Construction Industry Book Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Construction Industry Book - Article Example Starting with the verification of existing conditions in chapter 2, the book continues to discuss on the merits and proper use of concrete being the major construction material, followed by discussion on aspects of masonry. The author provides guidelines towards use of metals such as iron, steel, aluminum and non-metals such as wood, plastic material in the construction projects. The book further discusses on thermal and moisture protection techniques along with required ventilation, as well as HVAC and heating parameters. The book provides details on the finishing aspect of construction projects, up to the last minute requirement of furnishings, with emphasis on utilities including the electric work.(Simmons, 2001) This book is a complete academic guide for all students of civil, electrical and air-conditioning engineers, as it explains the minute details in an absorbing manner for any fresh student. The book can be helpful for all those who are concerned with construction projects as it can help them to prepare the project charter from the concept or design level, up to the level of complete project handover. Although this book is a lengthy guide, the individual chapters would be useful for different professionals according to their job requirements. For example, civil engineers will find useful details in chapters on concrete and other building materials. Similarly, electrical engineers would benefit from going through chapter on utilities and electric works, while heating, humidity control and air-conditioning experts can find interesting details from the chapter dedicated to these principles. Simmons. L. H, (2001) Construction: principles, materials and methods .google books Retrieved from:

Virginia Planter and Slave Holder Essay Example for Free

Virginia Planter and Slave Holder Essay The declaration for independence was given out by American representatives, American, then, being a colony of the Great Britain. American by then was constituted of majority being the slaves captured from other parts of the world and sold to merchants in the slave trade in the Great Britain who were later set free and allowed to settle in far lands which later came to be called America. America remained the colony of Great Britain until the Declaration of independence in 1776. The declaration encompasses a number of philosophies. Assuming that I am presently a Virginia planter and slave holder, this paper seeks to address how the philosophical ideals embodied in the Declaration of Independence, the similarities and differences of philosophies in the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution, affect my assumed role as a Virginia planter and slave holder. The paper also seeks to establish a constitutional ratification for and against my assumed role. To start with, the philosophies in the Declaration of Independence include the powerful proposition that all men were created equal and each one of them has a right to life, right to think for oneself i. e. right to liberty and right to pursuit of happiness (Jefferson, 1964). This philosophy of idealism, which believes in the inherent good of humanity, affects my assumed role in that as a holder of slaves whom I use for free labor in my farm, I go against the very human rights spelt out in foregoing philosophical stance. I deny the slaves I hold, their right to liberty i. e. hey need to acquiesce to working for me as opposed to my use of force. My holding of the slaves also seeks to show one thing: that I have failed to realize that all men were created equal, the inherent good in humanity and that no one or nothing gives me the right to hold them against their wish and consent. This does not mean that no one can have people working for him or no one can exercise power over individuals. All this is possible only if the subjects are in consent otherwise it is slavery Any conceivable government begets its power from the concurrence of the subjects (Jefferson, 1964). The fundamental difference between the Articles of confederation and the constitution is that whereas the articles were constructed by 13 states that the constitution of the US, by then, superseded (In fact, it is more of a treaty between the 13 states), the constitution was constructed to rule the whole nation constituted of many states, all the states, as one country. The articles were parochial but the constitution is not. Another difference is that, in the articles, the government had no power to directly tax the people. This was because the people were suspicious of the government for they saw it as a great threat to their liberties. The constitution gives the government power to directly tax people and the people are more receptive to and trust the government to do most things for them. Further, the articles had the states given one vote no matter how large the state was. This is not the case with the constitution which allows a large state a proportionate voting power. Finally, the articles are oriented to the idealist philosophy which believes in the inherent good of humanity whereas the constitution is oriented to the