Political and religious corruption Essay Example for Free

Political and religious corruption Essay ‘Tragedy’ and ‘satire’ are the weapons used by men of letters for different ends. Tragedy arouses the emotions of pity and fear in the hearts of viewers and readers; while satire makes them laugh as well as make them see the real picture lying beneath the one appeared on the surface. Now, let us discuss in detail how the use of satire in writing literature conveys effectively the message of religious and political corruption as compared to the use of tragedy. Tragedy primarily deals with the disaster that comes to those individuals who represent the flaws and shortcomings that are, to a large extent, universal. Tragedy is basically a cry of protest against the tragic circumstances and situations in which the tragic hero finds himself. Aristotle in his book Poetics says that the aim of these incidents is to arouse the emotions of ‘pity and fear’ in the hearts of viewers and readers in order to carry out the ‘catharsis of such emotions’. He also believes that these incidences should happen to the hero not by some ‘vice and depravity’ on the part of the hero but by some ‘error of judgment. ’ So the basic aim of tragedy is purging the viewer of the emotions of pity and fear and not that of making him particularly aware of the corruption, depredations, degradations and problems existing in the society in the realms of morality, religion, politics etc. So a number of times it happen that the viewers weep at the tragic situations instead of thinking about the social and religious problems encountered by the hero of the story. For instance, ‘the duchess of Malfi’ makes the viewers less aware of the political and religious corruption existing at the time in the Jacobean society and more aware of the misfortunes and troubles that fall upon the duchess and Antonio –her second husband. Yes, Webster raised his fingers towards the corrupt practices existing at the time in the palace by the example of greedy, lunatic and incestuous Ferdinand and towards the corrupt religious situation by the example of the cardinal-the duchess’s brother, who plays an important role in conspiring the murder of her sister, has a mistress and then killed her afterwards. The murder of Duchess, Antonio, Bosola and the excessive terror and violence in the last scenes nauseates the viewers and do not give them enough time and space to ponder over the social, political and religious violations existing at the time and discussed in the play. On the other hand, satirist is believed to be a kind of self-appointed guardian of social standards, of truth, of moral, political, religious and ethical values. He is a man who is supposed to take upon himself the task of correcting, censuring and ridiculing the follies and vices existing in the society and thus to bring contempt and derision upon the deviations and irregularities from civilized and widely-acceptable social norms. Satirical comedy is meant to be dramatic, whose basic and primary purpose is to expose, censure and ridicule the follies, vices and shortcomings existing in the realms of society, ethics, politics, and religion. Thus as compared to the use of tragedy the use of satire works best as a weapon aiming at exposing the political, religious and social and ethical corruption of an era. Let us discuss it in detail with the examples of Gay’s ‘the Beggars’ Opera’ and Jonathan Swift’s ‘the Gulliver’s Travels’. Gay’s ‘The Beggars’ Opera’ is intended to be a satire on the politics and society of his time. The heroes and the heroines undergo many difficulties and there were, at times, clear indication of impending deaths. But the opera does not make the viewers teary, rather it amuse them, make them laugh and at the same time made them think on the bleak political, ethical, and social scenario prevailing at the time. The viewer’s attention was directed towards the political corruptions, thefts, and high-handed tactics adopted by Sir Robert Walpole-the prime minister of England at that time- by the examples of Peachum and Macheath. Peachums behavior as a thief, as a womanizer, and as a double-crosser directly aims at Sir Robert Walpole, who was also known as a corrupt leader as well as an adulterer at that time. Then the attention of the viewers was directed towards the corrupted ethical state of the society of that time by the examples of unmarried mothers in ‘the Beggars Opera’, by the example of Polly and Lucy. The corruption is shown to be permeated deep down in the annals of the society and the music, crispy and thought provoking scenes and dialogues made the viewers seriously think and ponder on the state of affairs. Unlike ‘the Duchess of Malfi’, the viewers of the Beggars Opera’ did not weep but the use of satire made them think and make