Recent orders
Dirk’s Theory of Origin of Monsters (2)
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Dirk’s Theory of Origin of Monsters
Introduction
Genre theory is a class of literature that categorizes it into different types, such as rhetoric, literary, and media theories (Chandler 2). According to the dirk theory, genres connect to the situations that occur around people during interactions hence affecting their power to help, hurt or speak (Lowe, and Zemliansky 252). Social situations regularly happen due to the interactions between people. Therefore, it has a recurring characteristic of the participants, context, purpose, themes, forms of writing, and their responses. According to dirk, genre does consider not only the characteristics of a piece of writing but also the aim of writing a particular piece and the choice of the specific audience. In Ken Gelder’s in the horror reader, genre theory is evident in the convincing of the audience of the experiences with monsters. The existence of the monsters is recurring, following Dirk’s approach, along with the context at which the situation exists.
Dirk’s Theory in Gelder’s in the Horror Reader
In social situations, in the traditional society, people tend to believe in the existence of monsters in the community. Gelder’s text, In the horror reader, explains the existence of the monsters, by giving experiences of the imagination and information that prove the existence of the monsters. At the beginning of the writing, it states, “Where do monsters come from?” (Gelder 84). In this statement, Gelder has already acknowledged the existence of monsters and now wishes to know their origin. As people may doubt the existence of monsters, the genre responds by accepting that they exist and explore the roots such as God or devils, stars, and parent anatomies. He attempts to explain the origin of both the monster creature and the name itself.
The genre attempts to convince the audience of the existence of monsters and educate on the various origins of monsters (Lestel 262). Dirk states that “…genres focus on the relationship between the makers and audience of the text.” (Chandler 5). This quote is the rhetoric dimension where information with no proof may apply, to create the effect required on the audience. As writers attempted to write the concepts on monsters, the connection between visions and resemblance tend to change. The offspring of a creature should look like them. However, in this case, the beings are differentiated, Gelder uses Aristotle’s book, stating that, “Anyone who does not take from his parents is really a monstrosity…” (Gedler 85). This case determines the truth of the existence of monsters through rhetoric, whereby the author uses Aristotle’s words to persuade, but the information has no sincerity or proof.
In support of the existence of monsters Richard Kearney Terror, in the book philosophy and the sublime, provides proof to the origin of monsters through the exhibits in museums. Previously, monsters were attached to congenital mutants and giants, but as developments occurred, the imaginary concept kept increasing (Kearney 27). Dirk’s idea of recurring concepts is evident in this and also the use of rhetoric genre through information with no proof of the imaginations created by people, but applied to persuade people that monsters genuinely exist (Dirk 251). There is fiction genre, creation of alternative realities other than the current belief, and people are forced to embrace and believe them too.
Conclusion
Genre theory characterizes literature into various categories, each having similar characteristics. Dirk recognizes the genre theory but introduces the context of form in social action. The theory ties with the existence of monsters that keep developing through imaginations and improve their characteristics. This factor keeps recurring by each author as more features rise, using both animal and human features. Gelder, in the horror reader, explains the origin of monsters using Dirks theory genre, to persuade its audience on the existence of monsters. The readers may easily believe in the monsters and create imaginations every time they see a new creature.
References
Chandler, Daniel. “An Introduction To Genre Theory”. Research Gate, 1997, p. 2., Accessed 8 Feb 2020.
Dirk, Kerry. “Navigating Genres”. Writing Spaces: Readings On Writing,, vol 1, 2010, p. 251., Accessed 8 Feb 2020.
Gelder, Ken. The Horror Reader. Routledge, 2002, p. 84.
Kearney, Richard. “Terror, Philosophy And The Sublime”. Philosophy & Social Criticism, vol 29, no. 1, 2003, p. 26. SAGE Publications, doi:10.1177/0191453703029001831.
Lestel, Dominique. “Why Are We So Fond Of Monsters?”. Comparative Critical Studies, vol 9, no. 3, 2012, pp. 259-269. Edinburgh University Press, doi:10.3366/ccs.2012.0062. Accessed 8 Feb 2020.
Lowe, Charles, and Pavel Zemliansky. Writing Spaces. Library Of Congress, 2010, p. 252.
To what extent is American expansion, characterized by a series of incidents and not the pursuit of a specific foreign policy
Name
University
Course
Tutor
Date
To what extent is American expansion, characterized by a series of incidents and not the pursuit of a specific foreign policy?
