Recent orders
The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass
Name:
Course:
Instructor:
Date:
The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass
Frederick Douglass came into existence at around 1817 or 1818. Similar to the vast majority of the slaves, Douglass was not particular about the exact time he was born. His mother (Harriet Bailey) and he parted ways soon after Douglass was born. Captain Anthony, their white master, is speculated to be his father. Captain Anthony served as Colonel Lloyd’s clerk. Under Llyod’s authority, there are hundreds of slaves and often refers to Lloyd’s central plantation as “Great House Farm.” In all of Colonel Llyod’s plantations, life is brutal, as in the case of Southern plantation. Slaves were working for long hours and drained, get small quantities of food, lack beds, and adequate clothing (Douglass, Pg. 3). Going contrary to the rules, not to mention even following them, guarantees being whipped or beaten. In some cases, one could be shot by the plantation overseers. Mr. Severe and Mr. Austin Gore are believed to be the cruelest.
In comparison with other slaves on this plantation, Douglass’s life is a bit fair. As a child, Douglass worked in households as opposed to the fields. Douglass was taken to Captain Anthony’s son-in-law’s brother while he was still aged seven. The guy lived in Baltimore, and Douglass’s life was relatively freer in that city. Generally, individuals owning slaves in the city are cautious about not ruining their reputation to the non-slave-owning neighbors. Their neighbors might term them as neglectful and cruel towards their slaves. Sophia Auld is married to Hugh and is surprising showing kindness to Douglass at first as she has never had slaves before. She introduces Douglass to reading until the time Hugh orders her not to do it, insisting that enlightening the slaves makes them unmanageable. Finally, Sophia succumbed to the idea of slave-owning and no longer showed her natural kindliness (Douglass, Pg. 52). Despite the couple being cruel to Douglass, he prefers Baltimore by far as, through the help of local boys, he learns how to read. Following his enlightening, Douglass is now conscious of slavery evils and the abolitionist existence movement. Eventually, Douglass resolves to run away to the North.
Following Captain Anthony and his heirs’ death, Douglass is returned to Thomas Auld as a server. Auld is naturally mean and cruel based on his false religious piety. Auld views Douglass as somebody who cannot be managed. Consequently, he rents Douglass to Edward Covey for a year, a man recognized for “breaking” slaves. In the first six months, Covey does well in working and whipping all the demons out of Douglass. Douglass turned into a brutish man, uninterested in both freedom or reading, only capable of taking a break from exhaustion and injuries. A point of no return came Douglass resolves to riot against Covey. Their fight lasted for roughly two hours, and since then, Covey ceased from touching Douglass.
The contract ended, and now Douglass is next rented William Freeland for two years. Despite Freeland being a mild and fairer person, Douglass’s desire to run away is nonetheless renewed. There, Douglass started educating other slaves during Sabbath services at the free blacks’ homes. Showing little or no concerns to threats of severe punishments and violence, most slaves from around turned up to Douglass, motivated to learn diligently. Douglass thinks of escaping from Freeland’s, together with the other three slaves. Their mission backfired as someone snitched their plan to Freeland, and were taken to jail. Douglass is sent back to Baltimore by Thomas Auld to learn ship caulking trade. In the trade industry of Baltimore, Douglass faces strained race relations. Free blacks and white employees have been working together, but the white started fearing the rising numbers of free blacks will jeopardize their job positions. Douglass is still a slave and apprentice but faces full weight of intimidation through violent tactics from white colleagues and retreats to switch shipyards (del Mar, Pg. 120). Under the new apprenticeship, he swiftly learned the caulking trade and managed the highest wages possible, at any time handing them over to Hugh Auld.
Ultimately, Hugh Auld grants Douglass permission to hire out his free time. Bit by bit, Douglass saved the money and finally ran away to New York. Douglass could only withhold from explaining his escape details to safeguard the future slaves willing to try the journey. The fear of recapturing makes Douglass change his name from Bailey to Douglass (Zubak, Pg. 2). After some time, Douglass ends up marrying Anna Murray, whom they met in Baltimore. The couple relocated to Massachusetts, where Douglass actively joined the abolitionist movement serving as both an orator and a writer.
