The Berlin Wall separated the people of East Berlin from the people in West Berlin. It separated families, kept people from their jobs, and caused people to die. It was erected in an effort to save East Berlin’s economy, but in the end it did so much more. The fleeing of residents of East Berlin to West Berlin affected the Soviet Union and East Berlin in two ways. The first of which was economic. By 1958, 15% of the population of East Berlin had fled to West Berlin. East Berlin’s economy provided much for the Soviets and among these 15% were doctors, lawyers, businessmen, and other essential figures for the East Berlin economy. The birth rate in East Berlin was higher than the death rate, but still 250,000 people were leaving every year. In 1961 alone, 5,000 doctors, 20,000 engineers and technicians, and 17,000 teachers left East Berlin. All together in the years from 1954 through 1960, 4,600 doctors, 15,885 teachers, 738 university teachers, 15,536 engineers and technicians moved from East Berlin to West Berlin. Besides these professionals, 11,705 students with initial intentions of working in East Berlin left to work in West Berlin after getting their free education from East Berlin. This hit East Berlin very hard, for it needed these potential workers to rebuild the country after the destruction caused by World War II.
Walter Ulbricht, the leader of the East German communist party and president of the Privy Council, was greatly distressed by the fleeing of East Berlin’s citizens, for it hurt his 7 year plan to bring East Berlins economy to the same level as West Berlin’s. Walter Ulbricht ordered regular police spot checks of anyone carrying a suitcase, but this barely had any impact on the number of East Berlin citizens fleeing. Citizens making many trips with very little baggage at once easily avoided them. Ulbricht tried very hard to convince Soviet Union to take over West Berlin, but the Soviet Union wanted to keep peace with westerners. Finally, the Soviet leader, Stalin, backed Ulbricht and declared that West Berlin must be turned into a “free city” in six months. The Western powers did not comply with these demands and Stalin, after six months, did nothing in retaliation for being ignored.
During the six months that Stalin spoke of, the citizens of East Berlin feared their time was running short to flee to West Berlin, so in those six months, more people fled than had previously been fleeing.
In the year 1961, the building of Berlin Wall called upon disasters in Germany. United States controlled the west of Berlin while German Democratic Republic held the East. Being stuck under the rule of day to day terror, people from East Berlin were making their way to the West Berlin. West Berlin was a safe spot and freedom checkpoint in the middle of terror. To stop the moving of East Berliners, the East German government decided to build a barrier that limited and halted the East Berliners from leaving. But the battle to control Berlin between, the United States and the Soviet Union, had been taking place since after the division of Germany. The German Democratic Republic wanted better control over its people to spread its communist ideas
It is important that everyone lives their lives according to God’s purpose for them. Many people in today’s society fear death. Those who fear death have little to no knowledge about what God has planned for all of his children. On the other hand, some people fear death because they feel as though they have not fully completed their life’s purpose; or lived accordingly. This work brings about many real-life situations. There will always be people who use others to advance their own lives. Then there will be people who want the best for others. Continuing a study of this work will allow readers to make a connection to his or her current society. The Death of Ivan Ilyich is an easy read, that will automatically catch the reader’s
Tolstoy paints for the reader through the discourse of “The Death of Ivan Ilyich” a social statement on the insignificance and banality of sociological conformity from a variety of viewpoints all perceptible to the reader from many sociological class structures. What we find in “The Death of Ivan Ilyich” is a way of life, a comparison that defines for the reader a method of living outside that of the accepted sociological norm. This new take on life extends through the above passage as a method by which humanity can asses its place, its role, and the crucial role of the individual in the personal “success” of the human individual. In this paper, I plan to outline several points used by Tolstoy through a means of sociological placement (i.e. Work, family, social attrib...
Novel Analysis: Death of Ivan Illich. 12 April 2001 This author explains how Ilyich’s life is a ‘front’ for the sake
Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilyich is a reminder that books can provide answers to questions we never asked, but yearned to know. For that reason alone, The Death of Ivan Ilyich should be considered a work of art. However due to the many subtle hints and clues pointing at the underlying Christian nature of the book, it deserves to be added to the list of great modern Christian literature.
In the "Death of Ivan Ilych" the symbolism of death is very important. It shows that we should always look to the future and what we may become rather then the present and what we want at that moment. Will we turn out to be what we wanted to be, and live the fullest life possible. Its only up to us to decide that. Ivan Ilych was beginning to decide that when it was to late. In everyday life we take for granted that our values are sound and the projects and activities we take on are worth doing. We never take a "step back" to realize that maybe we are doing something good or that maybe we're not. We mainly concern ourselves with how we look in the end. That is something we should stop doing. We should follow the example of Ivan Ilych and make sure we live our lives to the fullest instead of realizing it when its to late. We should be like Tolstoy and realize that life is worth living.
