entire basis of nanotechnology is the creation of what Drexler calls an ?assembler.? An assembler is a nanoscopi cally small robot that manipulates individual atoms through contained chemical reactions to assemble the atoms into desired molecular patterns. Such an assembler could build a one hundred percent pure diamond literally out of thin air. Nature already has created it?s own assemblers. The assemblers of most organic life are called ribosomes. These tiny little cells, which are only a few cubic nanometers large, can build proteins out of the amino acids that they gather from there surroundings. These proteins are the basis for all life on Earth, because it is through these proteins that DNA is created. If nature can have its assemblers than naturally so can we. The application of nanotechnology in medicine is called nanomedicine (for obvious reasons). Looking through the basics of nanotechnology there are huge implications in medicine for Drexler's little assemblers. Taking a small army of assemblers, probably close to hundred thousand, and giving them access to the write proteins would allow the rapid creation of transplant organs for specific patients. No chance of the patient rejecting the organ or tissue would occur because the nanorobots could assemble the transplants to match the patients exact DNA coding. Perhaps the most simplistic nanorobot would be the artificial red blood cell which Drexler?s assemblers would have to build. Such a robot would be composed entirely of diamond and would act as only a simple pressure tank.

Satire and Comedy Essay Example

Satire and Comedy Paper Satire Satire is a term applied to any work of literature or art whose objective is ridicule. It has significant functions in social and political criticism. Satirical literature exposes foolishness in all its forms, such as vanity, hypocrisy, sentimentality etc. It also attempts to effect reform through such exposure. Satirists, therefore, design a work of literature focusing on human or individual vices, follies, abuses, or shortcomings. They use satire as a literary technique to combat these vices and shortcomings, and to censure by means of ridicule, derision, burlesque, irony or other methods (New Encyclopedia Britannica, 1993, 10, 467). Satirical works are commonly critical. Hawthorn (2005:197) states, Satire attacks alleged vices and stupidities either of individuals or of whole communities or groups and its tools are ridicule, exaggeration and contempt. However, Sutherland (1958:2) points out that not all satirical works are equally critical. He argues that: 2 Some works are satirical throughout; in others the satire is only intermittent, one element in a more complex effect. The lines that separate the satirical from the unsatirical are often hard to define, either because the writer shifts easily and rapidly from one mood to another, or because the satirical tone is so rarefied as to be almost imperceptible. In addition to being critical, many satirical texts are humorous. To put it in Feinbergs words, crit icism and humor have to be present in a literary work to be called satiric (1967:60). Thus, it is the nature of satire to be humorous and critical in order to expose follies and vices of individuals and society, and if possible, to do justice to such erroneous practices. Several literary critics state that satire is a protean term that makes it difficult to come up with a fixed definition. In line with this, The New Encyclopedia Britannica, 2005, 23,173 states, together with its derivatives, it is one of the most heavily worked literary designations and one of the most imprecise. This book even goes to the extent of saying: No strict definition can encompass the complexity of a word that signifies, on one hand, a kind of literature as when one speaks of the satires of the Roman poet Horace or calls the American novelist Nathanael Wests A Cool Million a satire and, on the other hand, a mocking spirit or tone that manifests itself in many literary genres but can also enter into almos t any kind of human communication. We will write a custom essay sample on Satire and Comedy specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Satire and Comedy specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Satire and Comedy specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Similarly, Feinberg (1967:18) points out that satire is such an amorphous genre that no two scholars define it in the same words. However, many literary scholars have attempted to give suitable working definitions based on their own perspectives. This does not exclude the definition stated in the 13 above source that states, Wherever wit is employed to expose something foolish or vicious, to criticism, there satire exists, whether it is in song or sermon, in painting or political debate, on television or in the movies. Nor does it disregard what Feinberg says in defining satire as: a playfully critical distortion of the familiar (1967:19). It is, therefore, important to mention the varying definitions of satire given by different writers at this point. One of the most widely accepted definitions of satire is the one that is given in A Glossary of Literary Terms by Abrams (1981:167). Abrams defines satire as: The literary art of diminishing a subject by making it