In this narrative, Douglass addresses the issue of slavery and is vigorously against slavery. Douglass sought to demonstrate how cruel, unfair, unethical, and ungodly slavery is and should be abolished. His antislavery rebellion started, as he dated while he was still a slave. The major of his argument in the narrative inclines on the recognition of black communities, social injustice, slavery, brutality, and unnaturalness (Murwantono, Pg. 138). Based on his argument concerning slavery, some slavery apologists considered the black community as beats and degenerated subhuman forms of the human species. Concerning the black community being beasts, Douglass emphasized that instead, slavery had brutalized them. He looked at the obviousness of black humanity to that of apologists’ hypocrisy for American slavery on the below question. What is the essence of special laws barring the free actions of African Americans? Why did the slave-owners motivated slaves’ Christianization but banned their religious gathering? Besides those questions, the slaveholders in the United States were afraid and banned black communities from education, taking advantage of their development in the skilled trade.
Another social issue is natural law. As per the narrative, Douglass’s ideas of natural rights were drawn from natural law tradition concerning his antislavery argument. Douglass was a critical thinker who believed in the development of man and civilization. Thus, he viewed slavery in America as brutal backwardness running to counter the progress of history. According to Douglass, the supreme God and history progression are the essentials of truth, justice, and humanity (Blumenthal, Pg. 185). Douglass had numerous sources of belief, such as the American founding document, acquaintances, friends, famous intellectuals, among others. His visions concerning human rights encompass actions. Providential justice is resisted by humans, as seen in the slave-holding states’ resistance concerning slavery abolition and the apathy of other citizens of America about slavery.
Violence and self-respect come as another social issue in this narrative. As the narrative indicates, Douglass actively led up to the United States Civil War and protested against the decision of Dred Scott, distressed by the laws protecting the slaveholders’ property rights over their servants in a free country and the increasing slavery into the United States protectorates. Through his time as a slave, Douglass thinks of liberation and attaining personal freedom as the only way to get self-respect. Douglass tries hard to get educated and eventually manages to know how to read and write. As a result, his education opens the door for him to get an apprenticeship and learn the caulking trade. Douglass was against the cruel treatment of slaves. Following the change of his demeanor, Douglass is taken by Auld to Edward Covey, who was a well-known disciplinarian. He persevered brutal treatment by Covey for six months and eventually retaliated. The pair engaged in a fight that lasted for two hours, and from then henceforth, Douglass earned his self-respect from Covey following his violence.
Works Cited
Blumenthal, Rachel A. “Canonicity, genre, and the politics of editing: how we read Frederick Douglass.” Callaloo 36.1 (2013): 178-190.
del Mar Gallego Durán, María. “WRITING AS SELF-CREATION:” NARRATIVE OF THE LIFE OF FREDERICK DOUGLASS”.” Atlantis (1994): 119-132.
Douglass, Frederick, and Jake Meador. Narrative of the life of Frederick Douglass, an American slave. Random House, Incorporated, 1992.
Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglas. JA, 2018.
Murwantono, D. (2011). PSYCHOANAL YTIC LITERARY CRITICISM OF AMERICAN ROMANTICISM LITERATURE AS REFLECTED IN NARRATIVE OF THE LIFE OF FREDERICK DOUGLASS. Celt: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching & Literature, 11(2), 135-148.
Zubak, Goran. Using the slave narrative Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave to promote intercultural competence in the English Language Classroom. MS thesis. 2020.
