SolidWorks CFD Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

SolidWorks CFD - Assignment Example There are several commercial CFD packages accessible for modeling flow in or around objects in the fluid dynamics. The computer simulations display structures and details that are expensive, difficult or impossible to measure or visualized experimentally. When simulating the flow airfoils, transmission of laminar to turbulent flow plays a significant role in determining the stream features and in enumerating the airfoil, performance such as lift and drag. Hence, the proper modeling of transition, including both the onset and the extent of the transition will lead to more accurate drag prediction. The beginning of development is on Michel`s methods of incompressible two-dimensional flow while the degree of the change is quantified by evolving a prototypical for the intermittency role. The shape of pressure distribution is directly related to the airfoil performance. The relationship between the airfoil geometry and airfoil pressure can be predicted numerically solving the relevant equation. Pressure increases as we move further from the surface. This means that the surface pressure is lower than the pressure far away II. Graphing Calculator: Pacific Tech Graphing Calculator can be considered as a device for rapidly visualizing Math Type and equation which is strained from the users without complex dialog boxes or commands. III. Maple soft, Math & Engineering Software: Maplesoft is one of the leading developers of interactive mathematical software such as Maple. It`s suitable for products harnesses the power of mathematics. IV. Math Media - Math Media Educational Software: It’s a Macintosh and Windows software designed for math education. It`s also Curriculum based, interactive, programs which are used with instructions from which students can practice on their own. V. Math Strategies – Pixel Graphics: This software is an educational program from Pixel Graphics that combines two concepts; that is: the arcade action

Review of Bill by Vern Myers Essay Example for Free

Review of Bill by Vern Myers Essay To start, I would like you to know that I am writing this book review on an old fashioned manual typewriter, an Olympia Model 9 in fact, that I purchased at a consignment antique store. I think this machine dates back to the early 1970s. It makes a nostalgic clack-clack-clack sound. [1] I am not writing this book review in solidarity with author Vern Myers (who refuses to use a computer and composes his work on a 1968 Underwood-Miller, and before that a 1909 Corona 3, the same Ernest Hemingway employed for his early works[2]), no; I am afraid my reason is pedestrian in nature: my girlfriend, Michele, deep-sixed my Sony Vaio laptop into the back end of the toilet, where the water rises after you flush, after what one would call â€Å"a heated argument. †She locked herself in the shitter[3] (which she hates me to call the commode), after having grabbed my laptop, stating that I loved my machine more than her; that she was jealous of the attention I gave to my novel-in-progress. Needless to say, my laptop will not start up. A friend told me to let it dry out. I will probably have to take it to a shop and pray that they can recover my data—most importantly: my unfinished novel, which I have been laboring at for three years now. It’s an opus, this novel of mine, 850 pages and three-fourths done, so I would say it will be 1,000 manuscript pages when finished, or around 250,000 words. It began as a short story, and then I thought it would be a novella, 80 pages at best, but the thing took on a life of its own. I hear that is what happened to Vern Myers’ 23,000-word masterpiece, Bill. Talking grapes around the New York literati have it that Myers worked on the project for nearly five years and had 600 pages of rambling text, some typewritten, some hand-written, and his editor, Stanley Flint, pulled a Max Perkins (to Myers’ Thomas Wolfe) or Gordon Lish (Raymond Carver) and hacked away, jumbled and tossed like the proverbial salad of sentences, and came up with this current 102 page book. I read Bill in one sitting, or a single bath soak, an hour and a half’s worth of water: after Michele destroyed my computer and possibly my novel (which, by the way, is titled Lunch on the Grass), I drew a hot bath (I own a claw foot tub, talk about antediluvian delights! ) to calm my nerves, opened a bottle of cognac, and slipped into the water with the ARC of Bill that I had received in the mail from the book editor of the newspaper you are reading this review in. For Vern Myers, 102 pages (23,000 words, the margins generous) is War and Peace. Myers, the past decade, has been known as King of 3,000 Words or Less. Your typical Myers story is 1,500 to 2,000 words, each with the epic impact of a Shakespearian tragedy and the emotional complexities of a Chekovian triptych of 5-act plays. Some say it is his life-long friend and editor, Flint, who has fine-tuned the 5,000 words of new story Myers sends in to a magnificent 3,000 word slice of American Literature; Flint published many of these in Dapper Magazine, a slick where he was fiction editor for a decade. [4] Critics are certain to debate over this decades after Myers is gone. Myers was often asked, at readings and lectures and interviews (the few he has granted): â€Å"Are you ever going to write a novel? † and his jovial answer was (with a stiff Long Island Iced Tea in hand): â€Å"I’m working on said novel now, something I call Bill: A Life, but the real question is: Will I ever