Japanese Prejudice in Fact and Fiction Essay -- Discrimination Japanes

Japanese Prejudice in Fact and Fiction The novel Snow Falling on Cedars by David Guterson is about the way Japanese Americans were treated in the United States during the time of Pearl Harbor and afterwards. Guterson got his inspiration for a novel about a court trial full of prejudice from Harper Lee’s novel To Kill a Mockingbird. His father was a lawyer, so Guterson was able to reenact a realistic trial that could have occurred during the late 1940s in the book (Sherwin 1). Kabuo Miyamoto, the man accused of murder in the book, is presumed guilty because he looks different. When Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, most Americans became fearful of the Japanese. The Japanese-Americans didn’t have as many rights as other Americans, and like Kabuo would have been presumed guilty. Japanese were not allowed to own or lease land, they were sent to internment camps, and when they returned from the camps their personal possessions were not returned. The Japanese living on the West Coast became a supposed threat to people. Americans were afraid that Japan would invade the West Coast. The Japanese were better farmers than most Caucasians, because they were very hard workers. In 1907, the first of the Alien Land Laws was enacted. The laws prohibited the sale or lease of land to Japanese people. This law was in effect through 1966. Nine more bills were introduced in 1943 that â€Å"were designed to prohibit the ownership of property by alien Japanese and United States citizens of Japanese ancestry, to prohibit Japanese aliens from being guardians of property owned by the minor United States citizen children, and to provide for the sale at public auction or private sale of escheated property† (Chuman 200). T... ...inst, Kabuo Miyamoto was the first one investigated in the murder of Carl Heine. After some circumstantial evidence was found, the investigation was stopped, because everyone presumed Kabuo was guilty. By the end of the book, a news reporter finds the evidence that the sheriff didn’t look for. The judge dismisses the trial after hearing evidence about weather conditions and hair found on the boat. Kabuo was released from jail after seven months. Work Cited Chuman, Frank. The Bamboo People: The Law and Japanese-Americans. Del Mar, California: Publisher's Inc., 1976. Girdner, Audrie and Loftis, Anne. The Great Betrayal. London: The MacMillan Company, 1969. Hersey, John. Manazar. New York: Times Books, 1988. Sherwin, Elizabeth. Printed Matter -- David Guterson-- Page. 6/4/97. 4/11/01 .

Insanity or Feigned Madness

Throughout William Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, the protagonist, Prince Hamlet, is faced with avenging the cruel murder of his Father. In attempts for vengeance, Hamlet feigns madness as a ploy to perform actions he would normally be prohibited from and as a way to prevent people from taking him seriously, thus allowing him to execute his plans unnoticed. He uses his ‘insanity’ as a way to vent his feelings and thoughts towards other characters as shown when he is speaking to Claudius, Gertrude and Ophelia. Hamlet blatantly states on various occasions that he in fact is not mad and even says that he will put on an â€Å"antic disposition†. He also only portrays his madness when necessary for his underlying goal, but when there is no need to deceive, Hamlet acts as a perfectly sane person would which is demonstrated when he speaks to Horatio as well as the actors. Finally in comparison to Ophelia, who is the portrait of madness and has undergone similar tragedies as Hamlet, he appears as normal as anyone else. Hamlet appears to be mad as a way to vent his emotions and conceal any action he plans to take against Claudius to avenge his father. This is part of Hamlets initial plan when he tells Horatio and Marcellus that he will â€Å"put an antic disposition on†(I. v. 173) and that they must swear not to speak a word of his feigned madness. This allows Hamlet to maintain his appearance of insanity thus allowing him to make his remarks of disgust towards Gertrude and Claudius without being punished or taken seriously as a sane prince would be. Through his act, Hamlet is able to vent his feelings towards Gertrude about how she married too soon after the death of his father and is even able to criticize her. Hamlet also uses his feigned madness as an excuse for his actions. This is shown when Hamlet apologizes to Laertes: Was’t Hamlet wrong’d Laertes? Never Hamlet: If Hamlet from himself be ta’en away, And when he’s not himself does wrong Laertes, Then Hamlet does it not, Hamlet denies it. Who does it then? His madness: if’t be so,(V. ii. 224) Even in Hamlets apology he makes it seem as though he is mad. The line â€Å"If Hamlet from himself be ta’en away† represents the modern description of madness stating that Hamlet was not all there. He also speaks about himself in third person, which is seen for the first time in the play, and also conveys the principle of madness. By apologizing in a ‘mad state of mind’, Hamlet hopes to make his insanity more believable thus making it easier for Laertes to accept it. By feigning insanity, Hamlet is able avoid questions about his peculiar behavior and is able to focus on his revenge on Claudius. Hamlet only uses his guise of madness when necessary. Proving his sanity, Hamlet is able create a play based on what the ghost of his father told Hamlet about his death. Also when telling Horatio, a scholar, of his plan Hamlet not only appeared sane but Horatio had no issues with his instructions â€Å"Observe mine uncle: if his occulted guilt Do not itself unkennel in one speech it is a damned ghost we have seen,†(III. ii. 79) Hamlet tells Horatio to watch Claudius for any signs of guilt. Showing that he is not insane, Hamlet also questions the intentions of the ghost and whether it is good or evil. If he were mad, then he would not even contemplate the intentions of the ghost. Above all Hamlet was correct with his plan and the king did in fact show signs guilt. Even other characters notice that Hamlet is not completely mad. A prime example is when Polonius was speaking to Hamlet and says, â€Å"Though this be madness, yet there is method in’t. †(II. ii. 204). Although Hamlet was able to fool Polonius that he was indeed mad, Polonius notices that Hamlet’s remarks are full of meaning and quick-witted, no easy task for a man who is truly insane but not as difficult for a man nearly playing the role. Polonius’ analysis of Hamlet proves to be true when Hamlet tells Rosencrantz and Guildenstern that he in fact is not mad. I am but mad north-north-west. When the wind is southerly, I know a hawk from a handsaw. (II. ii. 376). Though spoken in an unconventional way, Hamlet blatantly states that he is not mad. Hidden within that statement, Hamlet also was able to convey the message that he can recognize his enemies, â€Å"I know a hawk from a handsaw†. Some have analyzed this quote as an attack towards Rosencrantz and Guildenstern1. Hamlet is not mad he is merely feigning it and with his knowledge of acting he is doing an exceptional job. Similarly to Hamlet, Ophelia suffers the same tragic loss of a father. Cambridge University did a study on the effects of losing a parent and came to the conclusion that â€Å"The death of a parent imposes an unexpected crisis for most healthy, well-functioning adults. This crisis can result in high levels of physiological distress, increased risk for depression, impaired physical health, or increase alcohol consumption. These effects go largely unrecognized by everyone except those going through the loss. †(Umberson,7). This study proves true to Hamlet who undergoes similar signs of depression and physiological distress. Ophelia on the other hand shows true signs of insanity. She is unable to process thoughts logically and when she falls in the water she is unable, or unwilling, to sense the danger at hand and drowns without the slightest struggle. Unlike Ophelia, Hamlet is constantly thinking and rationalizing his possible actions. This is shown when Hamlet has the opportunity to kill Claudius: Now might I do it, now he is a-praying; and now I’ll do’t: and so he goes to heaven: and so am I revenged. That would be scann’d: A villain kills my father, and for that, I, his sole son, do this same villain send to heaven. (III,iii,74-79) Hamlet’s thoughts follow a logical progression that shows his understanding of the situations around him. With the chance to kill Claudius, Hamlet realizes that by killing him while he is repenting his sins, Hamlet would thereby be sending him to heaven and thus doing Claudius a favour. Hamlet proves that he is sane by having the ability to think logically and therefore in comparison to Ophelia he is far from madness. The question of Hamlet’s sanity is one that has been questioned since the moment Hamlet was first performed. Madness is one of the main elements driving the plot and as the play progresses, Hamlet’s depiction of a madman becomes increasingly believable. His feigned madness is a mere ploy for vengeance on Claudius and should not be mistaken for true insanity. Hamlet himself states that he is not mad and will put on an â€Å"antic disposition† and in comparison to Ophelia, Hamlet is the picture of sanity. In William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet, Young Hamlet feigns madness in attempts to avenge the death of his father and although he shows signs of depression he should not be believed to be a madman.