The Myths and Realities of Teamwork
The Myths and Realities of Teamwork
Student Name
Institution
Course
Professor Name
Date
The Myths and Realities of Teamwork
Teamwork is essential for any organization because it enables team players to share responsibilities and ideas, reduce stress, enhance each team member’s productivity, and improve the overall performance of an organization. Working as a team promotes innovation and enables employees to gain perspectives on their roles and tasks (Baker, 2006). As much as teamwork promotes the performance and growth of an organization, it is also quite challenging to operate and maintain to completion of tasks and projects. The journey to a higher performance of an organization is quite challenging for both team members and the organization altogether. Many myths and realities surround the concept of teamwork, especially in workspaces. It is necessary for an organization to comprehend its objectives, teamwork significance, and setbacks to counter the myths regarding teamwork. This paper will discuss the myths of teamwork experienced in workspaces.
The book The Myths and Realities of Teamwork by David Wright addresses the six myths and realities of teamwork experienced in most organizations. According to the author, managing teamwork in the most challenging manner is likely to yield a positive income for leaders of organizations (Wright, 2013). Various teamwork myths compromise the operations of an organization. Each myth has a reality to it, and the sooner an organization discovers the reality, the better for it. It will be much easier to run or work in an organization that acknowledges the existence of these myths and devise effective measures to counter them.
The first myth is most people like teamwork. Most organizations assume that their employees value teamwork, hence assigning duties in teams rather than individual work (Sewell, 2001). The truth is that only a third of employees like teamwork, the other third is neutral about the idea while the rest reject teamwork altogether. Companies should consider the working preference of their employees because not all of them share the same team spirit. The productivity and performance of employees rely on their comfortability and passion for a common goal.
The second myth is team conflict is unhealthy. When team players embrace a common objective of an organization, conflicts are bound to arise. They all come with different opinions and approaches regarding the objective or task at hand, which is likely to cause conflict. Disagreements within an organization should be taken positively as a learning opportunity for team members (Illife, 2008). Organizations should also incorporate the habit of preparing rules and regulations that will govern the operations of a team. A team should also be assigned a team leader to facilitate and oversee all the team’s activities. These actions will minimize or eliminate conflicts among employees.
The third myth is teams are harmonious people who compromise their needs for the sake of others. This statement is a myth because the strongest teams in an organization diversify in selecting team players. They bring extensive and different ideas altogether to aid an institution’s progress and improve its performance (Wright, 2008). To better the relationship among diverse team players, it is essential to establish operating rules, identify the members’ strengths and weaknesses, and encourage them to share their talents with team members.
The fourth teamwork myth state that senior managers encourage teamwork. This statement is false because most managers like to manage projects or tasks assigned. Teamwork does the exact opposite of that. It distributes the power of handing tasks to group members, leaving managers with little or no tasks at all. However, if a manager decides to view themselves as an individual who brings people together to facilitate decision-making and resource sharing in projects, teamwork is highly unlikely to affect their security or threaten their position in the organization (Wright, 2013). Team managers should strive to promote positivity among the team members and encourage teamwork spirit.
The fifth teamwork myth is teams are easy to manage and influence. It is essential to understand that team players have different personalities and skillsets. Grouping people into a team is quite challenging because it means making them agree on most of its initiatives (Iliffe, 2008). Therefore, team leaders experience a hard time leading and influencing the team members into agreeing and meeting on common ground. For this to happen, team leaders should be courageous, assertive, and fully aware of themselves and the position they hold as far as the team is concerned. They should understand that they are in control, not necessarily to harass or push team members around but to reinforce order, motivate members, foresee operations and ensure tasks and projects are completed within the stipulated period.
The final teamwork myth is teamwork is essential for business success. Teamwork is vital in any workspace, especially when handling huge tasks. However, it does not apply to every aspect of a business. Small tasks that require fast decision-making and implementation will not be successful if placed in the hands of a team. Organizations should evaluate their tasks and distinguish those that need teamwork from those that could thrive if handled by an individual (Wright, 2013). This action will yield a positive outcome in an organization and improve its overall performance.