pragmatic philosophy which doesn’t trust that people can do the right thing. On the part of similarities, it is seen that both, the Articles of confederation and the constitution, provide for the congress declaring war and sending ambassadors. As a Virginia planter and slave holder, the articles of confederation and the constitution may favor me or threaten me at the same time. Even as the articles of confederation fought to promote general welfare, to ensure domestic tranquility and to ensure the blessings of liberty, they always had a compromise to let slavery continue because most of the people, by then, owned slaves. It was to take centuries later before the slaves could finally enjoy the blessings of liberty spelt out in the constitution when the constitution could later clearly emphasize award of inalienable human rights to slaves and lords alike. This was of course no good news to any Virginia planter and slave holder because it meant that they could lose the free labor from the slaves hence no productivity or expensive cost of production and they stood a chance of going to prison if they continued to keep the slaves. This explains why Virginia delegates failed to sign the constitution during the constitutional convention. Slavery is seen going against the laws of human jurisprudence. The opening phrase in the American constitution, insurance of liberty being part of the phrase, serves as a precursor to antislavery stance of the constitution. However, the constitution may have failed in its own ways and supported slavery or any act close to slavery. A number of scholars argue that the constitution at its conception at the constitutional convention was pro-slavery. The founders created a national charter to deal with the slavery issue, when they realized that fallout was eminent based on the issue of slavery. It is noted that the slave owners were monopolizing the government offices and dictating policies that trampled on human rights. For this reasoning that constitutional ratification appeared unclear on the issue of slavery, a Virginia planter and slave holder could not ratify the constitution until he was sure that slaves were only counted as property and not citizens lest they could attract the protection the human rights enshrined in the constitution consequently making slavery illegal.

The Things They Carried, Tim OBrien | Analysis

The Things They Carried, Tim OBrien | Analysis Tim OBrien, in an interview has discussed the definition of truth by saying, You have to understand about life itself. There is a truth as we live it; there is a truth as we tell it. Those two are not compatible all the time. There are times when the storys truth can be truer, I think, than a happening truth (Herzog 120). This definition of truth is a great challenge for readers of OBriens works. It is hard even for the author himself to distinguish whether a detail is truth or no-truth. In this essay, I will discuss the blurry border between truth and fiction in OBriens Vietnam War stories, The Things They Carried. The technique that OBrien uses to blend truth and fiction in his book is his use of metafiction narrative to describe Vietnam War. Metafiction is a term given to fictional writing which self-consciously and systematically draws attention to its status as an artifact in order to pose questions about the relationship between fiction and reality. (Patricia Waugh). In the novel The Things They Carried, Tim OBrien purposely makes the boundary between truth and fiction invisible. For him, truth depends on the context of the situation that someone experiences it and what going on in that persons mind. The author starts his book with the quote, This is a work of fiction. Except for a few details regarding the authors own life, all the incidents, names, and characters are imaginary(6). However, just few pages later OBrien gives his dedication to the men of Alpha Company, and in particular to Jimmy Cross, Norman Bowker, Rat Kiley, Mitchell Sanders, Henry Dobbins, and Kiowa. Ironically, they are all the main characters of the novel. Tim OBrien has already require his readers to notice the blur lines between fiction and fact in his stories. Tim OBrien blurs this line of truth in many ways. He uses truth in his fiction to make the story more believable. The protagonist as well as narrator of The Things They Carried is named Tim OBrien, he also comes fr om the same town as the author Tim OBrien. The character is a college graduate and is also a drafted Vietnam War vet. He is in his late forties and also is a writer whose book Going After Cacciato got published. Those are obviously more than few details that the character shares with the real OBrien. The author successfully manages deploying his purpose that he wants the readers to feel what he felt. He wants his readers to know why story-truth is truer than happening-truth (203). Hence, readers cant help but trying to connect the relationship between the narrator with the author. Readers will always need to raises the question of what is reality and what is fiction. Even in the work of fiction, OBrien more than once insists readers to believe things he says is the truth. Before revealing the gruesome story of Rat Kiley