Mandatory Organ Donation - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 2 Words: 677 Downloads: 6 Date added: 2019/08/12 Category Medicine Essay Level High school Tags: Organ Donation Essay Did you like this example? Mandatory Organ Donation sounds wrong doesnt it? Nearly 115,000 people die every year waiting for an organ transplant. That amount of death could be resolved by making donation mandatory. According to the American Transplant Foundation a new name is added to the Transplant waiting list every ten minutes. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Mandatory Organ Donation" essay for you Create order Meaning 240 people will be added to the transplant list every single day. 87,600 people a year will need an organ transplant. The statistics are proof of just how much we need this. Religion is one of the main factors that people can not be a donor or even receive a transplant.The Percentage of other healthy and capable Americans that have no reason they cant donate,other than the fact that they dont want to because they find it crude or they just simply arent educated about it. 20 people die everyday from a lack of available organs, and from just one deceased donor eight lives can be saved. UNOS.org says that there are 114,621 people on the waiting list. There are only 13,041 donors, Meaning only 64,835 people will get the life saving transplant that they need. 4 out of 5 donations come from the deceased, 1 out of 5 comes from the living. 95% of Americans support Organ donation and only 1. The information should be made easier to get as far as handing out brochures on how and what donors do. They can not take your skin, eyes, bones, or tissue while you are living. However they can take a kidney, and pieces of other organs to grow in the recipients body according to Organdonor.org. Religion is one of the leading factors people can not seem to be able to donate or receive however, Jehovahs Witnesses are often assumed to be opposed to donation because of their belief against blood transfusion. However, this merely means that all blood must be removed from the organs and tissues before being transplanted. as www.donorrecovery.org says. The Amish can even receive even against the popular opinion that they can not. The Amish consent to donation if they know it is for the health and welfare of the transplant recipient. www.donorrecovery.org says. As long as this is being done for the right reasons no one is going to completely refuse. This is Life or Death after all. With knowing that the reasons not to be a donor are crumbling. There are many myths about organ donation but the few educated people know how to disprove them. Many people believe that there is an extra cost among the funeral for organ donation, but UNOS.org says There is no cost to the donors family or estate for organ and tissue donation. Meaning the recipient gets the cost for the organ and the surgery. A national computer system and strict standards are in place to ensure ethical and fair distribution of organs. Organs are matched by blood and tissue typing, organ size, medical urgency, waiting time and geographic location.UNOS.org. So the scenes in Greys Anatomy where they are stealing and thinking of ways to steal organs does not happen in real life. Education about organ donation is one of the smartest things to do before you write it off completely. When you die and you go in for an autopsy they are going to take out, weigh, and throw your organs in a bag to rot within you. So as far as the crude nature of the process and the people thinking they are being harvested does not happen. So which way is more crude? Would it not be better if you knew that you were saving up to as many as eight peoples lives? Organ donation is a second chance for someone, But yet only 54% of Americans sign up to be a donor. So in conclusion I agree that organ donation should be mandatory, for the benefit of the people that really need it. Organ donation isnt something that will ever run out, not enough people know about it. Lets not let our future diminish because we dont take the time to be educated about donation.