Introduction
The American expansion is termed as one of the most unique and unforgettable foreign policy event in the history of the United States. The American expansion also did not happen because a foreign policy was being planned or assessed but is culminated by a variety of spontaneous events whose result was a bigger size of the American land.
The American expansion was informal and consisted more of a series of incidents than pursuit of a specific foreign policy. First, the nature of the involvement derived more from domestic influences rather than a thorough assessment of the external reality. Second, the incidences were just too numerous and confusing and it is difficult to directly tie the incidents to steps towards foreign policy.
The nature of the involvement derived more from domestic influences rather than a thorough assessment of the external reality. As stipulated in history from his inauguration speech, President Woodrow Wilson took office expecting mainly to deal with domestic affairs but abrupt incidences resulted to foreign involvement. As a leader, the president had adequate training to solve domestic affairs although the foreign involvement can be looked at as a crisis that resulted from pressure within to react. For instance, in the Spanish-American was fueled from the Democratic side after the sinking of the U.S battleship Maine in Havana. The Spanish-American conflict over the Cuban independence was highlighted in yellow journalism which really angered the Americans who believed that it was being perpetuated by the atrocities.
On the other hand, critics argue that the historic American expansion is likened to imperialism in which the U.S demonstrated continuity of its foreign policy to the acquired land rather than focusing on an aberration. The critics allege that despite the events, the end result is that America extended its rule to the expanded boundary, and this is a showcase of foreign policy. For example, the Paris Peace treaty that required Romania, Italy, Bulgaria, Hungary, and Finland to resume their sovereignty and qualify for membership in the U.S.
The incidences were just too numerous and confusing and it is difficult to directly tie the incidents to steps towards foreign policy. The American expansion was more of a series of abrupt events rather than a pursuit of a specific foreign policy; the events that occurred are investigated. The Tampico incident; the yellow journalism and Spanish-American war; the Paris peace treaty; the gunboat diplomacy; and Seward’s folly are likened to abrupt incidences that led to abrupt decisions and it is hard to understand how they were more of planned foreign policy. The Tampico incident in 1914 can be likened to an American overreaction to minor incident that occurred in the Gulf Coastal town of Tampico and involved U.S sailors and Mexican land forces that were loyal to their general. The arrest and parading of the U.S. sailors was later misunderstood by the U.S officials even after the General released the sailors and sent an apology to the U.S. The result was a breakdown of diplomatic relations and occupation of the port city of Veracuz for over six months. This incident lacks the weight of a real foreign policy issue and is more of a gunboat diplomacy in which the U.S wanted to showcase a show of power. Seward’s folly involves Seward signing a treaty to buy the Alaska region from Russia at a moment when there was triumph after America’s success in the Civil War. America had initially rejected to buy more land because there was no population to fill.
The 19th century American expansion is a serious foreign policy crisis of Wilson’s presidency and therefore it should not be viewed as a dedicated pursuit of foreign policy. The incidents were abrupt and the reactions were more of gunboat diplomacy rather than pursuit of foreign policy.
To what extent does the current law allow a householder to use fatal force against an intruder and is the current approach sa
Name:
Institution:
Course
Tutor:
Date:
To what extent does the current law allow a householder to use fatal force against an intruder and is the current approach satisfactory?
Introduction
The contention that an individual needs to employ violence in self defense activities against the person attacking the same are securely inclined in societal ethics. Most of the individuals consider it an instant reaction to dangerous situations and life threatening instances. On a secondary level, the global community believes in the conviction that wars are permissible especially in instances where a country is attacked for no apparent reason. This explains why increasingly, countries continue to equip dangerous weapons on the pretext that they are expected to be used for self defense.
In addition, it can not be disputed that various nations across the globe are frequently engaging in wars f or purposes of self defense. Similar principles have also been employed at personal level and cases of self defense are increasingly being handled by the courts at different levels. It is against this background that this paper explores the extent to which the current law allows a householder to use fatal force against an intruder. In order to enhance a harmonic consideration, it also highlights whether the current approach is satisfactory.
The current law allows any individual to employ force in repelling any criminal activity that has the capacity to threaten the wellbeing of his or her property. Thus it is lawfully acceptable to employ the force in protection of one’s property. The law in this regard stipulates that an individual can use reasonable force in self protection or to protect other individuals, to prevent criminal activities, to protect one’s property or to help the law enforcers to arrest a suspect of crime. Notably, the notion of reasonable force has been a bone of contention since time immemorial.