slowly killing a baby water buffalo, OBrien writes, This one does it for me. Ive told it beforemany times, many versionsbut heres what actually happened (78). OBrien confesses that he has told the story in several ways, it means somehow the story has been fictionalized. However, he still convinces readers that: but heres what actually happened,. The truth in this story is being tested. Readers know that the story contains fictional detail after being told several different ways; they have been notified that The Things They Carried is a fiction. However, they are still to believe the story is true, because the author affirms so. This writing style defines OBriens work as a metafiction where the author consciously challenges the readers to distinguish truth with what he wants readers to believe is truth between the very blurry line. In this case, according to Lynn Whartons remark, everything is true but nothing authentic (Blyn 189). In the chapter How to Tell a True War Story OBrien is most clear in telling his opinion about truth of the war: A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encourage virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior, nor restrain men from doing the things men have always done (OBrian 68). Furthermore, In many cases a true war story cannot be believed. If you believe it, be skeptical. Its a question of credibility. Often the crazy stuff is true and the normal stuff isnt, because the normal stuff is necessary to make you believe the truly incredible craziness (OBrien 71). OBriens short stories follow these rules. For example, the author describes a group of soldiers was ordered to listen for movements of the Viet Cong in the jungle. After few nights, they begins to hears the sounds of a cocktail party: popping champagne corks, several simultaneous conversations, opera-style music. Sanders, the soldier telling the story, says, All these different voices. Not human voices, though. Because its the mountains. Follow me? The rock-its talking. And the fog, too, and the grass and the goddamn mongooses (OBrien 74). The definition of a true war story have been established, in this case, the unbelievable fictional details were created in order to tell the real truth from the war. In Speaking of Courage, OBriens fiction become so believable. Readers can easily relate as if they witness this real life story everywhere. The protagonist Norman Bowker cannot restart his life because he cannot accept his self-described lack of courage in the shit field. No one is interested in his war stories any more, Norman becomes depressed by all the horrific memories, the guilt he carries. Readers can see the image of any soldier with PTSD then and now. Though OBrien has said this is a work of fiction (OBrien 5), hence readers need to treat Norman Bowker as a fictional character. However, in this story he is so real as a non-fictional truth. Following Speaking of Courage, the author adds Notes, to claim that Norman Bowker wrote to OBrien after the war. He also provides an update that Bowker has killed himself to reinforce the realistic factor in his fictional story. By doing this, more than ever OBrien has created the blurry line between truth and fiction in his works. Although the work is classified as a fiction, OBrien continually emphasizes the truthfulness of stories he tells . This technique creates uncertainty for the readers, resemble with the uncertainty of the young soldiers must have felt while fighting in Vietnam as the author confides: Certain blood was being shed for uncertain reasons. I saw no unity of purpose, no consensus on matters of philosophy or history or law. The very facts were shrouded in uncertainty: Was it a civil war? A war of national liberation or simple aggression? Who started it, and when, and why? What really happened to the USS Maddox on that dark night in the Gulf of Tonkin? Was Ho Chi Minh a Communist stooge, or a nationalist savior, or both, or neither? What about the Geneva Accords? What about SEATO and the Cold War? What about dominoes? (OBrien 122). Steven Kaplan discusses this point in his essay The Things They Carried includes staging what might have happened in Vietnam while simultaneously questioning the a ccuracy and credibility of the narrative act itselfà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ the reader is permitted to experience at first hand the uncertainty that characterized being in Vietnam (Kaplan 48). By blurring the line between fact and fiction, Tim OBrien can objectively speak to readers about war. Throughout the book there are many different versions of the truth. In any war story, but especially a true one, its difficult to separate what happened from what seemed to happenThe angles of vision are skewed (OBrien 71).The story called Spin tells of the Vietnamese soldier that the narrator killed. The story The Man I Killed describes the same dead Vietnamese man and creates a history for him. He loved mathematics (OBrien 142), he had only been a soldier for a single day (OBrien 144), and like the narrator he went to war in order to avoid disgracing himself, and therefore his family and village (OBrien 142). The story Ambush makes the reader wonder whether any of this ever