ridiculous nd evoki ng toward it attitudes of amusement, contempt, indignation or scorn. It differs from the comic in that comedy evokes laughter mainly as an end in itself, while satire derides; that it uses laughter as a weapon and against a butt existing outside the work itself. That butt may be an individual (in personal satire), or a type of person, a class, an institution, a nation or even (as in Rochesters A Satyr against Mankind and much of Swifts Gullivers Travels, especially Book IV) the whole race of man. The above definition emphasizes the principal notion of satire as a literary work in which human vice or folly are attacked through such techniques as irony, derision, or wit. Accordingly, it is the nature of satire to ridicule mans naive acceptance of individuals and institutions at face value (Feinberg, 1963:19). It is also acknowledged that satire gives us pleasure, for it presents the subject matter to scrutiny through humorous ways. 14 Robert Harris (2004), points out that the best definitions of satire should be formulated from a combination of its corrective intent and its literary method of execution. He quotes Thralls definition as an acceptable definition of satire as follows: A literary manner that blends a critical attitude with humor and wit to the end that human institutions or humanity may be improved. The true satirist is conscious of the frailty of institutions of mans devising and attempts through laughter not so much to tear them down as to inspire a remodeling. It is important to note in the above definition that satire involves the fusion of laughter and contempt. Inseparable from any definition of satire is its corrective purpose. Ian Gordon (2002) points out the corrective purpose of the satirist saying that the satirist stands in opposition to the current state of affairs, endeavoring to change things either to what they were in a recalled and often mythologized, past, or to what they might be in a preferred, and frequently Utopian, future. It may follow from the above definitions that the corrective purpose of satire is expressed through a critical mode that includes laughter and contempt. Scholes and Sullivan (1986:8) define satire based on the view of the world presented in a literary text. They argue, A work that presents a fictional world worse than the real world is in th e mode of anti-romance, or satire. They also suggest, The world of satire emphasizes ugliness and disorder. These authors claim remind us that the theme of sati re can be presented through different techniques in order to maintain standards, reaffirm values, and to come up with reforms in the society. 15 To put it briefly, satire is concerned with the nature of reality. It exaggerates or understates to criticize human follies and vices for it has a corrective purpose. It reveals the contrast between reality and pretense; yet again, it uses comic devices in order to criticize and give us pleasure. As Feinberg (1967) puts it, the sphere of satire is criticism of man and society, a criticism made entertaining by humor and moving by irony and invective. For many literary scholars, efforts at defining satire may vary. However, the definitions such as those described above commonly share the view that satire is concerned with the criticism of individual and social evils. Moreover, at the heart of every satire, there exists a corrective purpose that is expressed through critical humor. 2. 2 Characteristics of Satire Satire, in prose or verse, employs critical humor to expose human wickedness and folly. In reflecting the salient characteristics of satire, Mitchell (2003) argues that satire attacks those institutions or individuals the satirist deems corrupt. In other words, one characteristic feature of satire is that it is concerned with ethical reform. The other characteristics of satire according to Mitchell are: It works to make vice laughable and/or reprehensible and thus bring social pressure on those who still engage in wrongdoing. It seeks a reform in public behavior, a shoring up of its audiences standards or at the very least a wake- up call in an otherwise corrupt culture. Satire is often implicit and assumes readers who can pick up on its moral clues. It is not a sermon. Satire in general attacks types the fool, the boor, the adulterer, the proud rather than specific persons. If it does attack some by name, rather than hoping to reform these persons, it seeks to warn the 16 public against approving of them. Satire is witty, ironic, and often exaggerated. It uses extremes to bring its audience to a renewed awareness of its ethical and spiritual danger. According to Ian Johnston (1998), one characteristic feature of satire is the desire to use precisely clear language to induce an audience to protest. As a result, the language of the satirist is full of irony, paradox, antithesis, colloquialism, anticlimax, obscenity, violence, vividness, and exaggeration. The satirist uses these techniques to describe painful or absurd situations or foolish or wicked persons or groups as vividly as possible. Johnston argues, The satirist believes that most people are blind, insensitive, and perhaps anesthetized by custom and resignation and dullness. The satirist wishes to make them see the truth at least that part of the truth which they habitually