finish it? The second real question being: Will I ever publish it? † (I know this because I attended a reading of his at the UCSD campus four years ago where such QA took place. ) I read Bill: A Novella (what happened to a life? ) with delight in the clawfoot tub, sipping my cognac, trying to forget what Michele did to my Sony Vaio and my novel-in-progress (which I once considered calling Zombie Cheerleaders from Jupiter Attack!), and when I was done, I closed my eyes and considered the life of Bill, quite the epic one, and the moral/social/political/sexual implications of the story and character. I fell asleep; I did not mean to; napping is not a criticism of Myers’ fine novella; I was simply exhausted from the emotional outrage caused by Michele’s action, her not only leaving me, saying she never wanted to see me again unless I was in a casket at a funeral parlor and even then she would spit on my embalmed body, but destroying my life: for my life, the past few years, is contained on the hard drive (350 gigabytes) of that sunk laptop. My magnum opus, my Great American Novel, which I think I will change the title from Lunch on the Grass to Gargantuan. I see I have exceeded the 600 words the book editor asked for. Hopefully there will be room among the ads to fit in this complete text; hopefully my words will not be pared to the bone the way some say Stanley Flint has been doing to Vern Myers for years. Bill is about a Hollywood doctor named Bill and his adventures with various movie stars, porn starlets, studio moguls and drug dealers. He hops from bed to bed, romance to romance, leaving disaster behind him like the Tasmanian Devil in the Warner Brothers cartoons[5], or the Cat in the Hat paying a visit to unsuspecting latchkey children. Over the course of five years, Bill lives large, has experiences most of us cab only fantasize about; he crams ten lives into those five years and after each event, becomes wiser and older, yet maintains a youthful hop in his feet, always ready to bed the next pretty lady who crosses his path. Sounds like a soap opera, you say? A scalawag doctor from a trashy romance novel you shriek? Hardly! Bill is the literary event of the year and I expect prize Pulitzer, I demand a Book Critics Circle Award, I foresee the boys in the U. K. foregoing the Booker requirements and claiming Vern Myers a loyal subject to the Queen’s Crown (at heart). There is little doubt that the day will come when Vern Myers receives the Nobel Pri I thought I heard Michele coming in. No, that was the neighbor. The walls are too thin around here and I am sure the neighbors heard us fighting, the accusations Michele made. She thinks I am sleeping with a doctor, in fact, a vet who saved my cat, Poe, three months ago. Guess how it all started? I noticed a tattered copy of Vern Myers’ first collection of short stories on her desk, Can You Speak the Hell Up and Pass the Sugar, Please? and commented on it; she said she had discovered Myers in college, her roommate was taking his writing class and she happened to read his stuff and became a fan. I told her I too was a writer of fiction and the occasional essay and memoir (and dozens of book reviews) and, well, one thing lead to another†¦ And so Michele is right. I have been seeing said doctor and it is serious. I would have eventually broken up with Michele, told her the truth, but she beat me to it, and it is always the shits when you are the dumpee, not the dumper. It’s an ego thing, a guy thing, and it makes me think of something Bill says in Bill: â€Å"It’s better to end a romance first to avoid a pain in the brain. † Love ‘em and leave ‘em, Bill, that’s the ticket†¦only, I think I will ask the doc to marry me. I am serious here. I have never felt this way about any woman†¦ It’s five hours later since I wrote the above sentence. I had dinner with the doctor and guess what? She broke up with me, says she is getting back together with her ex-husband. I would be very depressed but my laptop has dried and boots up just fine and now I can get back to my novel. Will it be as fantastic as Vern Myers’ Bill? I could only hope so, but only Vern Myers can be Vern Myers, there can be no other. Michele has been calling, she wants to come back; she says she is sorry and loves me and will never let me go. I’ll take her back. I’ll get my life back on track and finish this book and maybe I can get the literati attention that Myers does. I will tell Michele that there was never anything real with the doctor, it was just a passing thing, no need to get into all that â€Å"pain in the brain† stuff. Editor’s Note: A day before going to press with this review, The Village Voice published an interview with a former student, and lover, of Vern Myers, wherein she claims she actually wrote the text for BILL because Myers was too drunk or high to get any writing done. This accusation comes on the heels of BILL garnering a nomination for the Transamerican Book Award (which reviewer Gerald Bass failed to mention in his rambling[6]); should these accusations be truthful, a fruitful literary scandal of the decade is certain to birth, like a dead baby whale oozing from the foul-smelling womb of a beached momma whale on a sandy, bloody cove near the shores of contemporary American letters. How do you like them apples, eh? Viz! To wit! To arms! [7] [1] I hear you can get that sound to come out of your laptop keyboard. The virtual clack-clack-clack, methinks, would be rather annoying and just damn rude. Everything has to be a simulacra these days. [2] Hemingway said of the Corona 3: â€Å"It is the