happened. That narrator tells us that he was not the thrower of the grenade that killed the soldier and then Even that story is made up (203). in a true war story, if theres a moral at all, its like the thread that makes the cloth. OBrien keeps giving the readers truth and then revising it or reshaping that trut h to something else. The reader is never quite sure where the real fact is but finds that it does not matter. In OBriens own words, You cant extract the meaning without unraveling the deeper meaning (77) For OBrien, truth can change, truth evolves through time and depends on the contexts and circumstances. OBrien also said Truth is fluid. Truth is a function of language. According to the authors own concept about truth, fiction is sometimes can be also considered truth. His brilliant and humorous example was: in 1964 I love Sally is the truth, but in 1965 the truth is I love Jenna. So they are both the truth told by the same person, but are very different just by the time they were told. OBrien said: A lie, sometimes, can be truer than the truth, which is why fiction gets written. The things they carried as a whole is vastly under the shadow of this definition, where fiction and nonfiction get seperated by a very blurry line; where it contains both truths and imaginations. Even for OBrien, he sometimes could not even distinguish what really happened and what he thinks it happened because the border between those two is so paper thin. In OBriens point of view, lives are about stories-the stories we tell ourselves, the stories we tell others. What is really true in our lives as we live it? Might there be events that we view incredibly significant now that we wont remember twenty years from now? Are there trivial details now that might come to have great impact on our lives or teach us incredible lessons? So where is this elusive truth? Truth is what we see from our own personal experience, and truth changes as we live our lives and as we keep remembering things, events, and people in our lives. Truth changes as we mature and as we continue to tell our stories or play them over in our minds. As critic Kaplan says, OBrien saves himself by demonstrating in this book that events have no fixed or final meaning and that the only meaning that events can have is one that emerges momentarily and then shifts and changes each time that the events come alive as they are remembered or portrayed (Kaplan). In an interview, OBrien was asked: What can stories do for us? He said: Stories do a lot for us. They can help us heal. They can make us feel part of something bigger. We all tell stories to ourselves-about today and tomorrow-we live our lives based on a story we tell ourselves. And were constantly adjusting ithoping for a happy ending. (Curran) For him, the key is hopefully to learn something or gain some insight from the process of telling and retelling in which truth and non-truth may get blend into each other to make sense. By stating his book is a work of fiction, OBrien gives himself a license to have more room to create and to write even though the materials are based on the truth. OBrien says One of the chapters in The Things They Carried is about a character with my name going to the Canadian border. He meets an old man up there, almost crosses into Canada but doesnt. I never literally did any of these things, but I thought about it. It was all happening in my dreams and in my head. And the one thing fiction can do is make it seem real. To let the reader participate in this kid making this journey and it feels like its really happening. You hope the readers asking the same questions that you were back then. You know, like What would I do? Would I go to Canada? What do I think of war? So even if the story never happened, literally, it happened in my head. If I were to tell you the literal truth about that summer, the truth would be that I played a lot of golf and worried a lot about the draft. But t hats a crummy story. It doesnt make you feel anything. (Richmond.com). It turns out he did not do the things in the story, but he considered them. The real truth would be boring but the embellished truth is still true. Just because he did not live these things does not mean that they are not true. He has embellished the truth in his head in order to dramatize the moral dilemma for the reader. With the pass he has given to himself in writing fiction base on truth, and letting truth hidden in fiction, everything is believable. In the book The Things They Carried, OBrien says, By telling stories, you objectify your own experience. You separate it from yourself. You pin down certain truths (OBrien 158). For OBrien, stories can make events happen over again, can bring back to life ones weve lost. He writes, The thing about a story is that you dream it as you tell it, hoping that others might then dream along with you, and in this way memory and imagination and language combine to make spirits in the head (230). The Things They Carried, then, brings back to life for OBrien lives such as Norman Bowker and Bowkers best friend Kiowa. Since stories can have such an incredible effect, they save us. The us implies OBrien, other veterans, as well as general readers. By