ignore. Moreover, Johnston considers morality as an important characteristic of satire. To put it in his words: At the basis of every good traditional satire is a sense of moral outrage or indignation. This conduct is wrong and needs to be exposed. Hence, to adopt a satiric stance requires a sense of what is right, since the target of the satire can only be measured as deficient if one has a sense of what is necessary for a person to be truly moral. Satire attacks socially objectionable behavior through humorous ways. It aims at amendment of vices by correction. As Feinberg (1967) writes on the characteristics of satire, its essential qualities are entertainment and its freshness. That is, the appeal of satire lies in its literary merit, brilliance, wit, humor, and freshness (7). Satire, therefore, shows old things in a new 17 way to reveal the contrast between reality and pretense through skillful manipulation of language. To put it in Feinbergs (1967:16) words: Satires are read because they are aesthetically satisfying as works of art, not because they are (as they may be) morally wholesome or ethically instructive. They are stimulating and refreshing because with commonsense briskness they brush away illusions and second han d opinions. With spontaneous irreverence, satire rearranges perspectives, scrambles familiar objects into incongruous juxtaposition, and speaks in a personal idiom instead of abstract platitude. It is important to note in the above quotation that satire entertains through humor, irony and invective. Russell and Brown (1967:xviii) also argue that where attack is absent or where it tends to turn almost wholly on extreme distortion, what may pass as satire becomes ineffective and does not deserve the name. 2. 3 The Purpose of Satire Harris (2004), highlights that the satirists goal is to expose vice and hypocrisy in order to effect reformation. The best satire, according to Harris, does not seek to do harm or damage by its ridicule, but rather it seeks to create a shock of recognition and to make vice impulsive so that the vice will be expunged from the person or society under attack or from the person a society intended to benefit by the attack. Thus, satire attempts to effect some changes in the behavior of the target as well as to encourage others not to behave in such a manner. Satire is concerned with justice, morality, and virtue. Maynard Mack (quoted by Harris) states that satire asserts the validity and necessity of norms 18 systematic, values, and meanings that are contained by recognizable codes. Accordingly, Harris notes that satire has moral and didactic purpose. He writes: Satire is inescapably moral and didactic (in the best sense of that unfortunately slandered word) even when no efinite, positive values are stated in the work as alternatives to the gross corruptions depictions by the attack. The satirist does not need to state specific moral alternatives to replace the villainy he attacks because the morality is either already present in the lip service his target pays to virtue, or it is apparent by implication. Likewise, Feinberg (1963:20) argues that the primary purpose of the satirist is to moralize. Humbert Wolfe (cited by Feinberg) strengthens this idea considering the satirists work as half-way etween a preacher and a wit; he has the purpose of the former, uses the weapon of the latter. In other words, what motivates the satirist is the hatred he has for the wrong and injustice as much as his love of the right and the just. Moreover, the satirist holds up human and individual wrong doings to censure in order to make us better. The art of satire is, therefore, the delivering of moral judgment and its objective is not to degrade man but to show him how he has degraded himself (Feinberg, 1968:23). The purpose of the satire, according to Sutherland (1958:11) is to compel man to what they have tried to ignore, and to destroy their illusions or pretenses. As a social critic, the satirist, therefore, makes us see familiar things in a new way compelling us to what we have ignored. Accordingly, any kind of satirical comment may magnify, diminish or distort to tear off the guise and expose the naked truth, or to bring someone to his sense s. 19 Abrams (1981:67) agrees on the corrective purpose of satire. He says, Satire has usually been justified by those who practice it as a corrective of human vices and folly. Similarly, Harris (2002) argues that the corrective purpose of satire in exposing individual and human vice and hypocrisy succeeds only to the extent that the audience responds to the attack. Hence, as Sutherland (1958:20) puts it: Satire is not for the literal-minded. It exists on at least two levels, the overt and the implied; and it can only function properly when the tact, the intelligence, and the magination of the satirist are met by a corresponding response in the reader. In short, satire attacks erroneous practices of individuals in particular and human beings at large with intent to bring about changes. These changes may have corrective or moralizing purpose. That is, at the heart of every satire there is criticism that is geared towards exposing hypocrisy, pretense, corruptions, and other shortcoming of human beings. Therefore, satire aims at displaying the critical attitude of the satirist in order to reaffirm values, maintain standards and rectify the follies and vices of the society. 