only psychiatrist I would ever submit to. † I once had a t-shirt with that quote on it and a picture of a harried Hemingway. He wrote his second novel, A Farewell to Arms, on the Corona 3. He probably would have done the same with The Sun Also Rises but he sent that one out to a typist to create the manuscript sent to F. Scott Fitzgerald editor Max Perkins at Charles Scribner’s Sons. [3] She once said, joking, â€Å"The loo is the only psychiatrist I would drop all my emotional crap on. † [4] Myers’ first publications were in regional and small literary journals, then moved on to The Kenyon Review, Mid-American Review, and The Paris Review. After he graced the pages of Dapper, and after Flint left the magazine because new ownership wanted to cut the fiction section (â€Å"do people actually sit down and read this stuff? †), Myers started to appear in Playboy, Harper’s, The New Yorker and Granta, getting top dollar and top recognition. All the places that only sent me form rejection slips! It is easy to not only admire, but also envy the professional career of Vern Myers. As for his personal life, from what I know of all his disastrous relationships and problems with vodka and LSD, there is no room for desiring that. [5] Have you ever seen some of the antiquarian classic cartoons, uncensored, often used as war propaganda to show between double features at movie theaters in the 1930s and 40s? Bugs Bunny, the transvestite rabbit, foiling bucktooth Japanese soldiers and suicidal Nazis? A prototype of Bugs Bunny—same situations, same voice—was Private Snafu, which you can locate on Youtube for a blast from the past. I always seem to be drawn to cartoons and comic books whenever I have great stress in my life; it’s a way of escaping the hell. Kids do it, adults do it. Some escape into the fantasy of online porn but I tend to switch on animated superhero TV shows and movies, like Batman and the Justice League, which also happen to be owned by Warner Brothers. In Bill, Bill has a sexual encounter with an actress on the Warner Brothers lot, doing her in the trailer while gong over her lines, and then doing lines of cocaine off her naked ass. I would like to see that animated. I would like to see Michele’s psychotic tirade animated, then I could really say that my life is like a cartoon. [6] It was not a â€Å"failure† on my part; I just happen to have a long history with the members of this so-called organization and happen to know, FOR A FACT, it is all a ruse, embedded in the beds of supreme nepotism; given the â€Å"quality† of the books this award has been handed to in the last five years, the obvious should be, well, obvious. Oh the stories I could relay! The lays, the drugs, the mouths to genitals and feet shackled to bedposts and whips applied to tender, eager flesh! But that’s for another in a different context.

My Dream of Becoming a Veterinarian Essay -- Admissions Essays

My Dream of Becoming a Veterinarian As far back as Dawn can remember she has always dreamed of becoming a veterinarian. It all started when Dawn’s parents gave her, Samson, Doberman pinscher puppy as her first pet. They grew up to become best friends. At age 12, her best friend had developed a tumor on his chest. It devastated Dawn that she could do nothing for her friend. She had no way of helping him. This was just one of the signs that everything she had felt in her heart was meant to be. For her, to become a veterinarian, so she could help animals. While in high school, she volunteered in vet’s office so she could be closer to animals. After high school, she had planned on going to college to follow her dream. However, life had other plans for her, she discovered she was pregnant. Following her dreams had to go on the back burner for now. Dawn tried to find a job that would support her & her son. All she could find was minimum wage jobs with crazy hours. Therefore, she went to a local college & signed up for classes, she was going to major in Accounting. She was good at math in high school; she thought that Accounting would be a great job. It was not her dream job but in the end, Accounting would pay the bills. At the end of her first year of college, she discovered she was again pregnant with her second son. After the birth of her second son, she was involved in an abusive relationship with the father of her son. Dawn took time off from school to get her life in order if not for her for her children. After getting her life in order, she graduated from college with an Associates Degree in Accounting. After getting her degree, she worked several jobs such as an Accounts Payable Clerk, an Administrative Assistant, an Offic... ...ght thing. Soon, she started believing herself. She decided she was going to attend the same schools she had planned to attend back in high school, Morehead State University & Auburn University. Dawn started to doubt herself again. How could she make in a school with people ten years younger than her? What would they think of her going back to school at her age especially for what she wanted to do? How will she ever make it? However, Dawn being the determined person she is wasn’t going to let anything stop her this time. It was now or never plus she wasn’t going back to school for them she was going for her & her family. She has to keep her mind heading in the right direction. No matter what Dawn feels, she will always be a little bit scared. But you just cannot live by being scared; life will happen the way it is supposed to happen you just have to enjoy the ride.

Globalization: the Americanization of the World?

