Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
interpretation of the ironic ending in story of an hour
story of an hour analysis character
analysis on the story of an hour
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Death of Freedom in The Story of an Hour
In Kate Chopin’s short story, "The Story of an Hour," we are told that Mrs. Mallard, the main character, has a heart condition. Then Mrs. Mallard’s sister, Josephine, tells her Mr. Mallard died in a railroad disaster. At the end of the story, Mrs. Mallard dies when her husband suddenly walks through the door. The doctor says that Mrs. Mallard died "of heart disease—of joy that kills" (Chopin 27).
Some people may agree with the doctor’s diagnosis, but I think he was wrong. I believe that Mrs. Mallard’s death was not because she was happy to see her husband, but because she was sad about the loss of her newly-found freedom. I also think Mrs. Mallard realized that love is not a substitute for the freedom to live your own life. Throughout this short story there are examples showing how Mrs. Mallard’s actions and ideas are focused on her freedom. There are also thoughts and ideas that show Mrs. Mallard realizing that love is by no means a substitute for independence.
When Mrs. Mallard was told of her husband’s death she "did not hear the story as many women have heard the same, with a paralyzed inability to accept its significance" (Chopin 25). This shows that Mrs. Mallard was not utterly grief-stricken or she would have had this so-called "glazed-over look." She also did not deny her husband’s death, which is another natural reaction to the loss of someone you deeply care about.
After Mrs. Mallard is told of her husband’s death, she retreats into her bedroom. The scenery outside is not one of death, but one of life. This is how Chopin describes the scenery while Mrs. Mallard is looking out her bedroom window: she "could see in the open square before her house the tops of tr...
... middle of paper ...
...Mrs. Mallard’s husband walks in the front door. She looks at her husband, but all she can see is her newly-found freedom slipping away. Can you imagine the loss of such a thing as your freedom? Mrs. Mallard had just realized that she had her independence, when it was taken from her suddenly. I think the loss independence can be fatal, and in Mrs. Mallard’s case it was. After Mrs. Mallard dies, the doctor incorrectly diagnoses her death as "joy that kills." Now, I hope you can see, as clearly as I do, that Mrs. Mallard did not die of joy that kills, but of the loss of this powerful thing we call freedom.
Works Cited
Chopin, Kate "The Story of an Hour." The Harper Anthology of Fiction. NY: HarperCollins, 1991. 25-27.
Skaggs, Peggy. "Kate Chopin." Short Story Criticism. Ed. Thomas Votteler. Vol. 8. Detroit: Gale Research Inc., 1991. 20 vols.
When envisioning a prison, one often conceptualizes a grisly scene of hardened rapists and murderers wandering aimlessly down the darkened halls of Alcatraz, as opposed to a pleasant facility catering to the needs of troubled souls. Prisons have long been a source of punishment for inmates in America and the debate continues as to whether or not an overhaul of the US prison system should occur. Such an overhaul would readjust the focuses of prison to rehabilitation and incarceration of inmates instead of the current focuses of punishment and incarceration. Altering the goal of the entire state and federal prison system for the purpose of rehabilitation is an unrealistic objective, however. Rehabilitation should not be the main purpose of prison because there are outlying factors that negatively affect the success of rehabilitation programs and such programs would be too costly for prisons currently struggling to accommodate additional inmate needs.
It is 1787 in the home of Benjamin Franklin where a group of powerful Philadelphians held in high esteem have congregated to deliberate a very pressing issue. They are conversing on the present prison institutions established across America and Europe. It seems that the institutions in both countries are known for their appalling conditions. Benjamin Franklin and his colleagues have set out to change the course of prison history. Their plan is to make a prison system based entirely on reform and enlightenment instead of punishment and misery. They believe prisoners should repent and seek God to help them learn from their mistakes, hence the name penitentiary. After many long years, the men finally reach success and the Eastern State Penitentiary is opened in 1829. America was in a time of reform which was obvious by the opening of such a diverse prison. But no matter how much the Eastern State Penitentiary claims to be averse to torture and harsh conditions, it was after all a prison. From the outside, the Eastern State Penitentiary appeared to be marvelous and sensational, but what went on inside of those massive walls was something entirely different. Life at the Eastern State Penitentiary was unspeakable because of the cell life, disease, and treatment that the inmates had to endure.