using metafiction as a vehicle for the Vietnam War, OBrien is able to discuss with readers why the stories are told and retold. Readers are better able to understand the aftereffects on veterans and relate to experiences they may never personally under go. OBrien uses fiction to be able to tell whole truth because the fact is fiction is often closer to the truth than what surrounds us on a daily basis. By explaining to readers how The Things They Carried operates on different levels, OBrien is arguing that his fiction piece is more accurate than nonfiction pieces on the Vietnam War. Even when OBrien exaggerates the truth or changes the details of a story, he does so to make the Vietnam War more real for the readers. As explained through the story of Norman Bowker and in How to Tell a True War Story, for OBrien, the truth of a story depends almost solely on how real the experience seems for the readers. In this way, happening truth remains historically and emotionally distant (Silbergleid 133). If the story is not technically true, at least the reader understands the significance of the event. Silbergleid notes story truth, is full of excruciating detail and specificity (133). OBrien uses story-truth to recreate Vietnam for outsiders. If the readers can fully imagine the shit field where Norman Bowker lost his best friend because of a sudden lack of courage, then that story of Vietnam is real. Although a Norman Bowker may not have ever existed, may only be a character in the fiction piece The Things They Carried, his experience undoubtedly happened to other soldiers. Even with exaggeration and falsification, the reality of Vietnam is accurately created by OBrien. The character Mitchell Sanders summarizes The Things They Carried best: I got a confession to make, Sanders said. Last night, man, I had to make up a few things. Yeah, but listen, its still true. (OBrien 77)

Comparing and Contrasting Epic of Gilgamesh and the Bibles Noahs Ark

Comparing and Contrasting Epic of Gilgamesh and Noah's Ark Many cultures have stories of a great flood, and probably the best known story is of Noah's Ark. The next most notable is the Sumerian story of Ut-Napishtim found in the Epic of Gilgamesh. In the ancient Babylonian depiction of the flood story, the god Enlil creates a flood to destroy a noisy mankind that is disturbing his sleep. Gilgamesh is told by another god, Ea, to build an ark (Monack 1). The Epic of Gilgamesh has broadly the same structure and plot as Noah's Ark, suggesting the possibility that the Biblical account has drawn influence from the archaeologically older Sumerian depiction. University professor Alexander Heidel concludes that these accounts are undeniably related (Fowler 1). According to theological considerations, the Epic and the Biblical versions can be contrasted as well. In the Epic of Gilgamesh, the gods are depicted as lacking any moral or ethical purpose in their pronouncement of judgment (Fowler 2). In contrast, the Biblical record describes only one God who is just and moral. The archite...

Things Fall Apart :: essays research papers

Things Fall Apart is a novel written by Chinua Achebe. I t takes place in the middle of the twentieth century, in Umuofia Africa. It is based on the life of its main character Okonkwo and his village. Okonkwo was a well known, accomplished man in his village. He was a man of two titles and he earned every bit of it. Okonkwo’s family included eight children, six sons and two daughters. He also had three wives which was also a symbol of wealth in Umuofia because in their village it was their custom to have men pay a bride price for their wives. Okonkwo worked very hard to obtain everything he had because his father Unoka left him with nothing but debt. Unoka, Okonkwo’s father was a very lazy degenerate gambler of whom Okonkwo was ashamed of. Unoka was often referred to as an efulefu, or a man with of no worth . Okonkwo overcame these negative aspects of his childhood, started with a small loan of yam seeds, and worked to become a very wealthy man. Everything in Umuofia seemed normal and seemed to be going well for Okonkwo and his family until Okonkwo committed a fatal action. The story then takes another turn when Okonkwo, his village, and the eight villages surrounding his were affected by the new coming European customs and laws. . The village of Umuofia was located in the rainforest region Africa. The people of Umuofia were mainly farmers of root crops and herders of sheep and goat. Their farming and herding was very successful and it provided a surplus which made way for their market. Umuofia and the eight villages surrounding it were male dominated villages, yet women were also very important because of their abilty to give birth. The female’s ability to conceive children was the most important and beneficial thing for a woman to do in Umuofia. Women also helped in farming , but they were limited to farming beans, cassava, and things that required light duty farming. The men farmed the yam which was referred to as the king of crops because it required heavy labor and attentive care. The people of Umuofia were polytheistic, they had a long list of gods and goddesses such as Chukwu, who was believed to have