Andrew J. Bacevich, American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U. S. Diplomacy (Harvard University Press, 2002). Joseph E. Stiglitz, Making Globalization Work (Norton, 2007). James L. Watson, ed. , Golden Arches East: McDonald’s in East Asia (2nd edition, Stanford University Press, 2007). Robert McCrum, Globish: How the English Language Became the World’s Language (Norton, 2010). Fareed Zakaria, The Post-American World (Norton, 2009). Globalization is the integration of the world’s different regions into a global culture, economy, geo-political arena, and communication network. It is the process by which the lines of nation states are blurred, smoothed over by new international institutions. Globalization is the undeniable destination of human history and as such permeates nearly every facet of it. It is liquid in this sense, flowing and changing to fill in wherever it flows, but there can be no doubts of the tide of globalizations source: The United States of America. At first glance, the distinctions between Globalization and Americanization are almost imperceptible. â€Å"Big Mac, Coke, and Disney† (Watson, 5) are as recognizable to Chinese and Russians as they are to Americans. The World Bank and IMF’s policies are more or less set by Washington. The American military has the most powerful armies and fleets the world has ever seen, and has effectively dominated the world from World War I onwards. The United States population which is less than 5% of the world population produces about a quarter of global GDP. Such realities might lead one to the conclusion that Globalization and Americanization are synonymous, but is this actually the case? In the discussion of the books at hand, globalization as it pertains to Americanization is made evident. Andrew Bacevich contends that the United States is the primary agent of modern globalization. It has capitalized on the opportunities it has been presented with in order to create a system of global politics and economics that is of the most benefit to itself, all the while packaging it in altruistic rhetoric. Joseph Stiglitz contends that the United States has conducted globalization by dominating the institutions of world governance and finance. It has done so to the detriment of other nations and as such, the American means of globalization is not the best strategy if true globalization† is the desired end. James Watson holds that McDonald’s, once as iconic of America as the stars and stripes and one of the leading agents of globalization, has been assimilated into many local cultures. As such, it no longer represents the Americanized aspect of globalization, but is rather an international institution and an agent of globalization at large. Yet, some of the seemingly obvious aspects of American led globalization are not as American as they may seem today. Robert McCrum asserts that English being the world’s language arises not from American economic and foreign policies, but is rather a legacy of the British Empire. Furthermore, that America is not spreading its culture through English, it is only a tool to be used for communication. Finally, Fareed Zakaria demonstrates that we are departing from a unipolar world dominated by America. Although it will continue to play a leading role in the globalization of the world, â€Å"the rise of the rest† is diminishing its role and the United States is no longer solely holding the reins of globalization. Andrew Bacevich’s assertion is that the idea of the American empire differs only in form from traditional imperialism. Its function, enriching the mother country, is precisely the same but employs a variety of techniques to make this less evident. The United States embraces its role in history of exerting power only as a last resort. Only when circumstances totally necessitated it would America resort to using Theodore Roosevelt’s proverbial â€Å"big stick† (Bacevich 117). The Spanish American war began only when General Valeriano â€Å"Butcher† Weyler could be tolerated no more. World War I was entered only because of the unprovoked German aggression upon the Lusitania. Cold War military and political endeavors were nobly pursued to defend against Communist aggression. Yet Andrew Bacevich rejects this view. He argues that this â€Å"myth of the ‘reluctant superpower’—Americans asserting themselves only under duress and then always for the noblest purposes† (Bacevich 7-8) is exactly that, a myth. That Roosevelt’s reportedly soft speaking and big stick carrying America uses the† reluctant superpower† myth only in order to justify acts of self-interest. Perhaps the more fitting description of America by Theodore Roosevelt is his affirmation that â€Å"of course, our whole national history has been one of expansion† (Bacevich, 7). The United States has conscientiously exerted itself at every opportunity in order to expand its global economic and strategic interests. America’s superpower status and role as an agent of globalization is driven entirely by the machinery of self-interest. Bacevich writes that â€Å"ever increasing prosperity† (Bacevich, 85) is the primary national interest. Furthermore, as Bill Clinton stated â€Å"Growth at home depends upon growth abroad. † Of course, there is still the legitimate idealistic side of globalization as â€Å"the ultimate promise of peace, prosperity, and democracy† (Bacevich, 42), but America’s actual interest and role in globalization is to expand the American economy. In other words, America’s aims in globalization are to benefit the world yes, but â€Å"benefit the United States most of all† (Bacevich, 96). The American economic empire, brought about by the domestic desire for continued growth is the overarching American interest in the realm of globalization. The fact that â€Å"where interests were slight, the United States seldom bothered to make the effort to assert any substantial leverage† (Bacevich, 107) vividly illustrates this. Considering the insubstantial economic incentives of Africa, it â€Å"consistently ranks dead last in U. S. strategic priorities† (Bacevich, 107). Now, take into account the economic and political incentives of Europe’s markets and the Middle East’s oil reserves. Based on US military intervention, it is telling that â€Å"conditions that in the Balkans or the Persian Gulf the United States found intolerable were in Africa merely unfortunate† (Bacevich, 108). The United States found it necessary to militarily intervene in the former two interest-rife locations, and merely sent aid and rhetorical sympathies to the economically barren latter. The portrait of Americanization and Globalization that Andrew Bacevich paints acknowledges one of the primary facets upon which the two collide, the global economy and the United States role within it. To deny that America has been the driving force behind the creation