Different parties have expressed their varied opinions and discontent in this regard and minimal efforts have been undertaken to provide a distinct value of reasonable force (Mickey & Christopher 34). This is contributed to by the nature of the crimes that are committed in this respect. Usually, the defendant does not have a chance to determine the amount of reasonable force, especially considering the fact that his or her own life could be threatened. In the court contexts, the defendant is also denied a chance to determine the force used due to the recognition that s/he is likely to maintain that the actions were reasonable. In the long run, irrespective of the fact that the same could have employed excessive force, it could be difficult to press charges accordingly.
In his review, Briggs indicates that it is for this reason that the members of the community and the jury are accorded the responsibility of determining the amount of force employed by the defendant in each circumstance (1991, 57). This usually puts in to consideration various factors. To begin with, Jamison asserts that it is worth acknowledging that the conditions of the case are unlikely to allow the defendant to make rational decisions in this respect (89). As such, the analysis of the amount of force often puts in to consideration the degree of subjectivity of the defendant. In particular, specific aspects of the perception of the offender are analyzed accordingly, regardless of the fact that they could be possibly mistaken. Nevertheless, the law contends that the force employed needs to be reasonable as well as proportionate. Essentially, there need to be a balance between the value of the various interests that are meant to be protected by the force and the harm that the respective force is likely to cause.
In his study, McCormack considers reasonable force to be necessary as well as proportionate (52). The amount of force according to this is usually depended on the threat that the person is facing. This is defined under the law of necessity of defense that defines the instances that justify the application of the same. To begin with, Briggs cites that the law allows use of defense of necessity in incidences where the case poses objective dangers that have the capacity to threaten the wellbeing of the accused as well as other individuals in that context (1992, 121) Then, this can only be availed in instances where the accused is perceived to be acting in a reasonable and objective manner to prevent serious injuries and/or death of any party. The jury should then be allowed to make final judgments regarding the conditions that compelled the accused to act in a certain manner. The final decision is also influenced by the assessment of the reaction of a normal person to the particular incident.
In order to enhance justice therefore, the amount of force employed does not entirely determine the nature of the sentence that the defendant might be accorded by the courts. The need to place limits to the employment of force was based on the recognition that the law enforcers rather than individuals should be responsible for upholding justice.
John and Stamimir indicate that there are inherent limits that ensure that these powers are used in a viable manner (67). In particular, it is indicated that in incidences where some form of violence is apparent and excessive force is used, the law denies the defendant a right to murder. In other words, in such cases, committing murder through employment of excessive force is not allowed or excused under any circumstances. On the other hand some jurisdictions tend to reduce the sentence in such instances to manslaughter on the premise that the defendant could have miscalculated the gravity of the force employed. Seemingly, the punishment enforced under such circumstances tends to be lighter than in the former.
Further, Dillmann and Chris postulate that in order for the defendant to be considered genuine, the householder needs to have undertaken necessary measures to avoid any form of conflict with the intruder (52). This provision is also apparent in the common law and stipulates that the defendant needs to have demonstrated a will to retreat from any form of conflict with the attacker. This according to the law is the most fundamental way of avoiding any form of attack. Alternatively, the defendant may exhibit the unwillingness to engage in a confrontation with the attacker by using reasonable force to withdraw and or escape from the same. In this respect, it is not necessary for the defendant to employ violence and fight the attacker accordingly. Instead, s/he can simply withdraw by escaping from the scenario.
In addition, an analysis is usually done to ensure that the defense is not triggered by the desire for revenge. At this juncture, Briggs ascertains that in some cases, the defendant tends to employ excessive force in as a form of revenge to the attacker (1992, 123). Notably, in such instances, the perceived defense is not entirely influenced by the need to protect oneself, one’s property or other individuals whose lives could possibly be at risk. This particularly tends to have adverse implications if murder is involved. In such cases, Mickey and Christopher assert that the defendant is unlikely to escape punishment (82).
Further, Briggs indicates that the physical and mental wellbeing of the accused plays a critical role in determining the viability of self defense (1992, 126). This is used by the jury and courts in determination of the reasonableness of the same. In particular, a person who is mentally unstable or physically handicapped may be accorded leniency in this regard. This is due to the fact that the activities that the person engaged in could possibly have been influenced by the health status, rather than his objective thoughts. This provision is not often extended to psychiatric individuals because of the severity of their actions.
Further, is indicated that the threat needs to be imminent, although not entirely spontaneous. In this regard, Briggs point out that the law permits an individual to prepare for self defense or to repel a conceived attack (1991, 71). A classic example in this respect is the confirmation of Lord Griffiths in the Beckford (1988) AC 130 case. In this, the accused had supposedly produced and stored in his shop several petrol bombs at a period when rioting was rampant in the region. According to the court of appeal, the jury lacked enough evidence to determine whether the bombs were expected to be employed in excessive force. Thus the accused was lawfully permitted to own the bombs.