2. 4 Techniques of Satire It has been pointed out earlier that the essence of satire is giving pleasure of criticism by combining or contrasting ideas. Accordingly, satirists use different techniques to convey their messages. Certain specific literary techniques lend themselves to satire because they can contain a measure both of wit and of humor. Among them are exaggeration, distortion, understatement, innuendo, simile, irony, metaphor, oxymoron, parable, and allegory (Harris, 2002). On the other hand, Feinberg (1967) lists distortion, indirection, externality, brevity, and variety as major techniques of satire. Other scholars, such as Matthew Hogart, Gilbert Highet and Northrop Frye, 20 add reduction, invective, caricature, burlesque, and reduction ad absurdum to the list. A brief discussion of the prominent techniques has been presented as follows. 2. 4. 1 Exaggeration Exaggeration is one of the most commonly used techniques in satire. Harris (2002), notes that exaggeration is one of the best ways to get the target to recognize or admit that a vice exists. The satirist exaggerates in order to make the unseeing see, and the seeing-but-complacent oppose and expunge corruption. Hence, exaggeration as a satirical technique plays an important role. To use Feinbergs (1967:108) words: The exaggeration of satirists is not as purposeless as it tries to appear. What the satirist exaggerates is the bad, the foolish, the hypocritical; what he minimizes or omits is the good, the sensible, and the honest. The resulting scene is not only exaggerated but heavily biased-against the victims of the satirists attack. In other words, the satirist uses exaggeration to describe painful or absurd situations or foolish or wicked persons as vividly as possible. On top of that, as a dispassionate observer of humanity and the irate attacker of particular individuals (Knight, 2005), the satirist employs exaggeration to make his observation and attack effective. 2. 4. 2 Distortion The technique of the satirist, as indicated earlier, consists of a playfully critical distortion of the familiar. Distortion refers to changing the perspective of a condition or event by isolation (separation from its ordinary surroundings) or by stressing some aspects and deemphasizing others (Harris, 2002). Hence, the satirist distorts in many ways. For instance, he 21 may minimize the good qualities of the person or institution that he is attacking. For example, in Gulliver’s Travels (1726), Swift exposes humanity in all its baseness and cruelty using this technique. Sa tirists may also magnify the bad ones making isolated instances seem typical. 2. 4. 3 Indirection and Invective One often-used satiric technique is indirection. Many literary critics agree th at the quality of satiric representation is effective when the attack is indirect. David Worcester (cited by Feinberg, 1967:93) remarks that satire is the engine of anger rather than the direct expression of anger. Similarly, Sutherland (1958:20) points out that twentieth century satire relies more and more on the indirectness of irony, innuendo and fantasy. Accordingly, the indirectness of satire helps the satirist to make his or her attack tolerable by making it entertaining. As Johnston (1998) suggests satires that are very direct are boring and ineffectual. Unlike indirection, invective is very abusive. It is an open insult used occasionally for shock effect. It usually lacks irony in order to attack a particular target. According to Johnston, it is the least inventive of the satirists tools. Besides, the danger of pure invective is that one can quickly get tired of it, since it offers limited opportunity for inventive wit. 2. 4. 4 Burlesque Burlesque refers to ridiculous exaggeration in language, usually one that makes the discrepancy between the words and the situation or the character silly. To use Johnstons example, to have a king speak like an idiot or an ordinary worker speak as a king is burlesque. Similarly, a very serious situation can be burlesqued by having the characters in a literary text speak or behave in ridiculously inappropriate ways. In other words, burlesque creates a large gap between the situation or the characters and the style with which they speak or act out the event. 22 2. 4. 5 Irony Irony is a systematic use of double meaning where meaning of words is opposite of the literal or expected meaning. It is a stylistic device or figure of speech in which the real meaning of the words is different from the literal meaning. As Muecke (1969:3) puts it, irony may be a weapon in satirical attack. Likewise, Johnston (1998) notes that irony brings two contrasting meanings into play. Consequently, it becomes satiric when the real meaning appears to contradict the surface meaning. It should, however, be noted that irony is not confined to satire. To put it briefly, satirists use a variety of literary devices. They may use various techniques, such as those described above, in order to say two or more things at one time, and to compare, equate, or contrast for satirical purposes. Moreover, these techniques provide variety, conciseness, and opportunity for employing wit and humor. In explaining the use of satirical