and continuance of modern open market operations, and to deny that it has done so for the betterment of its own economic interests is to deny all but the rhetoric of American imperialism. The United States did not have, as the historian Ernest May naively stated, â€Å"greatness thrust upon it† (Bacevich, 7), but rather calculatedly and ingeniously shaped its responses to global politics and economics in order to integrate and derive the most benefit from the new globalized economy. Joseph Stiglitz, rather explicitly argues that â€Å"globalization should not mean the Americanization of either economic policy or culture, but it often does—and that has caused resentment† (Stiglitz, 9). He argues that â€Å"the worry about American unilateralism, about the world’s most powerful country imposing its will on others† (Stiglitz, 5) is fast becoming substantiated. Despite economic indicators such as GDP suggesting that poor countries seem to be improving, â€Å"globalization might be creating rich countries with poor people† (Stiglitz, 9). As Stiglitz argues, the United States’ goal of making Americanization a component of globalization is causing this. Particularly responsible has been the Washington Consensus, a set of development promoting policies created between the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the U. S. Treasury. The former two of these are basically international lending bodies, delivering short and long term loans, respectively, to countries in need. The policies outlined are â€Å"downscaling of government, deregulation, and rapid liberalization and privatization† (Stiglitz, 17). Although these are the characteristics of western countries, western countries did not become this way through the â€Å"shock therapy† of instant implementation. Rather they came from a drawn out progression of events The implication is that the United States, in attempting to make its political and economic policies integral concepts of the grander one of globalization, is actually turning countries off to the Americanized aspect of globalization. Similarly, the manner in which the United States encourages international trade to be conducted is a hindrance to globalization at large within poor countries. Stiglitz writes that â€Å"countries often need time to develop in order to compete with foreign companies† (Stiglitz, 70). Yet, The United States and the international trade organizations which it dominates oppose tariffs for many industries on the grounds of it inhibiting trade and not allowing the all-wise power of the market to control the economy. However, â€Å"most successful countries did in fact develop behind protectionist barriers† and climbed the â€Å"ladder of development†. The anti-tariff policies that soundly developed countries advocate are viewed as trying to â€Å"kick the ladder away so others can’t follow† (Stiglitz, 71). The uncertain effectiveness of these western policies, policies necessary for developing countries to get assistance from the IMF and World Bank, which they almost undeniably need, calls into question the western policies which they don’t necessarily need, namely democracy. Stiglitz writes that â€Å"IMF conditionality undermines democracy† (Stiglitz, 56), that although â€Å"globalization has helped spread the idea of democracy, it has, paradoxically, been managed in a way that undermines democratic processes within countries† (Stiglitz, 12). America, in efforts to save countries from spending time on the economic policy learning curve, in reality ends up harming them. As such, the United States’ inadequacy for creating economic agendas for developing countries is a paradox of its own success. He posits that in order for the developing countries to benefit from globalization, the agenda of globalization needs to depart from the Americanized version, and instead â€Å"have the voices of developing nations (be) heard more clearly† (Stiglitz, 98). If the hardline factors of globalization—economics, geo-political military assertions, and international governance are the easiest to assess the American-ness of—the soft aspects: cultural and linguistic patterns, are the most difficult. James Watson contends that in some respect, global corporations gain their transnational appeal simply by being American; by being an image of modernity. However, he also holds that components of globalization that were once considered agents of Americanization are now accepted as local. Japanese McDonald’s have â€Å"clearly capitalized on the fact that it is associated with American culture† (Watson, 172). In China, McDonald’s promotes â€Å"the corporations image as an exemplar of modernity† (Watson, 42). McDonald’s in these countries represents what the West represents, or more accurately, what the locals believe the West to represent—â€Å"the promise of modernization† (Watson, 41). It has gone so far as to even change cultural eating habits. In these locations, McDonald’s sells more than hamburgers. It sells America as an ideology, a place of modernity, cleanliness, efficiency, and equality. As Watson would contend in China and Japan, McDonald’s represents the convergence of the idealistic facets of Americanization and globalization: the United States as a favorable model to be emulated. Yet in the case of McDonald’s in Hong Kong, it is not considered â€Å"an example of American-inspired transnational culture† or â€Å"perceived as an exotic or alien institution† (Watson, 107). Rather it is a fully assimilated part of Hong Kong’s modern culture. As Watson writes, â€Å"the transnational is the local. † The younger generation could not â€Å"imagine life without it† (Watson, 109). Thusly, at least in Hong Kong, the American aspect of McDonald’s globalization has faded with its assimilation into the national identity. Although American, it no longer Americanizes or suggests that the American odel is something good and unique that should be followed. McDonald’s in Korea however suggests a different view of Americanization. Some people hold that â€Å"eating McDonald’s hamburgers is tantamount to treason and loss of Korean identity† (Watson, 158) At least here, to some degree McDonald’s is view ed as an American crusader of â€Å"cultural imperialism—a new form of exploitation that results from the export of popular culture from the United States† (Watson, 5). McDonald’s represents a conquering American agent seeking to enthrall and draw in cultures to that of its global Americanized one. Another phenomenon of globalization, one might argue American-driven globalization, is English becoming the language of the world. Robert McCrum argues however that this is not a legacy of the American century, but rather a legacy of the British Empire. America has helped to propagate it but it in fact is originally an agent of British-ization. McCrum writes â€Å"The nineteenth (century) was, supremely, the