Free Essays on Dunnes Flea

The suitor in â€Å"The Flea† argues that his girlfriend should stop being a prude. She worries about and he attempts to convince her that her honor is not at stake. He asks his mistress to notice only â€Å"this flea.† The desperate lover is groping for a symbol of union with his damsel. He explains that the flea has bitten them both. He reasons that since their bloods have mixed inside the flea’s body, they have already be aggregated. In essence, the swelling of the insect with "one blood made of two" is a surrogate pregnancy of their marriage. Therefore, their fornication would not result in a novel loss of innocence or honor. Furthermore, the suitor uses his contrived metaphor of mixed bloods to employ guilt as a tactic for persuasion. He argues that if she would kill the flea, then she would be guilty of three sins. She would commit murder, because it is impossible for him to live on if faced with her sexual reluctance. Secondly, since her own blood is mixed with the flea’s, shedding the flea’s blood would be comparable to suicide. Thirdly, the flea is the institution in which their â€Å"wedding† took place. Therefore, it would be sacrilege to destroy it. However, the yearning lover’s analogy comes to bear contradictory meanings. One idea presented is that their sexual activity is of minute significance. Donne says†Mark but this flea, and mark in this, How little that which though deny’st me is.† He then writes about high crimes and grave sins. At first he is flippant; he belittles the significance of the relations they might have. He claims that if the same effects can be realized within the body of a tiny flea, then the act itself cannot be of tremendous importance. Then, after a theological examination, the shedding of the blood within the flea is compared to multiple murders. If the existence of a mix of their bloods represents an activity of minute significance, its unraveling should not be compared to mu... Free Essays on Dunne's Flea Free Essays on Dunne's Flea The suitor in â€Å"The Flea† argues that his girlfriend should stop being a prude. She worries about and he attempts to convince her that her honor is not at stake. He asks his mistress to notice only â€Å"this flea.† The desperate lover is groping for a symbol of union with his damsel. He explains that the flea has bitten them both. He reasons that since their bloods have mixed inside the flea’s body, they have already be aggregated. In essence, the swelling of the insect with "one blood made of two" is a surrogate pregnancy of their marriage. Therefore, their fornication would not result in a novel loss of innocence or honor. Furthermore, the suitor uses his contrived metaphor of mixed bloods to employ guilt as a tactic for persuasion. He argues that if she would kill the flea, then she would be guilty of three sins. She would commit murder, because it is impossible for him to live on if faced with her sexual reluctance. Secondly, since her own blood is mixed with the flea’s, shedding the flea’s blood would be comparable to suicide. Thirdly, the flea is the institution in which their â€Å"wedding† took place. Therefore, it would be sacrilege to destroy it. However, the yearning lover’s analogy comes to bear contradictory meanings. One idea presented is that their sexual activity is of minute significance. Donne says†Mark but this flea, and mark in this, How little that which though deny’st me is.† He then writes about high crimes and grave sins. At first he is flippant; he belittles the significance of the relations they might have. He claims that if the same effects can be realized within the body of a tiny flea, then the act itself cannot be of tremendous importance. Then, after a theological examination, the shedding of the blood within the flea is compared to multiple murders. If the existence of a mix of their bloods represents an activity of minute significance, its unraveling should not be compared to mu...

The Marshall Plan - Rebuilding Western Europe After WW2

The Marshall Plan - Rebuilding Western Europe After WW2 The Marshall Plan was a massive program of aid from the United States to sixteen western and southern European countries, aimed at helping economic renewal and strengthening democracy after the devastation of World War II. It was started in 1948 and was officially known as the European Recovery Program, or ERP, but is more commonly known as the Marshall Plan, after the man who announced it, US Secretary of State George C. Marshall. The Need for Aid The Second World War severely damaged the economies of Europe, leaving many in a parlous state: cities and factories had been bombed, transport links had been severed and agricultural production disrupted. Populations had been moved or destroyed, and a tremendous amount of capital had been spent on weapons and related products. Its not an exaggeration to say the continent was a wreck. 1946 Britain, a former world power, was close to bankruptcy and had to pull out of international agreements while in France and Italy there was inflation and unrest and the fear of starvation. Communist parties across the continent were benefiting from this economic turmoil, and this raised the chance Stalin could conquer the west through elections and revolutions, instead of having lost the chance when Allied troops pushed the Nazis back east. It looked like the defeat of the Nazis might cause the loss of the European markets for decades. Several ideas to aid the rebuilding of Europe had been proposed, from inflicting harsh reparations on Germany- a plan that had been tried after World War I and which appeared to have failed utterly to bring peace so wasnt used again - to the US giving aid and recreating someone to trade with. The Marshall Plan The US, also terrified that communist groups would gain further power- the Cold War was emerging and Soviet domination of Europe seemed a real danger- and wishing to secure European markets, opted for a program of financial aid. Announced on June 5th, 1947 by George Marshall, the European Recovery Program, ERP, called for a system of aid and loans, at first to all nations affected by the war. However, as plans for the ERP were being formalized,  Russian leader Stalin, afraid of US economic domination, refused the initiative and pressured the nations under his control into refusing aid despite a desperate need. The Plan in Action Once a committee of sixteen countries reported back favorably, the program was signed into US law on April 3, 1948. The Economic Cooperation Administration (ECA) was then created under Paul G. Hoffman, and between then and 1952, over $13 billion worth of aid was given. To assist in coordinating the program, the European nations created the Committee of European Economic Cooperation which helped form a four-year recovery program. The nations receiving were: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, and West Germany. Effects During the years of the plan, receiving nations experienced economic growth of between 15%-25%. Industry was quickly renewed and agricultural production sometimes exceeded pre-war levels. This boom helped push communist groups away from power and created an economic divide between the rich west and poor communist east as clear as the political one. The shortage of foreign currency was also alleviated allowing for more imports. Views of the Plan Winston Churchill described the plan as â€Å"the most unselfish act by any great power in history† and many have been happy to stay with this altruistic impression. However, some commentators have accused the United States of practicing a form of economic imperialism, tying the western nations of Europe to them just as the Soviet Union dominated the east, partly because acceptance into the plan required those nations to be open to US markets, partly because a great deal of the aid was used to purchase imports from the US, and partly because the sale of ‘military’ items to the east was banned. The Plan has also been called an attempt to persuade European nations to act continentally, rather than as a divided group of independent nations, prefiguring the EEC and the European Union. In addition, the success of the plan has been questioned. Some historians and economists attribute great success to it, while others, such as Tyler Cowen, claim the plan had little effec t and it was simply the local restoration of sound economic policy (and an end to vast warfare) which caused the rebound.