Encountering God And Excuses Excuses Religion Essay

Encountering God And Excuses Excuses Religion Essay Theres a story of a Scottish discus thrower from the nineteenth century. In the days before personal trainers, he developed his skills by himself in the Scottish highlands near his village. He made his own iron discus from a description he read in a book. What he did not know was that the discus used in competition was made of wood with an outer rim of iron. The discus he made was solid metal and weighed three or four times as much as the ones used by his would-be competitors. This committed Scotsman marked out in his field the distance of the current record throw for all of Britain and trained day and night to be able to match it. For nearly a year, he labored under the self imposed burden of the extra weight. He became very, very good. He reached the point where he could throw his iron discus the record distance, maybe farther. He was ready. He traveled south to England for his first competition. When he arrived at the games, they handed him the regulation wooden discus, which he p romptly threw like a tea saucer, like wed throw a Frisbee. He set a new record, a distance so far beyond those of his challengers that no one could touch him. He thus remained the uncontested champion for year after year after year. From that moment on his life had a defining image: Train under a great burden and you will be so far beyond the rest of the world you will be untouchable. Each one of us has a story that tells us who we are. Every life is defined by a narrative. There was a time when our culture had such a defining story. The hours of the day were marked by the ringing of church bells. We lived Anno Domini in the year of our Lord. Our role models were the lives of the saints. When we left we said, God be with you, which we have today compressed into our word, Goodbye. But todays role models are movie stars and sports celebrities. Our greeting is Have a nice day. Oh, once in a while a story will come along, like the terrible tragedy or a terrorist threat, and pull us all together for a moment or two. Or we find a kind of togetherness in cheering for a sports team. I dont know about you, but I yearn to hitch my itty bitty life to some grand story that makes every moment throb with meaning and purpose and excitement and adventure. Ive found that story for me in the pages of this book the Bible. This book tells me the hunger in my heart corresponds with the reality of the universe. Thats why I like the name of our radio programme Word Alive. Theres a God who wants to enlist you and me to join him in loving, redeeming, and restoring the world. And this God comes to you the same way he came to an aimless wanderer named Moses centuries ago. To meet this God is to discover why youre alive and on this planet. So how big an adventure are you up for today? Are you ready to stop watching other peoples reality shows and star in one of your own as one of Gods everyday heroes? Lets step into Gods story today as we continue a series of messages on the foundational event of the Bible, God leading the children of Israel out of Egypt. Jane Thank you for joining us for todays Word Alive with Dr. Derek Stringer and Im Jane Moxon Ill be commenting from time to time. Derek has been teaching from the life of Moses and explaining how we can encounter God today and get His direction for our lives making it significant and of value. Heres Derek Derek And thanks for your help Jane. Have you ever been reluctant to take a call? I think weve all have been there, especially now that many of us have caller ID on our phones. Have you ever gotten a call, looked at the ID and then were reluctant to take the call? I am so thankful for the ex-directory in England because I think every salesman in the country knew when I sat down for a meal. They would decide thats the time were going to call Derek Stringer. Incidentally, someone has come up with a list of twenty responses to use with these telemarketers. I like several of them, but one is my absolute favourite and one of these days Im going to get up the courage to do it. It suggests: Tell the telemarketer you are busy at the moment and ask him if he will give you his home phone number so you can call him back. When the telemarketer explains that they cannot give out their home number, say, I guess you dont want anyone bothering you at home, right? When he says, Yes, then you say, Me neither! Lets face it weve all had calls at times that we just didnt want to take, and we were reluctant to answer. I want us to consider the fact that sometimes were reluctant to answer the call even when we know that its God whos doing the calling. I want to talk a little bit about what it means to be called by God. Jane As we study Gods call of Moses at the burning bush, we understand that God doesnt call us the same way that he called Moses, but he does call us. Derek In fact, you may recall that the Greek word for church is ekklesia. It literally means, the called out. We are the called out people of God. Peter said, You areà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.his own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his marvellous light. I know that this broadcast will reach people who make no claim to be Christians. And I want you to understand that God is calling you this very day, calling you to make the decision to become a child of God. Many who listen to this broadcast are Christians whom God is calling to greater heights of service. There are things that God wants you to do for him. There are people that God wants you to talk to. God is calling you to proclaim the praises of Him who brought you out of darkness and into the marvellous light. As we look at the call of Moses, I want you to consider how God is calling you. Jane Were going to look at the first part of Exodus 4. Derek When I say Moses, what comes to mind? The old Hollywood Movie with the piercing blue of eyes of Moses