century of British English – first the King’s and then the Queen’s – but it also witnessed the beginnings of the world’s English† (McCrum, 174). English spread to the earth not as a result of America’s dominance in the 20th century, but rather Britain’s far flung immigration in the 19th. McCrum contends that this is what made Jean-Paul Nerriere’s global English (Globish) so accessible to so many people across the world. It is removed from American influence in that it was not asserted upon the world by America. Rather because of Britain and certain historical tilts towards English speaking, it simply fell into place. In essence, McCrum asserts that British English lay the foundation for English to become, as John Adams wrote in 1780, â€Å"in the next and succeeding centuries†¦the language of the world† (McCrum, 105), and as such is not truly an assertion of American influence. However, McCrum’s points are debatable. As a proud Englishman, he seems ready to assert the obvious role of Britain in making it a global language, but is less generous when it comes to the American aspects. Furthermore, his denial of English as a cultural force is problematic. The global media is dominated by America. The largest media conglomerates in the world are American. Ten of the highest twelve paid musicians in the world are American. McCrum seems to ignore the fact that media is one of the largest aspects of globalization, and that American influences dominate it. These have been the themes of globalization. The convergence of Americanization and globalization has dually permeated military affairs, economics, culture, and language. On the global stage, the United States has been the dominant player for over a century. However, to what extent will this remain true in the 21st century? Fareed Zakaria contends that it will, but will require a reassessment of the global community. Zakaria puts forth that we are â€Å"now living through the third great power shift of the modern era† (Zakaria, 2), not â€Å"the decline of America but rather†¦the rise of everyone else† (Zakaria, 1). What this means for Globalization as it is linked to Americanization is that although the U. S. ’s role will still be there, it is diminishing. The historically United States dominated past has paved the way for this. Its active efforts in globalizing the worlds consequence is the â€Å"rise of the rest† (Zakaria, 2). As Zakaria writes â€Å"the United States succeeded in its great and historic mission—it globalized the world. But along the way†¦it forgot to globalize itself† (Zakaria, 48). The arising international order that Zakaria see’s is a term invented by Samuel Huntington â€Å"uni-multipolarity†, which can be described as â€Å"many powers and one super-power† (Zakaria, 43). In the new international order, the United States will merely be a leading actor on a stage of many. The other actors are comprised of new powerful economies—China, India, Brazil. The United States has been able to maintain its preeminence within globalization in the past but the changing realities of the global economic landscape will require according change from America. Zakaria lays out a series of principles that the United States should or must follow in order to maintain its position in the modern world as a chief agent of globalization. These principles recognize the changing landscape and suggest how America can perpetuate its interests, its goal of Americanization within globalization. Firstly, the United States must choose which policies it actively wants to pursue. The ambiguity of policy facing Iran and North Korea do not allow the United States to reach an attainable international goal. If the United States were to decide that they were simply proponents of â€Å"regime change or policy change (that is, denuclearization)† (Zakaria, 234) they could more efficiently define the changes they wish to see in the global community. Similarly, in order for the US to continue to blend Americanization with Globalization, they must set out broad rules and seek to cultivate its bilateral relationships with other nations. As Zakaria argues, if the U. S. has strong relationships with other strong nations, better than anyone has with another, â€Å"it gives the United States the greatest leverage†¦maximizing its ability to shape a peaceful and stable world† (Zakaria, 242). The United States must also be careful in how it shapes it’s responses to international conflict. â€Å"Legitimacy is power† (Zakaria, 247) and the nature of the United States’ current conflicts are â€Å"asymmetrical†, meaning they are not facing conventional military forces or typical state actors. As Zakaria writes â€Å"asymmetrical responses have become easier to execute and difficult to defeat† (Zakaria, 244). Therefore in order to remain legitimate, to have the power to â€Å"set the agenda, define a crisis, and mobilize support† (Zakaria, 247) for the United States’ interests in globalization, reactions need to be shaped to fit the conflicts at hand. Overall, Zakaria contends that if the United States is not willing to change its policies and approach towards globalization and the global community, it will no longer effectively be able to mesh Americanization with globalization. In the analysis of how linked globalization and Americanization are within the context of these books, a complex and comprehensive picture can be draw. The United States has been able to use globalization as a tool to create a global economic empire and cultural model. Through the capitalization of opportunities to expand its markets, packaged in its â€Å"reluctant superpower† myth, the United States has been able to assert itself internationally and accomplish its political and economic aims. However, the changing nature of the global landscape calls for a recalculation of how this strategy of self-interest can be perpetuated. Furthermore, the United States will have to make some concessions regarding its hegemony as other nations with large populations and strong economies grow in power and importance. Culturally, the United States benefited from the British Empire’s legacy of spreading English around the world. However, it has also been able to capitalize on this and further Americanize the world through the consequentially large English speaking media outlets. Multinational corporations such as McDonald’s still possess their American identity abroad, but this is beginning to change in respect to the world’s youth. It is now dually perceived as a symbol of modernity (which sometimes equates to Americanization) but also a component of local culture. Therefore, whether globalization is the Americanization of the world seems to be a yes. The debate whether it will, or should continue to be, is still ongoing, and remains to be seen, dependent on how America conducts itself in the post-American World.