techniques, Harris (2004) writes the following about satirical techniques: The satire must be presented in a manner that will bring action, and in a world of complacent hypocrites, irony, with its various means of presentation, is essential; the message cannot be derived without it, if the message is to have any tangible effect. In a two-word abstract, the purpose of satire is the correction or deterrence of vice, and its method is to attack hypocrisy through the ironic contrast between values and actions. The aforementioned quotation highlights that the techniques the satirist uses have to serve the purpose the satirist has in mind. It is an indispensable 23 quality of satire to employ appropriate techniques. Furthermore, Hawthorn (2005:197) remarks that the satirist is concerned with drawing our attention to what he or she is attacking rather than to create characters, situations and events that are believable in and for themselves. That is, a novelist may include satirical elements in works that do not, overall, merit the term satirical novel (and indeed most novelists do). Therefore, literary works that are not usually categorized as satirical (novel or short story) may use the major weapons of satire in order to diminish a set of beliefs by making it appear ridiculous. Finally, based on the techniques the satirist employs satire can be divided into formal or direct and informal or indirect (Abrams, 1981:168). Abrams also distinguishes two types of formal satire, namely Horatian satire and Juvenalian satire, whereas the Menippean satire is indirect. On the other hand, Juvenalian satire is harsher; more pointed, and often attacks particular people with an invective attack. Horatian satire is mild and gentler. To put it in the words of Abrams (1981:169): In Horatian satire the character of the speaker is that of an urbane, witty, and tolerant man of the world, who is moved more often to wry amusement than to indignation at the spectacle of human folly, pretentiousness, and hypocrisy, and who uses a relaxed and informal language to evoke a smile at human follies and absurdities ometimes including his own. In Juvenalian satire the character of the speaker is that of a serious moralist who uses a dignified and public style of utterance to decry modes of vice and error which are no less dangerous because they are ridiculous, and who undertakes to evoke contempt, moral indignation, or an unillusioned sadness at the aberrations of men. 24 2. 5 The Nature of Comedy Comedy, according to Abrams (1971:26), is a form of literature that is de signed to amuse by use of wit, humor, criticism or ridicule. He defines it as: a work in which the materials are selected and managed primarily in order to interest and amuse us: the characters and their discomfitures engage our delighted attention rather than our profound concern, we feel confident that no great disaster will occur, and usually the action turns out happily for the chief characters. Abrams also notes that even though comedy is commonly applied to dramas, the comic form also occurs in prose fiction and narrative poetry. In whichever form it appears comedy attempts to arouse and satisfy human instinct for mischief. In line with this, Fowler (1973:31) has the following to say about the materials of comedy: Comedy in itself is neither morally useful nor immoral: it can perpetuate and extend misconceptions as well as ridicule them. Sometimes, however, dramatists use the irresponsible instinctual speed of comedy to lead the audience to a more complex intellectual awareness. According to John Morreall (http: //www. dbu. du/ mitchell/comedytr. htm) there are many characteristics that make up a comedy. One among them is the fact that comedy is more imaginative, stressing playfulness. For this reason, comedy tends to look for a variety of answers and does not need to solve everything. Secondly, comedy tends to call attention to the incongruities in the order of things, be it political, social, or religious. Thirdly, comic characters are often ironic and disengaged from the situation; they tend to respond wi th wit, imagination, or cynicism. 25 The other characteristic feature of comedy is that its language is fluent and articulate. To put it in Fowlers words: Characters do not feel a need to develop exploratory, stretching uses of language to account for themselves and the world around them, but are satisfied that the relationships between them and the world are simple and comprehensible (1973:32). It is also the nature of comedy to reveal playfulness. Even if it has its serious side, the comic vision tends to treat large portions of ife as not quite so serious. However, satiric comedy, according to Abrams (1971:27) attacks the disorders of society by making ridiculous the violators of its standards of morals or manners. In addition to this, comedy involves exaggeration, incongruity, and contradictions as techniques. It also uses contrast between social order and individual, suspension of natural laws, and comic premise to provide structural and thematic unity for comic dialogue. Ma ny argue that producing pleasure through laughter is the primary nature of comedy. On the other hand, Sypher (1991:148) states that the pleasure caused by the laughter of comedy is not a pure enjoyment. He further notes that it is not a pleasure that is exclusionary esthetic or altogether disintegrated. It always implies a secret or unconscious intent, if not of each one of us, at all events of society as a whole. Therefore, comedy may have a critical intent. Hence, comedy is not always a naive joke; nor is it always seriously stuffed with didactic moral issues. It expresses the characteristics of men in the ordinary circumstances of everyday life. As Sypher (1991:149) puts it: the comic is not always an indication of a fault, in the moral meaning of the word, and if critics insist on seeing a fault, even though a trifling one, in the ludicrous, they must point out what it is here that exactly distinguishes the trifling from the serious. 