Recent orders
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead (2)
Name:
Professor:
Course:
Date
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
Fate and Free Will
“Inside where nothing shows, I am the essence of a man spinning double-headed coins, and betting against himself in private atonement for an unremembered past.” (1.56-57)
Fate is introduced at the very beginning of the scene where consecutive coin tosses keep coming up heads, which indicates that at this point, the laws of chance have been halted. “A weaker man might be moved to re-examine his faith … in the law of probability (1.12)” The theme of fate in this play follows the words of William Shakespeare owing to the play being grounded on Hamlet.
For this reason, the fate of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern was written in the 17th century. Any time that this play has derailed from Hamlet, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern find themselves bored and apathetic. When these two plays are interconnected, the Rosencrantz and Guildenstern? Continue to wonder to what extent are their lives dependent on fate and chance?
When Rosencrantz and Guildenstern become aware of the switched letter, the latter realizes that getting on the boat has guided them to their deaths. Guildenstern notes that although they can move, clatter around and even change direction on this boat, their movement is still controlled by a bigger one that strings them around as adamantly as the wind and the current. Here, the freedom of movement becomes analogous to free will, and the boat represents fate. According to Stoppard, the course of life events is independent of free will. No matter the actions people pursue or the direction they take in their activities, the destination does not change, and in the case of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, death by execution.
The theme of language and communication
ROS: What are you playing at?
GUIL: Words, words. They’re all we have to go on. (Pause.)
ROS: Shouldn’t we be doing something – constructive?
GUIL: What did you have in mind?… A short, blunt human pyramid…?
ROS: We could go.
GUIL: Where? (Stoppard 1.300-306)
In Tom Stoppard’s play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, he creates characters that often play with words. These two title characters constantly pun off each other’s words without much direction to the dialogue or having a purpose for it. On the contrary, they goof around like children tossing a ball at each other back and forth. The consistent model of poor communication in the play is a hint at a broader breakdown in understanding between the characters that set the stage for the play’s tragic spiral. Lingualism purports that with the absence of language, there is no thought. Language is used to shift thought from a mind to the next. It is sometimes viewed as a powerful tool for writing the fate of oneself. But for the case of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, language is just but an impotent tool that they use to speculate. Because language feeds the mind with information and result in individuals entertaining certain thought with profound consequences, it influences the resulting behavior, meaning the lack of use of language by Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to this effect sends the two characters to tragedy.
The Theme of Death
“Guildenstern: You see him now and then you don’t see him”
Death is a central motif in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead as it describes the convolution of life, the complexity of death, and the events that lead to it. The theme of death is significant in depicting the theory of determinism vs. free will. The time when Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead was written, a number of people were questioning the existence of God and the afterlife.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern ponder over what happens when a person dies and seem to mutually conclude that after one dies, nothing is left of them but their body. This play questions every aspect of living with death as the only certainty. Death is an inevitability that is guaranteed by the play’s title and one that the characters, regardless of their questioning, have no power to avoid. This play uses William Shakespeare’s hamlet as a motif that dictates the course of the story. On the other hand, the human condition directs its course as well. Indeed, human condition answers the characters’ everlasting questions on where they are heading as well as their questions regarding fate. Death for every human thing and living creature is both a destination as well as a destiny. Guildenstern reiterates that “Death is … not. Death isn’t. You take my meaning. Death is the ultimate negative. Not-being.” In doing so, death is painted as the ultimate certainty (the path for every mortal) while at the same time being the ultimate uncertainty (nobody has an idea of what death is). The only presumption Guildenstern can come up with is that death is the opposite of life.
Guildenstern’s obsession with finding the meaning of death prolongs to his disagreement with the player. In his argument, Guildenstern believes that death is too significant to be sufficiently depicted on stage; the player in his defense does not see any difference with actual and implied death. Death does not hold any special import to the player and is instead the most certain-and thus routine-thing of all.
The Connection Between Life and the Stage
Tom Stoppard’s play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead highlights the close association concerning life and theatre. Various features of this play are dedicated to emphasizing this link, an important point that this production asks its spectators to take up that the characters in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet are actual, and a narrative to their story needs to be created from a different perspective. Within the play, the Tragedians and their play depict events that will ultimately befall Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. The actors in the play have two characters that resemble Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who eventually die in the same manner Stoppard’s characters do. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern also do not help but notice that the two characters the roles synonymous to their own are dressed in the same attire as them. Rosencrantz becomes so confused by the reason he identifies the actor outfitted as he is and later tells him that he is not the person (the actor) supposed he was. In summary, theater is a perfect reflection of life to the extent that Rosencrantz cannot tell one from the other.