decisions about the issues towards which there attention was directed by the writer of the Opera. Jonathan Swift in his book ‘the Gulliver’s Travels’ made pungent satire at the political, ethical, intellectual, physical and religious aspects of the English society of that time. He criticizes the politics of his time by making the readers feel, with the examples of the distribution of three colored ribbons to the winners in games, walking on tight rope, etc. that how the political offices at that time were distributed, not on the basis of intellect and political sagacity but on the basis of petty acrobatic skills. Flimnap-the Lilliputian treasurer, is a grotesque representation of Sir Robert Walpole. The Lilliputian palace intrigues are the satiric representation by Swift of the English Royal palace’s state of affairs. The king of Lilliput made the readers think about the greed and avarice and tyranny to which a king can fall. The by the example of Brobdingnagian King’s references to the politics and history of England of that time was very cutting and biting for the English readers- who think the politics of their country as the best of all in the world. The King’s remark that only justice and common sense is required to run the governments and not the bulk of books is also very thought provoking. All this was meant by Swift to shake the people out of their complacency and make them think how horrible the state of affairs has been. Swift made a reference to the corrupted religious situation of the time by discussing the feuds between the big-endians and the small-endians. This was a war waged between two groups of Lilliputian, one group insist on breaking the egg from its smaller end , while the other insisted on breaking it from the bigger end. This is a reference to the intellectual conflicts going on between the different religious sects at that time in England. The most pungent and intensely thought provoking satire is written in the last section of the book where yahoos are compared with the brutal elements in the human nature while horses-houyhnhnms-are considered as the paragons of wisdom and intellect. Yahoos are always ready to fight with one another; they are portrayed as very greedy, querulous, lecherous and gluttonous. Houyhnhnms are thinking of banishing the race of yahoos from their area. Thus from this whole discussion we gather that as compared to tragedy , the weapon of satire is better able to convey the social, political and ethical corruption prevailing at the time of writing of that piece of art to the readers and viewers. Tragedy primarily discusses the sorrows and misfortunes related to a single person, it purges the viewers and readers of the emotions of pity and fear by evoking and fashioning these emotions in them. Satire on the other hand is a tool with which the writer exposes the multi-dimensional social ills of the society with a smile on his face. The readers and viewers laugh with the writer and at the same time think about making amends of the faults and problems prevailing in the society. The satire does not nauseate the viewers and so they are left with enough energy to think about correcting the society and doing the needful.

Shakespeares Othello - The Character of Iago Essay -- Othello essays

The Character of Iago      Ã‚   In Othello, by William Shakespeare, one of the most intriguing characters is Iago. At first glance he seems to be pure evil, but I think his actions are much more complex. Through thought-out words and actions Iago is able to manipulate others to do things that benefit him and move him closer to his goals. This character is consumed with envy and deceit that leads to theft and killing. Iago is the main driving force in this play, pushing Othello and the other characters towards their tragic endings.    Iago is not your ordinary villain. He is smart and an expert judge of people's character and uses this to his advantage. For example, he knows Roderigo is in love with Desdemona and figures Roderigo would do anything to have her as his own. Iago states, "Thus do I ever make my fool my purse." By playing on his hopes Iago is able to swindle money and jewels from Roderigo, making a substantial profit and making him a pawn in his plan. Iago is also quick on his feet and able to improvise when the unexpected occurs.    