created the world and the other gods, Ani, who was their earth goddess, Agbala, and many others. The Umuofians created carvings and other things that were symbolic of their gods. Things Fall Apart :: essays research papers Things Fall Apart is a novel written by Chinua Achebe. I t takes place in the middle of the twentieth century, in Umuofia Africa. It is based on the life of its main character Okonkwo and his village. Okonkwo was a well known, accomplished man in his village. He was a man of two titles and he earned every bit of it. Okonkwo’s family included eight children, six sons and two daughters. He also had three wives which was also a symbol of wealth in Umuofia because in their village it was their custom to have men pay a bride price for their wives. Okonkwo worked very hard to obtain everything he had because his father Unoka left him with nothing but debt. Unoka, Okonkwo’s father was a very lazy degenerate gambler of whom Okonkwo was ashamed of. Unoka was often referred to as an efulefu, or a man with of no worth . Okonkwo overcame these negative aspects of his childhood, started with a small loan of yam seeds, and worked to become a very wealthy man. Everything in Umuofia seemed normal and seemed to be going well for Okonkwo and his family until Okonkwo committed a fatal action. The story then takes another turn when Okonkwo, his village, and the eight villages surrounding his were affected by the new coming European customs and laws. . The village of Umuofia was located in the rainforest region Africa. The people of Umuofia were mainly farmers of root crops and herders of sheep and goat. Their farming and herding was very successful and it provided a surplus which made way for their market. Umuofia and the eight villages surrounding it were male dominated villages, yet women were also very important because of their abilty to give birth. The female’s ability to conceive children was the most important and beneficial thing for a woman to do in Umuofia. Women also helped in farming , but they were limited to farming beans, cassava, and things that required light duty farming. The men farmed the yam which was referred to as the king of crops because it required heavy labor and attentive care. The people of Umuofia were polytheistic, they had a long list of gods and goddesses such as Chukwu, who was believed to have created the world and the other gods, Ani, who was their earth goddess, Agbala, and many others. The Umuofians created carvings and other things that were symbolic of their gods.

A Work of Artifice and You Should Have Been a Boy Essay -- Marge Pierc

A Work of Artifice and You Should Have Been a Boy The word potential can be defined as the sum of abilities and capabilities that are possessed by, and specific to an individual being. In regards to humans we could say that it is all that a person can be and accomplish if encouraged and allowed the freedom to do so. Fulfillment of potential is curtailed in both the females in â€Å"A Work of Artifice,† by Marge Piercy and the female in â€Å"You Should Have Been a Boy,† by Elizabeth Cady Stanton; however, the manner and degree of such curtailing is quite different. In â€Å"A Work of Artifice† the growth and fulfillment of females is stunted physically, mentally, and sexually. The first evidence of this curtailment of potential we see is when the author says that the bonsai tree, which symbolically represents females, â€Å"could’ve grown to be eighty feet tall†¦but a gardener carefully pruned it.† Males, which are symbolically represented by the gardener, whittle away anything they find undesirable, thus curtailing the female’s growth and fulfillment. Example of the curtailing of the physical growth is â€Å"bound feet† by which females are unable to move around as they wish, limiting them to precisely where the males want them to be. In the words â€Å"croon[ed]† day after day by the gardener â€Å"it is your nature to be small and cozy, domestic and weak,† we see how males use these words to shape the mind of females, and they tell the females repeatedly also that they are so lucky to have men to tend to them as to inflict guilt as a safety net just in case the shaping was unsuccessful. All this careful attention works together to curtail females mentally. Lastly, the words â€Å"the hands you love to touch† imply that females... ...hese works signify the male dominance in society, and how male uses different venues and approaches to protect his dominant status, whether it is by conscious or unconscious acts. Also both works show how female acceptance of this hierarchy gives males the power and approval to continue to rule the roost, whether such acceptance comes through willing obedience or defeat. The females portrayed in â€Å"A Work of Artifice† and â€Å"You Should Have Been a Boy† developed deep and lonely voids inside their hearts because they had been conformed to the male’s wishes. They learned to ignore the pain created by the turning away from their own desires and aspirations and directed their lives on the path of living to please others. This empty existence denied what was rightfully theirs—a life full of happiness and satisfaction that occurs through the freedom of expression of self.