Guildenstern, on his part criticizes the actor for his assumption that their performance on the stage can portray feelings, particularly the fear of demise. The actor’s reply comes in 2 perspectives. That portrayed death is the only real death because the audience and people, in general, believe in it, and it is what they expect. He goes on to create a demonstration of his point with the help of Guildenstern, who pangs him with a pretend blade. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are finally converted by the actor’s depiction, which supports his assertion that people really buy what theater sells. Indeed, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern believe in death when it is portrayed in theater as they cannot bring themselves to accept as true their particular looming deaths and for which they cannot visualize any anticipations.
Works Cited
Stoppard, T. (1967). Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are dead: a play in three acts. Samuel French, Inc..
Cuisine Diversity among the Mexican and Southwestern Cultures
Subject
Students Name
Institution of AffiliationDate
Cuisine Diversity among the Mexican and Southwestern Cultures
Cultural heritage is one of the aspects that different communities adore and live to be proud of no matter where they are located. Various communities have different cultures that are exhibited in various forms such as foods, clothing and other ways of life. In the book “Border Bites’ in McWhorter, it’s no different as the author; Heather Gianakos compares various delicacies from different cultures in a bid to show the rich foods that different communities adore as well as the differences in those types of foods. Reading from the book name ‘Border Bites,’ we already have a clue of what the author is planning to discuss in the book as it is all about delicacies. Again by the name ‘Border,’ the reader is intrigued with the thoughts that the author wants to discuss issues that cross over the border and for this case the Mexican and American border. The author sets up the essay by making the readers aware of the topic to be discussed, and that is an overlap in the different variations of the American foods.
The author’s primary purpose of writing the essay is to educate the readers making them aware of the rich diversity of the American foods and how different they are from a community to the other. A lot of people are not aware of the differences that exist in the types of foods consumed by various communities. In the book, the author discusses the differences between the Southwestern foods with Latin influences versus the traditional Mexican cooking, and therefore the primary aim of the author is to make the reader aware of the differences thus serving an educational motive. The cultural traditions, as well as the geographical influences, are among the factors that contribute to the subtle flavor differences among the two types of foods.
The essay is a comparison as well as a contrast due to various reasons. For one, the author chooses two subjects, and that is the Southwestern food versus the Mexican food to which tend to be closely related in the sense that the two communities border one another and therefore there has been a lot of cultural exchanges between the two communities, and consequently they are enough to make a comparison. However, there do exist some differences in the delicacies, and consequently, the topic under discussion is worth for contrast, and thus the author compares and contrasts the foods with a specific aim of educating the reader. At the beginning of the essay, the author mentions that the differences between the foods are subtle and most often, subtle differences get lost in a subject by subject comparison (McWhorter, 374). Point by point comparison enables the author of the book to focus on the petty scale items with close attention to detail in the bid to distinguish the differences and similarities in a subject.
Various situations give rise to the cooking styles and here is where the main differences and similarities are seen. The other makes the readers aware that there are difficult situations for the southwestern foods and this is evident from the topic sentence. The author, therefore, tells the reader that she will discuss the conditions under which the different styles get to be developed. Concerning the Southwestern foods, there are varying difficult conditions to those of the Mexican foods. In the southwestern foods, the cooking is done over the campfires with minimal ingredients while on the other hand, the Mexican foods are cooked at home and around the coastal areas (McWhorter, 374). The Mexican food varies again in that the food is cooked with plenty of seafood fresh fruits and vegetation, an ingredient that is hard to find in the southwestern foods as the people are not close to the shores.
The other difference between the two foods arises in the manner to which the tortillas are made. The tortillas are a thin and flat pancake that is made from the maize flour and can be eaten hot or cold mostly with a savory filling. In Mexico, the tortillas are made from corn and have been a traditional food among the indigenous Mexicans for many years (McWhorter, 374). There are slight differences in the making of tortillas from the people of the southwest in that the culture borrows much from the Mexican culture in that the tortillas are the same shapes but rather differ in the content. In the Southwestern tortillas, the main ingredient is wheat flour, and this replaces the corn flour in the Mexican culture in making the tortillas. In making the difference clear, the author provides the example of tamales to support the claim that corn is one of the key difference between the Mexican cuisine and that of the Southwestern.
The difference between the two cuisines tend to deepen further in that apart from the tortillas, other ingredients tend to make the difference, and this is evidenced in the preparation of meat. Meat is prepared differently in the two cultures. The southwestern cuisine is made up of fried chicken, and this is different from the Mexican cuisine in that the Mexican cooking is composed of stewed meat and sometimes baked (McWhorter, 374). From this difference, the Mexican cuisine of meat is served with stew making it different from the southwestern cuisine that is fried with no stew for the same type of meat that is derived from chicken.