Being of smart mind, Iago is quick to recognize the advantages of trust, thus using it as a tool in forwarding his goals. Throughout the play he is often referred to and known as "honest Iago." He even states, "I am an honest man..." Trust is a powerful emotion that can easily be abused. As seen with Othello who, "holds (him) well/The better shall (Iago's) purpose work on him." Iago's use of his trust is greatly abused and beneficial only to him. His "med'cine works! Thus credulous fools are caught..." Iago slowly poisons people's thoughts, implanting ideas in their heads without implication to himself. Iago, a masterful deceiver, says, "And what's he t... ...to be a person "of exceeding honesty, (who) knows all qualities, with learned spirit of human dealings." Iago does know all about human dealings, but he is far from honest. He uses the trust Othello puts into their friendship to turn him into a jealous man. Iago told Othello that his wife was cheating on him thus Othello thought he was killing for justice. He even said he "loved not wisely but too well." When the opportunity occurred Iago was lurking, waiting for the chance to take advantage of Othello. Iago succeeded in destroying all he sought out.    Works Cited and Consulted:    Bradley, A.C. Shakespearean Tragedy. New York: Penguin Books, 1991.    Shakespeare, William. "The Tragedy of Othello the Moor of Venice" The Norton Shakespeare. Ed. Stanley Wells & |Gary Taylor. New York/London, W.W. Norton Company,1997. 2100-2174      

Ethnicity and Racism Essay

Introduction Ethnic identity in varied urban society is maintained against force to assimilate, in part, by an opposing process of pejorative and odious distinction. Name-calling serves to expound and to restate demarcations against which one positively mirrors oneself and one’s group. Schermerhorn, cited in Sollors (1996), illustrates an ethnic group as follows: A collectivity within a larger society having actual or reputed common ancestry, memories of a common historical past, and a cultural focus on one of more figurative elements defined as the epitome of their people hood. Instances of such symbolic element are: relationship patterns, physical contiguity (as in localism or sectionalism), religious affiliation, language or vernacular forms, tribal association, nationality, phenotypal features, or any combination of these. An essential accompaniment is some consciousness of kind amongst members of the group. (Sollors, 1996, p. xii) Jones ( 1997) characterized ethnic group as â€Å"any group of people who set themselves apart and/or are set apart by others with whom they interrelate or co-exist on the base of their perceptions of cultural delineation and/or common descent† (p. 1). According to Jones, ethnicity contains all of those social and psychological phenomenon linked with a culturally defined group identity. Ethnicity centers on the ways in which social and cultural practices intersect with one another in the recognition of, and relations between ethnic groups (p. 1). The development and expansion of ethnic identity that takes place when an individual recognizes and affiliates with a particular ethnic group is multifarious. This significant personal and group identification has decisive emotional, behavioral, and cognitive implication that affects all aspects of development. Ethnic Groups Perception Phinney (1989, 1990) and others illustrated ethnic identity through components consciousness, self-labeling, attitudes, behaviors that consequence in the individual’s recognition with a particular group and with the attainment of group patterns through membership. Similarly, Bernal and Knight (1993) viewed ethnic identity as a psychological build that includes â€Å"a set of thoughts about one’s own ethnic group membership† (p. 7). These definitions deal with the evocative content and apparent distinctiveness of ethnic identity. Of significance to note is that these components operate at two levels individual and group (Branch, 1994) and within two areas self-given and other credited. Though components are a decisive part of the definition, components in and of themselves do not have expounding capabilities: why and how identity forms and develops. As ethnic groups in the United States are professed as occupying sociopolitical, cultural positions within a hierarchical system, the implementation, demonstration, or privatization of ethnic practices are inclined by factors such as physical, cultural and ethnic markers, antagonism, emulation, social facsimile, power, situational events, and scales of inclusion and contribution ( Hollins, 1996; Jones, 1997). These factors influence the scale to which ethnic identity attribution, or self-labeling, is internally driven, outwardly imposed, or both. Some scholars think that evenness in self-labeling and the acknowledgment and performance of established modes of behavior in social areas in which ethnic identity is reconfirmed and authenticated begins around 8 years old (Aboud, 1984, 1987). However, Spencer ( 1985) pointed out that identity is a developmental process in stable transformation. Developmentally, the traditions young children accept, display, and integrate ethnic identity content into their personal and group identity diverges from the ways they are demonstrated and