In addition, Mickey and Christopher indicate that the accused needs not have in any way employed provocation or created a viable situation that would enable the same to use the defense (96). In this respect they assert that the implications for the defense are likely to yield negative outcomes if s/he in ay way provoked the attacker intentionally for other reasons. Common reasons for this include the need to injure the attacker or kill the same purportedly in self defense.
This is exemplified by the Manick (1989) Crim LR 451 case in which the accused made a visit to a man whom he perceived to have stolen the vehicles of his friend. Since he understood and new that the man was dangerous, he armed himself with rice frail for self defense. Unfortunately, he was arrested by the law enforcers before he arrived at the man he considered to have his friend’s vehicle. Notably, charges were pressed against him as his carrying of the weapon in anticipation of an attack was not justified.
Further, it is indicated that he law does not under any circumstance acknowledge and permit the existence of a defense weapon. Thus the householders are not permitted by the law to arm themselves with any form of weapon on the premise that it would be employed in self defense. However, it prescribes that any object that is considered to be employed for daily purposes may be employed in self defense. These include items such as umbrellas, combs and keys. Of great importance in this regard is the fact that the force employed in defense should be reasonable.
Usually, the law has strict consequences for personalities that exhibit excessive force. In particular, studies indicate that persons who use the same in self defense that leads to death of the attacker are often found guilty of the offense. However, as indicated earlier, if murder occurs and the defendant is not found to have employed excessive force, the sentence is usually reduced to manslaughter.
The use of self defense has in the past been compounded by various complexities. Nevertheless, it can be argued that the approach has instrumental in enhancing protection of individuals and their property. Dilmann and Chris indicate that the persons with military skills have particularly played a critical role in enhancing the apprehension of criminals (88). This is because of the fact that they have employed their skills and expertise in overpowering the attackers.
In addition, McCormack indicates that this law has effectively empowered the citizens to defend themselves and their property (68). Statistics indicate that very few cases relating to self defense have had negative effects on the wellbeing of the accused. This according to Briggs indicates that the public understands the specifications underlying its use and utilizes the same for their advantage (1992, 135). This has in return been elemental in fighting crime and enhancing increased collaboration between the law enforcers and the public in fighting crime.
At this point in time, Jaison appreciate that various controversies related to the need to inform the attacker about the skills of these personalities have arisen (99). In particular, studies indicate that this is expected to enable the attacker to make the decision regarding the next course of action. Addition, this information is vital as it frees the defender of the implications of excessive force.
However, Mickey and Christopher contest this and indicate that by deciding to attack, the attacker is deprived of the fundamental rights of defense and protection that are in return transferred to the defendant (64). In addition, considering the nature of the scenario, the possibility of the defendant informing the attacker is likely to be limited. Furthermore, studies assert that the likelihood of the attacker heeding the same is as likely to be limited. In the long run, this is unlikely to yield the desired effects.
Conclusion
From the analysis, it is certain that self defense is at the core of the national law. Seemingly, it is also reflected in the common law. The use of the principles underpinning the same is characterized by various factors. In particular, the notions of reasonable force, proportionality, extent of defense and eminency are considered very important in this respect. Furthermore, the characteristics of the accused that are largely defined by his health status are also given utmost consideration.
Of great importance however is the realization that this law allows for preparation to repel an attack but does not allow one to own any form of weapon on the premise that it is expected to be employed in defense. In general, the prerequisites for employment of this law are wide and varied. Nonetheless, they aim at ensuring that that justice is enforced and upheld at all levels. Notably, this provision has yielded desirable effects as the citizens have been empowered to deal with the challenges accordingly. In essence, it has played a leading role in fighting relative crimes like burglary.
Works Cited
Doug, Briggs. Self Defense Laws. USA: Beverly Book, 1991.
Doug, Briggs. Personal Protection. USA: Beverly Book, 1992
George, Dilmann & Chris Thomas. Pressure and Self Defense. USA: Merrill Pr, 2001
Gillespie Cynthia. Justifiable Homicide, Ohio: University Press1990.
Kevin, Jamison. Common Law Experience, 2003
Louis, John & Stanimir, Alexandrov. Understanding International Law. USA: Bill, 1996
Mickey, Dimic. & Christpoher, Miller. Martial Arts and Defense. UK: McGraw Hill, 2008.
Timothy, McCormack. International Law and Self Defense. USA: Macmillan 1996