26 2. 6 The purpose of Comedy Comedies usually tend to focus on the larger community and spend more time paying attention to the interaction between groups. As a result, they often question tradition and those in authority. Comedy, according to Eric Trumbull, serves the purpose of looking at the world in which basic values are asserted but natural laws suspended in order to underscore human follies and foolishness. That is, in comedy we are usually being asked to laugh at our common human foibles and ourselves. Besides, comedy reminds us our inescapable human limitations. Sypher (1991:241-2) discusses several social meanings of comedy. He points out that in its earliest days comedy is an essential pleasure mechanism valuable to the society. To put it in his words: Comedy is a momentary and publicly useful resistance to authority and an escape from its pressures, and its mechanism is a free discharge of repressed psychic energy or resentment through laughter . . . The ambivalence of comedy reappears in its social meanings, for comedy is both hatred and revel, rebellion and defense, attack and escape. It is revolutionary and conservative. Socially, it is both sympathy and persecution. Comedy also serves the social purpose of affirming the security of any group already unsure of itself. With this regard, Sypher says, the comedian banishes doubt by ridicules and is the diplomatic artist (244). He further notes that comedy can relieve the stress between compelling ideals by laughter. In other words, comedy may enable us to adjust incompatible standards without resolving the clash between them. Finally, here is how Sypher (1991:245) describes the use of comedy in helping us with our disillusions: 7 Comedy can be a means of mastering our disillusions when we are caught in a dishonest or stupid society. After we recognize the misdoings, the blunders, we can liberate ourselves by a confident, wise laughter that brings a catharsis of our discontent. We see the flaws in things, but we do not always need to concede the victory, even if we live in a human world. If we can laugh wisely enough at ourselves and others, the sense of guilt, dismay, anxiety, or fear can be lifted . Unflinching and undaunted we see where we are. This strengthens us as well as society. To put it briefly, apart from the pleasure that we get from it, comedy enables us to laugh at evils and errors of human beings. Consequently, it serves the purpose of psychological compensation. In other words, comedy helps us escape from the vices and follies of individuals and societies making us laugh at the imperfections of the world around us. Not only that, but comedy can also be quite in accord with stern morality. It should, however, be noted here that what distinguishes satire from comedy, as Fowler (1973:167) put it, is its lack of tolerance for folly or human imperfection. 2. 7 Satire and Comedy Satire and comedy often shade into each other in ways tha t make an exact borderline difficult to draw. Like satire, comedy has a corrective purpose. The New Encyclopedia Britannica (2005,23,151) highlights that the comic artists purpose is to hold a mirror up to society to reflect its follies and vices, in the hope that they will, as a result be mended. Correspondingly, Johnston shares this view of the corrective purpose of comedy. He argues that satire is a particular use of humor for overtly moral purposes. According to him, satire seeks to use laughter not just to remind us of our common often ridiculous humanity, but rather to expose those moral excesses, those 28 corrigible sorts of behavior which transgress what the writer sees as the limits of acceptable moral behavior. One characteristic feature of satire, as indicated earlier, is criticism and humor. That is, the technique of the satirist consists of a playful critical distortion (Feinberg, 1967:19). Although not everything humorous may be satirical, Harris (2004) states that satire uses humor to make the attack funny. To put it in h is words: Satire, like all literature and poetry, must be intellectually rewarding, be reasonably well written, and especially must entertain in order to survive- and in the particular case of satire, in order to be received at all. The basic mood of attack and the disapproval needs to be softened to some xtent and made more palatable; wit and humor serve this end by making the criticism entertaining, and even attractive. The satirists major objective is unmasking or exposing human follies, vices and shortcomings. As Sypher (1991:242) put it, certainly the laugh of the satirist is often a