given significance at other life ages. We know that young children (birth to three and four years old obtain ethnic values, customs, language styles, and behavioral codes long before they are competent to label and know them as ethnic ( Sheets, 1997; Spencer, 1985). Intellectuals who study ethnic identity development in young children from a socialization viewpoint believe that the ethnic identity progression for children of color begins at birth, at the initial interactions between the child, family, and community (Sheets, 1997; Spencer, 1985). Sheets (1997) sustained that the continual existence of personal and societal markers such as skin color, language, food choices, values, and association in a dominant or non-dominant group instills in children ethnic roles and behaviors that practice them for eventual self-labeling. Likewise, Alba (1990) referring to White ethnics, continued that this early home-life frame of satisfactory alternatives creates a exceptional identity. He argued that this personality, conversant by ethnicity, exists at deep levels, present even while individuals reject their ethnicity. This agrees with identity theory in social psychology, which conjectures that the multi-identities within an individual function at diverse levels of importance. Stryker (1968) recognized this degree of confession and commitment as salience. This constituent of choice in identity labeling for White ethnics seems to be less challenging for White ethnics than for ethnics phenotypically or ethnically marked. However, for a developing ethnic identity, feelings of shared aims with a particular ethnic group implies explicit movement toward a conscious acknowledgment of and assurance with the group (Alba, 1990), resulting in self-identification with diverse degrees of salience. Thus, deliberately or unconsciously, cognitively or behaviorally, individuals use ethnic identities to classify themselves and others for the rationale of social interactions in varied settings. The Consequences of Stereotyping There is an immense and admired literature on the effects of stereotyping, The overt rationale of an ethnic epithet is to slur and to injure. But calling names is also an endeavor, whether quite deliberately realized or not, to control the behavior of the ridiculed group. This attempt at social control by disparaging labeling is an effort to influence reality by the mysterious identity of the spoken symbol with the nonverbal fact. The belief is that if one can name or add a label to an object, in this case, an ethnic individual or group, then one can use power over it by just calling its name. If the name is abusive, condescending, scolding, or ridiculing, it is expected that this description will elicit an proper response, such as causing the wounded to cower, to be degraded, to be scolded and thus to feel blameworthy, or to act out the prediction of ridiculousness. Usually this prediction is fulfilled in the eye of the beholder by selectively perceiving or misperceiving the genuine behavior of the group over which he seeks control. Yet the resultant social process of labeling and stereotyping at times also leads to redefinitions of the relations between groups and sometimes eventually has the portended effect upon the behavior and self-concept of the victim, a consequence that has been called â€Å"in authentication.† The social psychosomatic process of being proscribed entails losing one’s legitimacy by acquiring a fake image of one. The stereotypes expressed by nicknames are one device by which several minority group persons are deindividualized or depersonalized. Minority group members recognize numerous of the values of the society in which they live, including at times the conventional images of themselves. Blacks, for instance, in the past had many nicknames for other ethnic blacks that were a system of color-caste coding and gestured an recognition of one decisive factor of white racism. This and other examples prove to one of the disastrous implications of name-calling-eventual self-derogation of a group. Not simply do groups sometimes understand the stereotyped image of themselves, but at times they emphasize it by conforming to its behavioral expectations. They have then avowed the other’s image and are thus proscribed. Conversely, minorities, particularly blacks, have opposed stereotypes in creative ways. Derogatory labels, together with names such as nigger, through inversion, have been given optimistic meanings within the group. Broader stereotypes, such as robbery, sexual abandon, juvenile behavior, and laziness, through conversion, are acted out as techniques of hostility and mockery against whites. For these and other reasons, the issue of ethnic slurs is typically regarded, analytically, as a predicament in social psychology and, normatively, as