A Dolls house Language Essay

Ever since reading the text in my own time I have, in many of my past lessons been discussing, acting and re-reading parts of the play as well as researching many other aspects to the play. By doing this I discovered things like the play was firstly written in Norwegian and then translated into many languages along with many more complex things. Back in lessons I was doing tasks that specifically looked at the language in the play. For example before rein acting a scene from the play the whole class gathered in a circle to do a warm up exercise which evolved around the line; â€Å"What did you do to die today at a minute or two to two, a thing distinctly hard to say but a harder thing to do†. I had to say this line in many different accents and characters including a posh upper class character like Nora and Torvold Helmer from the play. The language used in the play not only creates the feel of the 19th century but it also reflects the way the characters are. It does this as the 19th century old English is very formal showing there middle to higher class and well educated. The language also shows the society that the characters live in and is significant as it reveals their inner thoughts, feelings relationships and situations. In one particular part of the play Torvold says: â€Å"You can’t deny it, little Nora now can you? It’s a sweet little songbird but it gets through a terrible amount of money you wouldn’t believe how much it costs a man when he’s got a little songbird like you† This rather poetic and metaphoric line compares Nora to a songbird which is petit and shows she can be sweet, innocent and chirpy. It also echo’s how Torvold belittles Nora and treats her like a child, which in them days was the done thing; men overpowering women and controlling the relationship in addition to this it perhaps shows how he has a fatherly figure and likes to take control over situations. Although in saying that Nora is or should I say acts rather childlike and naive herself but at the same time is manipulative, flirtatious and cunning as it proves on the opening line of the play; â€Å"Hide that Christmas tree away, Helen. The children mustn’t see it before I’ve decorated it this evening† As well as giving the audience a rough date and establishing shot it shows how Nora seems just as excited about Christmas as the children do. In most houses the children would be helping to set up the Christmas tree but not in the Helmer household Nora is setting up the tree and rather excited about it too. There is some reference to poetry in the text although it is not the rhyming type, it’s more a usage of poetic words being exchanged. Like in the first quote I made there are countless uses of words like â€Å"songbird† and â€Å"squirrel† being used to describe Nora as well as Torvold (in some parts of the play). There is another quote in Act 1 on page 25 where Nora has just gone out and bought some new things for the family, which Torvold is unhappy about as she has spent so much money which makes Nora unhappy too, it says; â€Å"Now, now! My little songbird mustn’t droop her wings. What’s this? Is little squirrel sulking? (takes out his purse) Nora; guess what I’ve got here! This quote to me shows how he just keeps Nora sweet but does not go out of his reach to keep her happy. Also the use of poetic words is very creative and wise it is saying to Nora do not loose hope or become sad. But it says this in a metaphoric way as Nora does not really have wings but a songbird does and this is what Nora is often compared to by Torvold. The majority of the speech used throughout the play is natural from all of the characters as the play itself is done rather realistically and flows well. There are very rare if any uses of Brectian techniques to break any language or any part of the play up for example; there are no placards to make a particular line stand out, this is probably as each line is just as important as the one before. Even though there is reference to use of poetic language I think it gives the play even more of a realistic effect as people do have little pet names for there husband and wife. In addition to this Henrik Ibsen goes that step further and creates for each character there own realm of speech as a quote from the Methuen Student notes verifies: â€Å"Ibsen creates for each character a habit of speech appropriate to his or her own class and personality† With Torvold he is spoken with a rather fatherly/paternal type of speech, Krogstad he always reflects to his training as a lawyer, Mrs Linde speaks direct and could appear a bit bitter and cold, Nora is excitable but finds resolve at the end of the play and Dr Rank speaks in riddles and fondness of using figures of speech. Over all this coursework has made me realise how important the lines actually are in a play and how important it is to deliver them correctly. As well as consistency when delivering the lines in a certain way the character must keep delivering them in that way. I personally believe that this may enhance my skills as a yr 12 drama student.