A Critical Analysis Of “The Story Of An Hour” Essay

A critical analysis of â€Å"The Story of an Hour† Kate Chopin’s â€Å"The Story Of An Hour†, in my opinion, is a good piece of literature. It is well written, clearly written, entertaining, and it brings a bit of a challenge to the reader. Starting with the title, Chopin described part of the setting. We already know that everything that happens during this little drama, happens within an hour. This title brought curiosity upon me because I did not realize that many things that could affect one’s life could take place in an hour. For example, the recent tragedy in America, within one hour much had happened in the borders of the United States and Chopin’s choice of title brought that to my attention, within an hour much could happen that could completely change someone’s life. The way the story is written is very straightforward. The author tells you exactly what is happening but still leaves enough room for your imagination to fill in the blanks. For example, when Chopin describes Louise’s room with â€Å"the open window, a comfortable, roomy armchair† (page 378), and then goes on to describe what Louise sees outside, she tells us that our protagonist isn’t living a bad life monetarily. Louise has a nice comfortable chair in her bedroom where she has a nice view of a square with trees and people. The way Chopin describes the weather follows the same suit. â€Å"There were patches of blue sky showing here and there through the clouds†Ã‚ ¦in the west facing her window† (page 378). The author tells you what to imagine but there is still room for you to add, for example, the sun shining through the clouds and warmly hitting her face, among other things. The language used was also good. It wasn’t the usual complicated Shakespearean English, it was, if you will, a more updated version of it. Because she used Modern English, it was easier to follow and understand, I didn’t have to stop and figure out what a certain word meant. At the same time, it is not to say that the piece was poorly written. In many instants as I read it I noticed the way it flowed so well and how beautiful it sounded. The description Chopin gives of Louise sitting on the chair  describes it best. â€Å"She sat with her head thrown back upon the cushion of the chair, quite motionless, except when a sob came up into her throat and shook her, as a child who has cried itself to sleep continues to sob in its dreams.† (Page 378). Simple, yet deep. Throughout the whole story I didn’t really have an urge to stop reading it. Chopin kept me there reading along because I was curious to know more about how Louise felt and if she was going to be ok since it was mentioned that she had heart problems. The story was very entertaining although short. I believe that even if Chopin had dragged on a little more I still would’ve read it right through. Louise showed some strange signs upon receiving the news of her husband’s death. It can even be said that Chopin intended for the audience to think that Louise might have had something to do with her husband Brently’s death. And Richards might have been involved too. As the news were received at the newspaper office, Richards was already there waiting for it and didn’t leave until a second telegram had been sent confirming the death of his friend. The fact that she â€Å"wept at once† (Page 378) also shows some kind of possible involvement, perhaps a fake cry scene was put here just so her sister would see that she was upset about her husband’s death. It is mentioned that she while sitting on her chair she sank â€Å"pressed down by a physical exhaustion that haunted her body and seemed to reach into her soul.† (Page 378). That to me sounds a bit like guilt, the use of the work â€Å"haunted† shows that this is a negative feeling. Once Chopin starts to describe Louise, â€Å"She was young, with a fair face, whose lines bespoken repression and even a certain strength.† (Page 378), that could be describing the repression that she felt because of her husband’s attitude towards her. â€Å"It was not a glance of reflection, but rather indicated a suspension of intelligent thought.† (Page 378), this sentence tells me that she hasn’t been logically thinking anymore, it also helps to show that perhaps she did have some kind of involvement on her husband’s death, not being able to cognitively solve her problems with him. She is waiting for a feeling, maybe it is guilt from what she has done and when it says that she would fight this feeling back it is because she doesn’t want to feel guilty. And later on this feeling is called  a monstrous joy. The cries of freedom also help my observations come true, she had a reason to do it, she wanted to be free of her husband’s ways. Once her husband opens the door, she screams and has a heart attack, she was not expecting to see him ever again, she was filled w joy until the moment she saw him alive. Perhaps she is guilty of trying to kill her husband. The confusing challenging part comes when Richards tries to get in the way of Louise’s sight so she is not able to see Brently. I don’t understand it, what does it mean? Did Richards maybe tell Brently to do something else rather than take this train trip but did not tell him that the train â€Å"accident† was to occur? Maybe it is so and he was trying to not allow Louise to see Brently because Richards and Louise had planned it all and he backed out on it. Maybe Louise’s intention was to be with Richards after her husband died. After reading the story several times this is my interpretation. It is a very good story that could have many meanings, this being one of them. Evil, or Louise’s desire to kill her husband, failed once again because of Good, or Richards strong friendship with Brently. Works Cited Chopin, Kate. â€Å"The Story of an Hour† The Norton Introduction to Literature. New York: Norton, 1998. 377-379.