a social problem. Situational and Environmental Context The context and circumstances (e.g., locations, sociopolitical radicalized ramifications, economic circumstances, and time) in which ethnic identity opens out is another element of ethnic identity (Branch, 1994). This is an area in require of research. Family socialization outlines that inspire values and social and behavioral codes in their progeny vary within similar groups and are reliant in part on particular circumstances such as socioeconomic status, generational influences, and geographic location (Hollins, 1996; McAdoo, 1993). If home-rearing performs finds out how people use their cultural resources to settle in to new and discrete environments ( Mintz & Price, 1992), this signifies that the mechanism of ethnic identity not only activate differently at diverse developmental ages, but also might be expressed another way in different contextual settings. For instance, attainment of values and behavioral and social prototypes are mechanism in the ethnic identity improvement of young children that can herald self-labeling and appreciation. Also, self-labeling informed by framework is not as easy as suggested. It may or may not designate recognition, commitment, and salience; the capability to self-label does not mean that contextually the same decisive factor is used to determine the labeling of others. Sheets (1998) found that five year old children from African, Mexican, Minh, Loatian American, and Black/White racially mixed groups were capable to categorize themselves ethnically. These children willingly provided distinctive physical markers (eye shape, skin tone, and hair texture) and cultural fundamentals (native language, food preferences, and ways of eating) as proof to discriminate themselves from others. though, they used trustworthy or communally accepted reasons to categorize others. For instance, they say an individual is â€Å"Loas† because â€Å"My daddy said so† or someone is â€Å"Mexican† because â€Å"He was born in the hospital.† The self-labeling at this age was also detach from attitudes of relationship, obligation, and salience, but not from exclusive cultural behaviors linked with group patterns. Research that scrutinizes how environmental framework affects children’s ethnic identity development–and its effect on present and successive development–or what types of sociopsychological events influence change in the development of individual and group ethnic membership were not accessible. The mechanism and progression of ethnic identity appear to be extremely receptive to changing contextual social, political, and economic conditions. Ethnic identity cannot be sufficiently examined as secluded elements, rather it must be examined as suggested by Mintz and Price ( 1992), as systems or patterns in their societal context. Jones (1997) argued that ethnic identity is â€Å"based on uneven, situational, subjective identification of self and others, which are entrenched in continuing daily practices and chronological experience† (p. 13). Future Prospect The diverse reactions are due to a numeral of factors, which are not essentially mutually exclusive: an enthusiasm for the immediate surcease of bigotry; an intolerance with the slowness of progress thus far; an indecision about the permanency of newly gained perfection; a premonition, anxiety, or resentment about enduring injustices; and, most lately, a belief that being renowned as a disadvantaged minority will take group preferences and remedies or that being denied such appreciation will dispossess them of just treatment. Obscured in history are the colonial exclusions, whippings, tongue borings, and hangings of heretics, rebels, and witches; the mob attacks on Mormons, Asians, Mexican Americans, Filipinos, and Italians; the blazing down of Catholic churches; and the lynching and shootings of Blacks and Indians. Neither amongst American Indians nor between Whites and Indians, Whites and Blacks, French and English, Dutch and Swedes, Russians and Americans, Catholics and Protestants, and Protestants and Protestants are there the defensive and regal wars that once raged on American soil; nor have American ethnic groups pretended the wide-ranging violence that existed or exists in numerous parts of Europe and Asia, such as between Russians and Poles, Greeks and Turks, Jews and Arabs, Spaniards and Basques, Irish and English, Japanese and Chinese, and Tibetans and Chinese. Gone are the Anglophobes, Francophobes, Spanophobes, and Germanophobes, who alleged that Britain, France, Spain, and Germany correspondingly were plotting to destroy our government. Also gone are the once popular beliefs that Masons, Illuminati, the pope, communists, and international Jewry had permeated government and courts or that America was jeopardized by