Every civilization in history has had rules, and citizens who break them. To this day governments struggle to figure out the best way to deal with their criminals in ways that help both society and those that commit the crimes. Imprisonment has historically been the popular solution. However, there are many instances in which people are sent to prison that would be better served for community service, rehab, or some other form of punishment. Prison affects more than just the prisoner; the families, friends, employers, and communities of the incarcerated also pay a price. Prison as a punishment has its pros and cons; although it may be necessary for some, it can be harmful for those who would be better suited for alternative means of punishment.
During the early half of the 19th century, there were two new models of prisons being built in the United States. Along with the new styles of prisons being constructed, two new styles of correctional systems were developed, the Pennsylvania system, and the Auburn, New York system (Mays & Winfree, 2009). Although the designs of the actual prisons were dramatically different, both systems shared similar ideals, with regards to how inmates should spend their days. Ultimately, the Auburn system prevailed as the more popular system of corrections in the United States, with some of the system’s correctional philosophies being used well into the 20th century (Mays & Winfree, 2009). Before discussing the actual philosophies, which were used to manage the inmates in each system, we should first look at the difference in the design of the prisons used in each system.
There are many people who are critical of the US‘s prison sysetm; the idea of locking up those who commit crimes against a society simply to keep them from doing harm. Many say that more rehabilatation is necessary to improve these individuals and, therefore, society as a whole. What are some ways of doing this? Do you agree/disagree with this view and why? Is the prison system currently in place the best option for society? 2 pages, double spaced, 12pt. font.
The word “privacy” did not grow up with us throughout history, as it was already a cultural concept by our founding fathers. This term was later solidified in the nineteenth century, when the term “privacy” became a legal lexicon as Louis Brandeis (1890), former Supreme Court justice, wrote in a law review article, that, “privacy was the right to be let alone.” As previously mentioned in the introduction, the Supreme Court is the final authority on all issues between Privacy and Security. We started with the concept of our fore fathers that privacy was an agreed upon concept that became written into our legal vernacular. It is being proven that government access to individual information can intimidate the privacy that is at the very center of the association between the government and the population. The moral in...
Maybe if I saw more reports on how prison has improved our society and the criminals who live among us, I would see why we should work on reforming our prisons. Until then, it does not seem to be working. We trust in the government to provide for our safety, but we must take responsibility among ourselves. To understand that the current system does work and that its intent is not to provide a safe society. History has shown us that. What we have done or continue to do will not make this a safer place to live. The problem is not to reform our prison system, for this won't stop criminals to commit crimes, but to find ways and means to deteriorate them from doing the crime.
The prison system in the United States was not always like it is today. It took mistakes and changes in order to get it to the point it is at. Some people think that prisons should still be being changed while others feel that they are fine the way they are. It is hard to make an argument for one side or the other if one does not know about the history of prisons as well as the differences between prisons structures and differences in prison management. Knowledge of private prisons is also needed to make this difficult decision.