Apart from chicken meat, beef is another recipe that distinguishes the two cultures. The similarity is that they both consume beef and meat, but the main difference arises in the recipes. The southwestern culture cuisine of beef is made up of grilled meat (McWhorter, 374). The Mexican cuisine of beef is served with a combination of other things, spiced and filling a tortilla. To the Mexican culture, meat is an ingredient but not treated as the central focus.
Pork is another kind of meat that is a differentiating factor between the foods of the two cultures. In the southwestern cultures, the barbeque is famous, and the author describes competitions in the making of the barbeque. The author further notes that the origin of the barbeque is in the Mexican cooking and it’s, therefore, right that despite the barbeque being famous in the southwestern culture, it has its origin from the Mexican culture (McWhorter, 374). The author continues to note that the style of preparing the pork is similar, but the difference arises among the ingredients used in the preparation of the delicacy. The author through the barbeque prepared from pork is able to convince the readers that the southwestern culture in terms of food was influenced by the Mexican foods considering that the tortillas are a Mexican cuisine that has also been adopted by the Southwestern cultures.
The author has achieved her primary goal of showcasing the differences and similarities among the cuisines of the Southwestern and Mexican foods. Besides, she has also served the purpose of educating the readers in that they have been made aware of the similarities between the foods of the two cultures while at the same time made aware of the dominant culture. The Mexican foods that most influenced the southwestern foods such as the tortillas and barbeque and therefore making the two cultures almost similar. The author has also made clear distinctions between the two cultures through examining the minor distinctions preventing the reader having the view of a singular style, and this includes fried and stewed meat and chicken differentiating between the two cultures.
Work Cited
McWhorter, Kathleen T. Successful College Writing: Skills-Strategies-Learning Styles. Macmillan, 2011.
Ethnocentrism According to Bizumic (2018), ethnocentrism is the belief that an individual’s ethnic group is inherently better
Ethnocentrism
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Professor’s Name
Date
Ethnocentrism
According to Bizumic (2018), ethnocentrism is the belief that an individual’s ethnic group is inherently better than all others. Ethnocentric people are inclined to think that the ideas, beliefs, practices, and values of their own culture are superior to those of other cultural groups, and they judge those of different cultural groups according to the criteria that are prevalent in their own culture. Besides, because of the commonalities that individuals have with the majority of members of their cultural group, the ethnocentric method makes it possible for individuals to cultivate a good self-image with a reduced likelihood of encountering conflict or rigidity.
However, ethnocentrism is the leading cause of divisions among people from different races, ethnicities, and religious groups. Also, ethnocentrism can cause certain intergroup emotions, such as contempt and fear. Besides, it can fuel ethnic cleansing, ethnic wars, and even genocide (Bizumic, 2018). For example, ethnocentrisms lead to conflicts between Western Native Americans. Since the white people were ethnocentric about their own culture, they desired the Native Americans to adopt many aspects of white culture, such as their religion and educational system. The Native Americans, however, turned down the proposal and instead began developing their own culture in the hope that it would be more superior. This enraged the whites, thereby sparking conflicts between the two groups.
While many individuals are aware that ethnocentrism is a harmful phenomenon, they may not be aware that it happens everywhere, at both the political and local levels. While it is simple to point the finger at colonial women and men responsible for the oppression of enslaved people, ethnocentrism is still practiced in today’s American society. For example, Americans are convinced that their culture is more valuable than all other people’s. For example, the growth of technology and industry, as well as the amassing of riches, are often highly valued in American culture. Another kind of ethnocentrism is shown when individuals in the United States of America believe that immigrants are stealing employment from native-born Americans and that immigrants should not be stealing jobs from Americans. The idea that only those with American citizenship should be allowed to hold employment in the United States is an example of the kind of thought known as ethnocentrism. In addition, the Americans are ethnocentric about their religion, and prejudice and discrimination exist against the U.S. Muslims (Oskooii et al., 2021).
Ethnocentrism has led to a negative impact on the America’s international relations. For example, according to Wylie (2018), owing to the culture of the United States, in many cases, U.S. foreign policy lacked an understanding of the cultures of the countries it engaged with. Americas have always felt that their cultures are always superior to other nations. Besides, due to ethnocentrism America only permits local companies to safeguard their markets and prohibits other companies from accessing the market from outside. Besides, if the host nation displays a high ethnocentrism, it will be difficult for an American corporation to establish a presence there.
References
Bizumic, B. (2018). Ethnocentrism: integrated perspectives. Routledge.
Oskooii, K. A., Dana, K., & Barreto, M. A. (2021). Beyond generalized ethnocentrism: Islam-specific beliefs and prejudice toward Muslim Americans. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 9(3), 538-565.
Wylie, L. (2018). Assessing Howard J. Wiarda’s Contributions to Our Understanding of U.S. Foreign Policy in Latin America and the Caribbean. Polity, 50(4), 684-696.