Chinese and Japanese invasions. On a local level, the Florida parliament in 1995 awarded compensation to nine Black survivors of White mob attacks seven decades earlier. In that similar year, Mississippi finally ratified the Thirteenth Amendment eliminating slavery. Some hundred years after 31 Chinese gold miners in Oregon were cruelly killed in 1887 were the files on what had happened first made public. On a state level, four decades passed before Congress chosen compensation for the unfair internment of American Japanese and Aleuts during World War II, and not until 1993 did Congress pass a declaration making an apology for the overthrow a hundred years earlier of the Hawaiian monarchy. Religionists, too, have more and more recognized past wrongs. On almost a hundred diverse occasions Pope John Paul II apologized for Catholic wrongs against Jews, Africans, Indians, Protestants, women, and even the astronomer Galileo. In 1995, on the 150th anniversary of its beginning, the Southern Baptist Convention overwhelmingly voted to request forgiveness of â€Å"all African-Americans† for past support of slavery. Two years later, Lutheran, Anglican, Catholic, and United Methodist leaders in South Carolina issued a statement owning up their sins of racism. Last has been a development of minority community and political action groups, which as never before look for civic and political acknowledgment and power. No longer are hyphenated groups viewed as unpatriotic, and no longer are they reliant on the altruism of others to resolve their problems, or, in the case of immigrants, to rely on motherland governments to speak on their behalf. Rather, much in the way of Blacks, they hold marches, pageants, demonstrations, and political forums, often with the support of second- and third-generation local or federal politicians of their own group. Both the Democratic and Republican parties have outreach programs to all main minority groups, together with the solicitation of funds. On both local and national levels, political officeholders are sure to have famous minority representatives as advisers or staff. Assistance all of the above were the press, radio, and television, which no longer disregarded prejudice, discrimination, or violence against minorities, but depicted such behavior as communally unacceptable and ethically wrong and called upon political and public officials to take corrective action. In brief, today’s minority groups have more fortifications, opportunities, and freedoms than their parents or grandparents had or dreamed of perhaps having and they are challenging and taking advantage of them as never before. Increasingly, changes for the better have taken place. Admitting such does not mean that there still is not victims and troubles, but rather proves that vary is possible and that cynicism and suspicion are unwarranted. A subsequent principle is comparing intergroup relations in America to those in other countries. Here, too, America detachable very well, as is obvious by what is and has been going on in other countries, as well as by the needs of so many foreigners to leave their homelands. We merely do not have the wars, ethnic conflicts, and calls for secession, self-determination, or ethnic sanitization that take place in Eastern Europe, Yugoslavia, Spain, England, Northern Ireland, India, Indonesia, Rwanda–or in our border neighbors, Canada and Mexico. Few Native Americans, Hawaiians, and Alaskans want secession, and few Puerto Ricans want whole independence from America. Still fewer are the figure of Americans who relinquish their citizenship and leave to live in another country. Third, intergroup relations can be evaluated to the nationally appreciated values of equal rights and opportunities for life, autonomy, and the detection of happiness, where individuals are moderator in spite of their race, religion, ethnicity, age, and sex. By this decisive factor, it is very understandable particularly to minorities that problems still exist, that racism, anti-Catholicism, anti-Asianism, anti-Hispanicism, anti-Native Americanism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, and sexism have not moved out. The fourth criterion entailed comparing a group’s progress or need of it to other groups. The consequences, certainly, depend on the groups being compared. while the situation of American Blacks is evaluated to that of American Indians or Haitians, Blacks are doing very well, but when contrasted to that of Irish Catholics or Jews, they are far behind. If being murdered and robbed of one’s home are the most terrible that can happen a group, then Indians were the leading victims, followed by Blacks, who were the only group brought here against their will as slaves, alienated from their families, and not permitted to enable their customs, languages, and