Technology has developed in leaps and bounds over the past few decades. The case is that the law always has difficulty keeping pace with new issues and technology and the few laws that are enacted are usually very general and obsucre. The main topic of this paper is to address the effect of technology on privacy in the workplace. We have to have an understanding of privacy before trying to protect it. Based on the Gift of Fire, privacy has three pieces: freedom from intrusion, control of information about one's self, and freedom from surveillance.1 People's rights has always been protected by the constitution such as the Fourth Amendment, which protects people from "unreasonable searches and seizures". As said by Eric Hughes, "Privacy is the power to selectively reveal oneself to the world."2 As written by Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis in 1928 is the right most valued by the American people was "the right to be left alone."3
Ever since day one, people have been developing and creating all sorts of new methods and machines to help better everyday life in one way or another. Who can forget the invention of the ever-wondrous telephone? And we can’t forget how innovative and life-changing computers have been. However, while all machines have their positive uses, there can also be many negatives depending on how one uses said machines, wiretapping in on phone conversations, using spyware to quietly survey every keystroke and click one makes, and many other methods of unwanted snooping have arisen. As a result, laws have been made to make sure these negative uses are not taken advantage of by anyone. But because of how often technology changes, how can it be known that the laws made so long ago can still uphold proper justice? With the laws that are in place now, it’s a constant struggle to balance security with privacy. Privacy laws should be revised completely in order to create a better happy medium between security and privacy. A common misconception of most is that a happy medium of privacy and security is impossible to achieve. However, as well-said by Daniel Solove, “Protecting privacy doesn’t need to mean scuttling a security measure. Most people concerned about the privacy implications of government surveillance aren’t arguing for no[sic] surveillance and absolute privacy. They’d be fine giving up some privacy as long as appropriate controls, limitations, oversight and accountability mechanisms were in place.”(“5 Myths about Privacy”)
Kate Chopin’s story, "The Story of an Hour," may seem to be about Mrs. Mallard’s unexpected and ironic reactions to the news of her husband’s untimely death due to a railroad disaster. At least that’s what I thought when I read the story. It seemed to me that she led a normal life with a normal marriage. She had a stable home life with a kind, loving husband who cared for her. She seemed to love him, sometimes. She had some kind of "heart trouble" (Chopin 25) that didn’t really affect her physically, until the very end. I thought Mrs. Mallard would have been saddened and filled with grief for an adequate period of time after her spouse died, but her grief passed quickly, and she embraced a new life that she seemed to be content with. Therefore I believe there is good evidence that Mrs. Mallard was an ungrateful woman who did not appreciate her husband or his love for her. That evidence is found in her selfish behavior after the death of her husband, Brently Mallard.
The evolution of the Internet started from the department of defense's project, and rapidly distributed to world wide. With the rise of the Internet age comes with the benefits and the concerns. Because of the easeness to communicate information and displaying data, the first amendment needs to be applied to this communication channel. How are we using and communicating information without offending and harm others? Since the evolution of the Internet, there has been acts from Congress to regulate the use the Internet such as the Communications Decency Act in 1996 and the Child Online Protection Act in 1998. These acts aim to forbid Internet users from displaying offensive speech to users or exposing children of indecent materials. The Internet raises other issues that people might have. The biggest and most debatable topic is the privacy issue. Is the Internet a safe place to protect personal information such as financial information, medical data, etc…? Some people who are computer literate or at least with some experience in software and technology would not trust to release the information on the web or at random sites . As a matter of fact, any unknown or small vendor on the web would have difficulty getting many customers to do business online. Big vendors such as Amazon would want to secure their network infrastructure to protect the users information, so that their server would not be hacked. However, even this style of protecting personal information is not enough. The users demand further protection such as ensuring their information is not being sold to other vendors for misuse, or spam the users mailbox with soliticing.
The world erupted in outrage following revelations by Edward Snowden regarding the extent of surveillance perform by the National Security Agency. Privacy becomes one of the hottest topic of 2013 and was chosen by the world’s most popular online dictionary, Dictionary.com, as the Word of the Year. However, the government is not the only one that conduct data gathering and surveillance. Employers often monitor their employees, and businesses collect data on theirs customer. The morality of these practices is a topic that generates heated debate.
As technology as advanced, so has our society. We are able to accomplish many tasks much easier, faster, and in effective ways. However, if looked at the harmful impact it has had on the society, one can realize that these are severe and really negative. One of the main concerns is privacy rights. Many people want that their information and personal data be kept in secrecy, however with today’s technology, privacy is almost impossible. No matter how hard one tries, information being leaked through technological advancements have become more and more common. With personal information being leaked, one does not know exactly how the information will be used, which validates the statement that privacy rights have been diminishing and should be brought to concern. Many people do not realize that their information is being used by third-parties and to consumer companies. In conclusion, technology has had a significant effect on privacy
As can be seen, from the information presented, the need for laws and restrictions concerning internet data collection is greatly needed. Moreover, the government can search private citizens data without warrant or cause. Also, companies are not only collecting internet user data but also selling it. The companies and agencies who commit such crimes should be fined or either closed down. In closing, the privacy and security of individuals on the internet should be upheld by the United States government.