Usurpation in Richard II, As You Like It, Midsummer Night's Dream, and Romeo and Juliet
In both As You Like It and Richard II, the concept of usurpation is illustrated in a political sense by a character substituting himself as ruler. However, Shakespeare employs usurpation in other contexts with characters of all different social positions. These two plays, A Midsummer Night's Dream, and Romeo and Juliet feature several kinds of usurpation, which are significant to characterization and plot development.
The first instance of usurpation in A Midsummer Night's Dream is Demetrius saying "Yield/Thy crazed title to my certain right" (I.i.91-2). Essentially he is telling Lysander to give up his pursuit of Hermia, although Demetrius is not in a position to command Lysander. This sets the two characters against each other, and adds to the play's central conflict of whom Hermia will marry. Another kind of usurpation is shown by Egeus choosing Hermia's husband: he denies her the right to choose her husband based on love. Furthermore, Egeus endangers Hermia’s life, as Theseus declares she must marry Demetrius or die. This combination starts the plot action, causing Lysander and Hermia to flee Athens.
Lysander, Hermia, Demetrius, and Helena occupying the forest exemplifies a third type, which places them in dream-like circumstances. Here, Lysander and Demetrius are forced out of character under the influence of Oberon's pansy juice. Both men fall in love with Helena, but only Lysander is given the antidote to Oberon's pansy juice: Demetrius remains in love with Helena and ultimately marries her. Thus going into the forest drastically affects Demetrius' character, as he no longer seeks to marry Hermia.
A fourth kind of usurpation involves using or agreeing upon things. Oberon employing Puck, a puccha, is an example of this. Although Oberon intends only to trick Titania, Puck's mischief dictates both the personality and the actions of several characters, most notably Titania, who falls temporarily in love with Bottom, and Demetrius, who falls and remains in love with Helena.
The kind of usurpation most present in Romeo and Juliet is the encroachment or impeding of another's rights. The first example is Capulet promising Juliet to Paris. As in A Midsummer Night's Dream, the father’s wishes contrast with the daughter’s, causing the daughter character to attempt to flee her family in hopes of escaping her arranged marriage and living with her lover. Although breaking tradition and even law by defying their fathers, these characters define themselves by choosing their husbands: they are not simply property to be sold off (with respect to the tradition of dowry).
In January of 2010, the United States Supreme Court, in the spirit of free speech absolutism, issued its landmark Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, marking a radical shift in campaign finance law. This ruling—or what some rightfully deem a display of judicial activism on the part of the Roberts Court and what President Obama warned would “open the floodgates for special interests—including foreign corporations—to spend without limit in…elections” —effectively and surreptitiously overturned Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and portions of McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, struck down the corporate spending limits imposed by Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, and extended free speech rights to corporations. The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief historical overview of campaign finance law in the United States, outline the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling, and to examine the post-Citizens United political landscape.
Tyler, Royall. The tale of Genji: abridged. Abridged ed. New York, N.Y.: Penguin Books, 2006. Print.
Clawson, Dan and Alan Neustadtl, Denise Scott. Money Talks: Corporate PACs and Political Influence. 1992.
Campaign finance reform has a broad history in America. In particular, campaign finance has developed extensively in the past forty years, as the courts have attempted to create federal elections that best sustain the ideals of a representative democracy. In the most recent Supreme Court decision concerning campaign finance, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Court essentially decided to treat corporations like individuals by allowing corporations to spend money on federal elections through unlimited independent expenditures. In order to understand how the Supreme Court justified this decision, however, the history of campaign finance in regards to individuals must be examined. At the crux of these campaign finance laws is the balancing of two democratic ideals: the ability of individuals to exercise their right to free speech, and the avoidance of corrupt practices by contributors and candidates. An examination of these ideals, as well as the effectiveness of the current campaign finance system in upholding these ideas, will provide a basic framework for the decision of Citizens United v. FEC.
Being a student interested in the field of biology, one knows that studying life in the past plays an important role in the history of organisms that lived on this earth. Similarly, being Japanese, studying the past of how Japanese were plays an important role in Japanese history. Despite all the general aspects of life that have changed from the Heian period, the one idea that has definitely not changed is the romantic relationships between a man and woman. Though the general concept is the same, from reading The Tale of Genji, it is what was considered the ideal woman and ideal man that were both surprising and thus worth discussing.
Reformation on the funding of political campaigns has been an ongoing battle between trying to create an equal and democratic balance of representation for the people and the rich and powerful who have succeeded in using the media to control those people. With The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1972 and the establishment of the Federal Election Commission in 1975, steps were taken to hold the wealthy and public officials accountable for corruption and to try and prevent it. Though the act could be viewed as a positive sign of peaceful evolution in the direction o...
As a result of the court case Arizona Free Enterprise v. Bennett, it was decided that citizens should be encouraged to help in financing campaigns. When there is increased participation from citizens, self-governance is greatly facilitated. The goal of public financing is to push citizens to help the political candidate of their choice financially. Many reformers have suggested that there is too much money in politics. Statistically, this is proven to be wrong. In the 2008 election, there were 64% of Americans that were eligible to vote. There were only about 10% that give money to the campaigns, and not even 0.5% who are responsible for the bulk amount of money collected by the politicians (Overton, 2012).