even names. Mexicans all through the Southwest were made strangers in their own land, as were national Hawaiians, both of whose lands were taken by fraud and conquest. Alaskan natives were not asked whether they required their land sold by Russia to America. Asians were the most redundant groups, and Catholics the most hated religious group. Frequently derelict in group comparisons are the momentous numbers of minorities who, despite discrimination, achieved, such as Arabs, Armenians, Asians, Cubans, Greeks, Huguenots, Jews, Latvians, Mormons, Quakers, and West Indians. Also derelicted are the ethnic and socioeconomic subdivisions within a explicit victimized group as with late-nineteenth and early twentieth-century comparatively well-off northern Italians and poor southern ones, as well as with moderately poor eastern and well-off western European Jews. These days, too, perceptible differences in accomplishment exist between such Hispanic groups as Cubans, Mexicans, and Puerto Ricans–with Cubans usually having a much higher mean income and educational attainment than the two other groups and than Whites usually. Briefly, the picture that appears from group-to-group comparisons is a mixed one, depending on which groups are being evaluated. A fifth principle is that of Utopia. All too perceptibly, America is not a Garden of Eden, Elysian Field, Happy Isle, Golden Land, or heaven on earth. Yes, we have approach a far way from the discrimination and favoritism of early America or of Europe, Africa, and Asia, but we have a long way to go before it can be realistically said that Americans live by the Golden Rule. The last and politically latest criteria (at least in America) are those of assortment and relative representation. originally, the terms usually implied that if a group did not have a percentage of jobs, school admissions, positions, elections, and so on, equal to its percentage of the local or state population, or to its percentage of the workforce, it was a sign of being discriminated against. For instance, since African Americans are some   twelve percent of the population, or women some fifty percent, it was argued, they should have that percentage of jobs, college admissions, political appointments, and the like. Consequently of the enduring nonrepresentational or exclusion of minorities, and the growing public and court refusal of race-conscious solutions, calls began being made for ascertaining multiculturalism and diversity. Schools, workplaces, political offices, media, and much else, were reproved to form workforces that replicate the makeup of America, thereby reassuring a greater minority inclusion than by just calling for equal opportunity for all minorities. By this decisive factor, with the omission of the armed forces, sports, and civil service jobs, few arenas of society are free of discrimination. It mean First, bad as prejudice was, it has been waning for all minority groups, though differentially so. Second, how much of a reject has there been, how fast or slow has it occurred, what has caused either, and how best to spiral the speed of reform are justifiable topics of concern and debate. Third, the dearth of usually agreed upon criteria for measuring progress distorts the realism of the progress made and not made. Worse yet, in numerous cases, the absence has aggravated intergroup relations, wherein one group’s self-interests conflict with those of other groups. Instead of figuring coalitions to resolve problems of common concern, numerous groups believe in centering on their own priorities. Without a coalitional conformity on what needs to be done, the speed of further development will be delayed, but not stopped. Too much goodwill subsists in America, and too numerous reforms have taken place, at too high a cost in lives and energy, to be stopped. The recognizable glass is neither empty nor full, but being filled and the earlier the better. References: Aboud F. E. ( 1984). â€Å"Social and cognitive bases of ethnic identity constancy.† Journal of Genetic Psychology, 145, 227 – 229. Aboud F. E. ( 1987). â€Å"The development of ethnic self-identification and attitudes.† In J. S. Phinney & M. J. Rotheram (Eds.), Children’s ethnic socialization: Pluralism and development (pp. 32 – 55 ). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Alba R. D. ( 1990). Ethnic identity: The transformation of White America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Branch C. W. ( 1994). â€Å"Ethnic identity as a variable in the learning equation.† In E. R. Hollins , J. E. King, & W. G. Hayman (Eds.), Teaching diverse populations: Formulating a knowledge base (pp. 207 – 224 ). Albany: State University of New York Press. Hollins E. R. ( 1996). Culture in school learning; Revealing the deep meaning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Jones S. ( 1997). The archaeology of ethnicity: Constructing identities in the past and present. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul. McAdoo H. P. (Ed.). ( 1993). Family ethnicity: Strength in diversity. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Mintz S. W., & Price R. ( 1992). The birth of African-American culture: An anthropological perspective. Boston: Beacon Press. Sheets R. H. ( 1997). â€Å"Reflection 1: Racial and ethnic awareness.† In J. Carnes & R. H. Sheets (Eds.), Starting small: Teaching tolerance in preschool and the early grades (pp. 16 – 21 ). Montgomery, AL: Southern Poverty Law Center. Sheets R. H. ( 1998). Ethnic identity behavioral displays in an urban Kindergarten classroom: Implications for practice. Unpublished manuscript. Sodowsky G. R., Kwan K. K., & Pannu R. ( 1995). â€Å"Ethnic identity of Asians in the United States.† In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 123 – 154 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sollors W. (Ed.). ( 1996). Theories of ethnicity: A classical reader. New York: New York University Press. Spencer M. B. ( 1985). â€Å"Cultural cognition and social cognition as identity factors in Black children’s personal growth.† In M. Spencer, G. Brookins, & W. Allen (Eds.), Beginnings: The social and affective development of Black children (pp. 215 – 230 ). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Dental Check-Up English Dialogue Pointers

Visiting the dentist requires a very particular set of English skills. A patient must understand how to respond to a dentists questions and communicate concerns about their teeth. Learn important vocabulary and study the following authentic dialogue to prepare for your next visit to the dentist. Vocabulary gums: the pink tissue connecting your teeth to your jawto recline: to lie or lean backopen your mouth: (at the dentist) to open your mouth as wide as you comfortably can and leave it open until told otherwiseinflammation: irritation that is often painful; usually of the gumsX-rays: an imaging procedure that allows a dentist to see a patients bones/teethstandard procedure: common practice; normalcavities: a hold in the tooth resulting from decayfillings: used to fill cavitiessuperficial: shallow; not deepto identify: to find or locatetooth decay: rotting of the teethevidence of further decay: signs that the tooth is rotting moreprotective apron: worn by a patient during an X-ray to keep them safe from the rays emitted by imaging equipmentto drill: to use a special tool to remove bacteria from a cavity in order to prepare it for filling and prevent more decayto take care of: to fix or correct a problemto get your teeth cleaned: to go to the dentist where they remove plaque (a material coating the teeth) in order to prevent cavities and gum diseases Dialogue From a Dentist Appointment The following conversation represents an exchange between a dentist and their patient during a dental check-up. Make sure that you understand the terminology used and expectations of the patient. Sam: Hello, Doctor. Dr. Peterson: Good morning, Sam. How are you doing today? Sam: Im OK. Ive been having some gum pain recently. Dr. Peterson: Well, well take a look. Please recline and open your mouth...thats good. Sam: (after being examined) How does it look? Dr. Peterson: Well, there is some inflammation of the gums. I think we should also do a new set of X-rays. Sam: Why do you say that? Is something wrong? Dr. Peterson: No, no, its just standard procedure every year. It looks like you may have a few cavities as well. Sam: Thats not good news. Dr. Peterson: There are just two and they look superficial. Sam: I hope so. Dr. Peterson: We need to take X-rays to identify tooth other decay and make sure that there isnt any between the teeth. Sam: I see. Dr. Peterson: Here, put on this protective apron. Sam: Okay. Dr. Peterson: (after taking X-rays) Things look good. I dont see any evidence of further decay. Sam: Thats great! Dr. Peterson: Yes, Ill just get these two fillings drilled and taken care of and then well get your teeth cleaned. English Dialogue in Other Medical Settings Make sure that you know what to expect from other medical appointments as well so that medical professionals can help you with any problems that you may have. Dentist Youll interact with professionals other than the dentist when you get your teeth checked. Be able to communicate with a dental receptionist and dental hygienist—they will be the first people you talk to during your next dentist appointment. Doctor There are a number of different experiences that you might have during a doctors appointment. Know how to tell a doctor or nurse about any symptoms or pain you are experiencing and be prepared to answer their questions about your general health as well.