sneer; and there is an undercurrent of satire in most comedy. As a result, when the satirist uses comic elements, it will only be for the purpose of criticism. In other words, wherever wit is employed to expose something foolish or vicious to criticism, there satire exists. Sutherland (1958:7) strongly argues that comedy, like satire deals with the common errors of our life. He says, If we can agree that it is the satirists intention to expose, or deride, or condemn that distinguishes him from the writer of comedy, then we shall probably find that much of what has conventionally been referred to as comedy should more probably be called satire. On the other hand, the tone of satire may vary in different works 29 eventhough the elements of attack and humor is associated with the efinition of satire. In line with this, Russell and Brown (1967:xviii) argue many satirical works are so playful or whimsical as to preclude the idea of attack, and many other satires, even some acknowledged to be great, lack humor and tend to become ponderous. However, satire and comedy are not exactly the same. Abrams (1981:167) argues that satire differs from the comic in that comedy evokes laughter mainly as an end, while satire derides; that is it uses laughter as a weapo n, and against a butt existing outside the work itself. What sets satire apart from comedy, according to Ian Johnston, is that in satire there is a clear and overt didactic intention. On the other hand, normal comedy aims at producing laughter at our common follies and ourselves. In line with this, Feinberg (1967:101) has the following to say: Uncritical humor is not satire, nor is all satire humorous. But since satirists use all the comic devices for the purpose of criticism, to see how satire works it is necessary to examine four basic techniques of humor: incongruity, urprise, pretense, and catering to the superiority of the audience. In general, there is a common agreement among literary critics that satire uses comedy for the effect of criticism. Besides, as Sutherland (1958:10) puts it, we must be prepared to find the writer of a comedy losing his moral neutrality and slipping into satire, and the satirist occasionally loosening his control over the reader and relaxing into co medy.

Free Speech VS. Hate Speech essays

Free Speech VS. Hate Speech essays Most Americans would like to think that the United States is a place open to diversity with room for everyone. The fact is, hate is a huge block to this vision, and the atrocities of Mathew Shepard and James Byrd grow by the day increasing the search for a remedy. We used to be able to ignore people who spoke of hate because they wore white hoods and had meetings in secluded places. Now, people like Eminen and John Rocker can speak hate over the television, radio, and especially the Internet (Goldstein, 2000). This new form of hate speech has caused much debate and controversy because every where a person looks some form of hate is being spoken. Some institutions have tried to curb hate speech by instituting speech codes, which try to eliminate hate speech. However, these speech codes have been confronted by much debate. Whether or not people need to be censored is a question asked by many in the debate between The First Amendment, which guarantees Civil liberties, and The Fourt eenth Amendment, which guarantees Civil rights. Civil rights vs. Civil liberties. In short, is hate speech protected under the rights and liberties of the constitution. Hate Speech is a very troubling matter for those who believe in the right to Free Speech and expression. They want to stop the hate, but at the same time, maintain the constitution. Many have tried to define hate speech as that which offends, threatens, or insults groups based on race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or a number of other traits (McMasters, 1999). However, what might be easy to define for scholarly or general discourse would simply not be adequate enough to put into law. McMasters (1999), gives several reasons why hate speech is so hard to define. First, "is the definition in terms of what the speech reflects, such as bigotry, bias, prejudice, anger, or fear? Or is it a matter of what the speech conveys: intimidation, vil...

Columbus and Vespucci Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Columbus and Vespucci - Essay Example I recognize him for his efforts to discover and explore new lands that would eventually prove to humanity that religious persecution, warfare, and slavery can be defeated. Now, why do I least prefer Amerigo Vespucci? It is because of his cruelty to the people he discovered. It is without a doubt that he is one of the most remarkable explorers that had ever lived, but his evil deeds were terrible. His letters reveal all these cruelties. Vespucci and his comrades became very bored, doubtful, tired, and heartless to the native population. They disrespected and maltreated those who refuse to become Christians. They invaded small communities and sold indigenous people to slavery for money. They looted villages and plundered everything that will make them rich; they killed a lot of native people not only for practical and selfish reasons, but for entertainment as well. Partly because of these evil deeds, Vespucci became very controversial and