Second War essays

Second War essays As the second World War was coming to an end, the representatives of some fifty nations met in San Francisco to sign the United Nations Charter in an attempt to unify many countries. The date was June 26 1946, and the countries that signed the charter did so to put themselves in a better position if any conflict were to arise in the future. During the time the charter was drawn and the treaty was signed, April 4 1949, ten countries who had signed the charter were in need of more protection that would require a stronger means of defense. The United States and Canada were to write the pledge of mutual security, that each country was to uphold if they wished to be a part of the alliance. The European countries by 1949 were all at a great disadvantage, since the defeat of Japan and Germany occurred there would be an opening for the Soviet Union to have its influential ways on imposing communism throughout Europe. The Soviet Union began to add on to its empire during World War two be cause they knew that the small countries which included: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Rumania, North-East Germany, and parts of Finland. All these countries combined contained an estimated 23 million people. This was only the beginning of the expansion according to the Soviets at the time, they planned to impose communism on as much of Europe as they could. They were all for the expansion of communism on a world wide level, with Russia at the core. The Soviets were doing the best to gain control of Eastern Europe because they knew if they controlled a large portion of it they would have immense power. The North Atlantic Treaty would enable countries to protect themselves against any threat through utilizing the powers of many countries. To better understand the alliance of the many countries a closer look must be taken at the treaty itself. The treaty was more than a military alliance, what it also did to the relations between the many memb...

The Dos and Don’ts for Sharing Opinions in an Interview

The Dos and Don’ts for Sharing Opinions in an Interview â€Å"It’s not polite to discuss politics or religion.† We’ve all heard it- and it’s good policy in the workplace, where people of all perspectives come together to get the job done. But how should you handle it if someone else- specifically, an interviewer- asks you for your opinion on a controversial subject? Here are 5 tips to keep in mind as you prep for your interview.DON’T feel obligated to answer.This is not a question that should come up in the course of a regular job interview. Maybe the interviewer is taking advantage of a casual setting (say, over a lunch during an extended interview process), or is just not aware of what’s appropriate and what’s not. Just because someone may be able to offer you a job does not mean they’re entitled to truth serum-level answers. Would you give him or her your Social Security number? Your bank account balance? You should consider your personal opinions just that†¦personal. Youâ₠¬â„¢re not obligated to give a full and honest answer if you’re asked for your opinion.DO respond with a question.In a case like this it’s perfectly fair to answer with a cautious question of your own, like â€Å"what makes you ask?† You may just be stalling for time and hoping to defuse the line of inquiry, but it’s a legitimate next step.DON’T use it as a launchpad for your favorite political rant.It may seem like an open opportunity to unleash the real you, but that’s deceptive. If you do give your honest opinion about abortion/gun control/healthcare reform, you run the risk of alienating the interviewer. Sure, it wasn’t especially fair of them to set you up like that, but human nature being what it is, they may disqualify you based on your opinions and not your qualifications.I fell prey to this temptation once, as an intern in college. I was 19, and was positive I had politics all figured out. During a lunch with colleagues, I sh ot off at the mouth about my disdain for the president at the time- only to find out later that one of the colleagues present was a huge supporter of President [name redacted]. I wasn’t asked to return to that group the next summer. In all likelihood that wasn’t the main reason, but it could have been. And I still cringe when I think about how unprofessional it was for me to unleash my righteous political fury at a work lunch.DO try to change the topic.It’s okay to give a mild, middle-of-the-road response and then move back to the interview track. If the interviewer asks you about your political affiliation, try something along the lines of, â€Å"I’m pretty fed up with all politicians these days. I’m more interested in what I can do every day to make things better.† It may sound lame, but at least it dodges a potential bullet.DON’T open the door to this question yourself.If your notebook has a â€Å"Feel the Bern† campaign sti cker on it, or you have a â€Å"Make America Great Again† tattoo, make sure those are out of sight when you walk into the interview. Similarly, if you’re, say, a vegan and you object to the fancy leather shoes the interviewer is wearing, don’t go out of your way to point out the folly of his ways. Again, this should be about your qualifications- not your personal views and beliefs. You probably won’t be able to convince this person of the superiority of your opinion in one sitting, and even if you do, you’ve already put yourself in a box before you even get a job offer.There’s plenty of time to talk about your personal opinions with friends and family, or on anonymous internet news comment sections. The job interview is just not the place for it. And if you’re asked to bring in your personal opinions on potentially controversial topics, you should feel comfortable in sidestepping that land mine.