The most common teamwork myth is team conflict is unhealthy. Most people are convinced that team members should be neutral and have good relationships to allow easy task management. It would be difficult to convince people that sometimes conflict is suitable for an organization or team members. Society believes that conflict is the downfall of an organization because it will bring mistrust among team members. People focus so much on the conflict instead of the healthy ways to resolve it and learn from it. They fail to understand that conflict is inevitable among team members. The only way is to approach it positively and tackle it appropriately with the help of the team leader.
References
Baker, D. P., Day, R., & Salas, E. (2006). Teamwork as an essential component of high-reliability organizations. Health services research, 41(4 Pt 2), 1576–1598. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00566.xIliffe S. (2008). Myths and realities in multidisciplinary team-working. London journal of primary care, 1(2), 100–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/17571472.2008.11493220 Sewell, G. (2001). What Goes Around, Comes Around: Inventing a Mythology of Teamwork and Empowerment. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 37(1), 70–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886301371005Wright, D. (2013). The myths and realities of teamwork, 1st ed. Retrieved from http://bookboon.com/en/the-myths-and-realities-of-teamwork-ebook
The myth of clean coal
Surname
Professor
Date
The myth of clean coal
Clean coal refers to several technologies that are used in converting emissions from burning coal such as carbon dioxide to reduce the greenhouse footprint and contribute towards managing climate change. Advocacy towards maintaining the production of energy through coal is based on the fact that coal is a cheap and more reliable source of energy compared to other renewable sources. The source of energy has been dubbed as “clean” since the introduction of technologies that reduce the amount of carbon iv oxide, nitrous oxide and Sulphur dioxide emitted in the air, hence reducing the fall of acidic rain and depletion of the ozone layer.
In their article “The Myth of Donald Trump’s ‘Beautiful Clean Coal,” Hodges, Wilkes, and Watanabe, cite the President’s remarks on reviving more coal plants by implementing the use of “clean coal.” This is in contrary to his counterparts such as the German chancellor who aims at closing all coal plants, even those considered the cleanest in Germany (Hodges, Wilkes, and Watanabe). For instance, General Electric Co. is one major coal facility in Germany with the highest emissions of greenhouse gases. Although the authors point out countries that are fighting coal energy, they do not seem to share a similar opinion with them. They tend to lean on the probabilities of using clean coal in energy production.
I, however, do not agree with the authors as coal energy presents a threat to the world that is fighting for green energy and better actions to reduce global warming. Moreover, the cost required when producing clean coal is much higher (at least 40% higher) as compared to when it produces unclean energy. Besides, approximately 70% of coal is wasted when clean coal is used as it has to go through filtering processes to remove any other dirt. The authors, however, argue that the amount of carbon dioxide emission is reduced by 25%-35%, which makes it almost the same level as natural gas in terms of polluting the environment (Hodges, Wilkes, and Watanabe).
The authors also provide compelling evidence and cases that cite the effectiveness of continuing to use coal as a source of energy. For example, they use the EnBW’s so-called RDK8 unit in Karlsruhe coal facility that has been named as supercritical as one of the cases that show technologies that have been employed to use clean coal. The technology, in this case, is reusing water in the process to produce extra electricity; which could be a cheap source of energy for countries such as Indonesia and Bangladesh.
Although using “clean coal” may serve as a cheap source of energy for both developed and developing countries, its effects on the environment cannot be ignored. There is no sufficient evidence to conclude that “clean coal” is clean and has no adverse effects on the climate and the people around the plants. Moreover, the costs involved in adopting these new technologies are very high and will require heavy investments which may not be possible for developing countries. Also, coal mining poses an environmental as well as a health risk to those working in the mines. Therefore, projecting energy and resources towards more research and improvement in green energy will bring the world a step closer in fighting climate change and solving other risks associated with coal energy.
Work cited
Hodges, Jeremy, William Wilkes, and Chisaki Watanabe. “Bloomberg – The Myth Of Donald Trump’s “Beautiful Clean Coal.”” Bloomberg.com. N.p., 2018. Web. 9 Apr. 2019.