Campaign Finance reform has been a topic of interest throughout the history of the United States Government, especially in the more recent decades. There are arguments on both sides of the issue. Proponents of campaign finance limits argue that wealthy donors and corporations hold too much power in elections and as a result they can corrupt campaigns. Those who favor less regulation argue that campaign donations are a form of free speech. One case in particular, Citizens United vs. The Federal Election Commission has altered everything with pertaining to Campaign Finance.
In this complicated case, the Court arrived at two important conclusions. First, it held that restrictions on individual contributions to political campaigns and candidates did not violate the First Amendment since the limitations of the FECA enhance the "integrity of our system of representative democracy" by guarding against unscrupulous practices. Second, the Court found that governmental restriction of independent expenditures in campaigns, the limitation on expenditures by candidates from their own personal or family resources, and the limitation on total campaign expenditures did violate the First Amendment. Since these practices do not necessarily enhance the potential for corruption that individual contributions to candidates do, the Court found that restricting them did not serve a government interest great enough to warrant a curtailment on free speech and association.
Charles Darwin is a devout abolitionist, such views may have portrayed his writings of evolution. For his beliefs revolve around universal common decent, his theory that all races and species derived from a similar ancestor. A theory that developed during his study of Galapagos Finches, where he found that the beaks of thirteen different Finches, though closely related, are suited solely to the food in such species environment: an adaption of natural selection. Although, Darwin’s observation of Galapagos Finches impacted his opposition on slavery, it had no comparison to the Beagle Voyage. For when he set sail off the coast of Brazil he illustrated his sorrow writing, “I thank God, I shall never again visit a slave-country. To this day, if I hear a distant scream, it recalls with painful vividness my feelings, when passing a house near Pernambuco, I heard the most pitiable moans, and could not but suspect that some poor slave was being tortured, yet knew that I was as powerless as a child even to remonstrate. I suspected that these moans were from a tortured slave, for I was told that this was the case in another instance” (Darwin 496). This is not a dispute that the scientific observation in which Charles Darwin examined in the Galapagos Islands does not affect his views in on slavery, but that his personal views may have p...
Kenneth Vogel’s Big Money explores the invasion of money into our political system. In the novel, Vogel explains one of the most important important events that is currently happening in today’s elections: donors. This, according to Vogel, has been brought on by a ruling in the case Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission. The result of this case destroyed finance restrictions, giving Corporations and Unions the same laws of freedom of speech as individual Americans. The novel opens in February of 2012 where Vogel sneaks into a donor banquet. As our current president, Barack Obama, gives his speech, Vogel makes a note of the President’s words. In particular, Vogel focuses on one line “You now have the potential
Mann, Thomas E. "Money in 2008: A Collapse of the Campaign Finance Regime?" Evolution and Revolution in the Nominations Process. Rowman and Littlefield, 2009. Print.
The issue of campaign financing has been discussed for a long time. Running for office especially a higher office is not a cheap event. Candidates must spend much for hiring staff, renting office space, buying ads etc. Where does the money come from? It cannot officially come from corporations or national banks because that has been forbidden since 1907 by Congress. So if the candidate is not extremely rich himself the funding must come from donations from individuals, party committees, and PACs. PACs are political action committees, which raise funds from different sources and can be set up by corporations, labor unions or other organizations. In 1974, the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) requires full disclosure of any federal campaign contributions and expenditures and limits contributions to all federal candidates and political committees influencing federal elections. In 1976 the case Buckley v. Valeo upheld the contribution limits as a measure against bribery. But the Court did not rule against limits on independent expenditures, support which is not coordinated with the candidate. In the newest development, the McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission ruling from April 2014 the supreme court struck down the aggregate limits on the amount an individual may contribute during a two-year period to all federal candidates, parties and political action committees combined. Striking down the restrictions on campaign funding creates a shift in influence and power in politics and therefore endangers democracy. Unlimited campaign funding increases the influence of few rich people on election and politics. On the other side it diminishes the influence of the majority, ordinary (poor) people, the people.
...tween lovers. Women were mild, yielding, and soft, and men were emotional, diligent and passionate in character. Both men and women of high class seemed to have been educated in the musical arts, particularly in playing the koto, and the art of dance. Essentially, Murasaki Shikibu's depiction of Heian court life in Genji Monogatari was one of distinction, elegance, aesthetic appreciation, literacy, passion, and emotion, most highly exemplified in ideal male form by Prince Genji, and in ideal female form by Fujitsubo. These two characters present the most accurate representations of model Heian court nobles, and truly illustrate to readers not only the beauty present in the Heian court, but of the flaws and trials present as well, presenting a wonderful contrast to the ideal views of men and women in modern Western society, and insight into ancient Japanese culture.
In order to analyze how gender ideals in the Heian society were formulated and how they were expressed in the Genji Monogatari, it is necessary to have an understanding of the Chinese society from which they were derived. The Chinese works often alluded to in the Genji Monogatari are primarily from the Tang dynasty period of China(618-907AD), which formed the basis of the flourishing of Japanese culture during the Heian period.3 Therefore an analysis of Heian gender ideals must begin from the Tang dynasty court-life culture.