To many individuals the word “progress” has a positive meaning behind it. It suggests improvement, something humans have been obsessed with since the dawn of society. However, if closely examined, progress can also have a negative connotation as well. While bringing improvement, progress can simultaneously spark conformity, dependency, and the obsession of perfection within the individuals caught in its midst. It is this aspect of progress within modern society that negatively affects Ivan Ilych, Leo Tolstoy’s main character in The Death of Ivan Ilych. Ivan’s attempt to conform to modern society’s view of perfection takes away his life long before he dies. Furthermore, his fear of death and reactions towards it reflects modern society’s inability to cope with the ever present reminder that humans still suffer and die, despite all attempts to make life painless, perfect, and immortal.
Ivan Ilych was a member of the Court of Justice who was "neither as cold and formal as his elder brother nor as wild as the younger, but was a happy mean between them—an intelligent, polished, lively, and agreeable man” (Tolstoy 102). He lived an unexceptionally ordinary life and strived for averageness. As the story progresses, he begins to contemplate his life choices and the reason for his agonizing illness and inevitable death. “Maybe I did not live as I ought to have done, but how could that be, when I did everything properly?” (Tolstoy
At first, the divisions between East and West Berlin were uncertain. There was nothing that divided the city. For more than ten years after the official split of the city, East Berlin saw a major emigration of East Germans, unhappy with the communist system. With nothing physical to separate East and West Berlin, migration from totalitarianism to democracy was as easy for East Berliners as changing houses. The Soviet Union went against their promises to the people of East Germany, and made East Germany a Communist country. This decision by the Soviet Union separated East Germany even more from the rest of Europe. East Germany was now all by itself, and by the summer of 1952 th...
In the years between 1949 and 1961, a mass of East Germans had fled to West Germany. Some of the people included skilled workers and high end intelligent people. The result of the East losing such successful people the economic was destroyed. In response, the Communist government of the German Democratic Republic also known as East Germnay built a barrier to close off East Germans' access to West Germany. This barrier was known as the Berlin Wall.
Tolstoy provided us with two perspectives to view Ivan’s life in “The death of Ivan Illyich”: an omniscient narrator and Ivan himself. What I plan to do is give another perspective, not necessarily to view his life, but rather to his experiences after he realized he was dying. This perspective will be an analytical and psychological; the perspective from Kubler-Ross’s Stages of death (or stages of grief, as they are better known for). These stages occur when we are faced with an event that is usually connected with death. The “normal” order in which these five stages occur, though may not go doctrinally in this order, are as such: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, and Acceptance.
One notable difference between William Shakespeare’s The Tempest and Julie Taymor’s film version of the play is the altered scenes that made quite a difference between the play and the movie version. This difference has the effects of creating a different point of view by altering the scenes affected the movie and how Taymor felt was necessary by either by keeping or deleting certain parts from the play. I use “Altered Scene” in the way of how Julia Taymor recreates her own point of view for the movie and the direction she took in order to make the audience can relate to the modern day film. I am analyzing the way that the altered scenes changes to make a strong impression on the audiences different from the play. This paper will demonstrate
On August 13, 1961, the residents of East Berlin found themselves cut off from friends, families and jobs in the West by a tangle of barbed wire that ruthlessly cut the city in two. Within days the barbed-wire became a 103-mile-long wall guarded by three hundred watchtowers. The wall symbolized the struggle between Soviet Communism and American capitalism—totalitarianism and freedom. This would take place for the next thirty years (Taylor)
According to Kubler-Ross’s theory, the first cycle is denial. Denial in this case is the individual denying that they are dying. When the individual resists the reality that they are going to die. “Then where shall I be when I am no more? Could this be dying? No I don’t want to!” (Tolystoy, “TdofII” p127), Ivan may have felt that he would be leaving too much behind if he were to die: worrying about where he’ll after he dies and refusing to something that cannot be stopped. Concerned mostly about losing his luxuries, he was clearly afraid and couldn’t accept he was dying as shown in this quote. “In the depth of his heart he knew he was dying, but not only was he not accustomed to the thought, he simply did not and could not grasp it.” (Tolystoy, “TdofII” p129).
The first difference between the play and the movie “The Tempest” is; the protagonist Prospero, the Duke of Milan, is played by a female character named Prospera in the movie filmed in 2010, directed by Julie Taymor. He is a complex character in the play however the personality that Shakespeare created was slightly changed in the movie. The key point of this gender difference is to highlight the role of women’s empowerment over the last two hundred years. Taymor’s movie is making a statement on how Prospera’s power is limited for the island, she is still able to empower throughout the text sexually,...