Charlton Heston standing before the throne of Pharaoh Yul Brenner? When we glamorize Moses we create distance between ourselves and him. The more distance you put between yourself and any Bible character, the less help the character provides us in our life before God. The real Moses? He was probably a lot more like Charlie Brown. In one of my favourite Peanuts cartoons Lucy says, Life, Charlie Brown, is like a deck chair. Like a what? he says. Havent you ever been on a cruise ship, Charlie Brown? Passengers open up these canvas deck chairs so they can sit in the sun. Some people place their chairs facing the rear of the ship so they can see where theyve been. Other people face their chairs forward. They want to see where theyre going. On the cruise ship of life, Charlie Brown, which way is your deck chair facing? Charlie thinks a minute and says: Gee, Ive never been able to get one unfolded. Ever feel like that? Like people all around you are going somewhere in life and you cant even unfold the deck chair? Yet as the curtain rises on the man who will become the most important person in the Bible, second only to Jesus, Moses is a foot-dragging loser. Moses had it made in Egypt, then killed a man and fled for his life. Ever since, hed been going nowhere. What do you say to someone 80 years old who doesnt know what he wants to be when he grows up? (Someone has said the reason adults are always asking children what are you going to be when you grow up? is because we dont know ourselves and were looking for suggestions.) Moses was tending his father-in-laws sheep not even his own in the desert of Midian. He squinted out across the parched landscape in search of shrubs for the hungry animals and noticed a bush on fire that did not burn up. As he came closer to investigate, suddenly a voice spoke to Moses out of the fire. Moses mouth fell open at a bush ablaze with God: I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt. I have heard them crying out because of their slave drivers, and I am concerned about their suffering. So I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians. Jane Youll recall from our past couple of lessons that Moses is at the burning bush. Derek God has revealed to Moses his sacred name I AM, Yahweh and God has announced that he has chosen Moses to go to tell Pharaoh to let His people, the Hebrews, go. Jane Then Moses answered and said, But suppose they will not believe me or listen to my voice; suppose they say, The LORD has not appeared to you.' So the LORD said to him, What is that in your hand? And he said, A rod. And He said, Cast it on the ground. So he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from it. Then the LORD said to Moses, Reach out your hand and take it by the tail (and he reached out his hand and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand), that they may believe that the LORD God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has appeared to you. Derek Furthermore the LORD said to him, Now put your hand in your bosom. And he put his hand in his bosom, and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous, like snow. And He said, Put your hand in your bosom again. So he put his hand in his bosom again, and drew it out of his bosom, and behold, it was restored like his other flesh. Jane Then it will be, if they do not believe you, nor heed the message of the first sign, that they may believe the message of the latter sign. And it shall be, if they do not believe even these two signs, or listen to your voice, that you shall take water from the river and pour it on the dry land. And the water which you take from the river will become blood on the dry land. Derek Then Moses said to the LORD, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither before nor since You have spoken to Your servant; but I am slow of speech and slow of tongue. So the LORD said to him, Who has made mans mouth? Or who makes the mute, the deaf, the seeing, or the blind? Have not I, the LORD? Now therefore, go, and I will be with your mouth and teach you what you shall say. Jane But he said, O my Lord, please send by the hand of whomever else You may send. So the anger of the LORD was kindled against Moses, and He said: Is not Aaron the Levite your brother? I know that he can speak well. And look, he is also coming out to meet you. When he sees you, he will be glad in his heart. Now you shall speak to him and put the words in his mouth. And I will be with your mouth and with his mouth, and I will teach you what you shall do. So he shall be your spokesman to the people. And he himself shall be as a mouth for you, and you shall be to him as God. And you shall take this rod in your hand, with which you shall do the signs. Derek God comes to Moses with a job to do. I want you to understand that when God has a job he wants you to do, he doesnt ask you; he tells you. He doesnt extend an invitation; he gives a commission. God said to Abraham, You go to this place I will show you. He said to Elijah, Go, present yourself to Ahab. Jesus said to his disciples, Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. But now the call of God comes to Moses and Moses doesnt want to answer the phone. And I can understand a little bit of what Moses is thinking. Have you ever been asked to go back to the place of your absolute greatest failure? I would imagine that everybody can think of a place or think of a person that frankly you wouldnt mind if you never saw that place or that person again. Because it brings back a memory of a time when you blew it on a scale you dont even like to think about. And when we dont want to do something, we tend to make excuses, and thats exactly what Moses does here. Lets look at some of his excuses and as we do so, were going to notice that were still making the same excuses today. The first excuse Moses made was, I dont have any credibility. Jane He said in verse one, What if they dont believe me and they say, The Lord did not appear to you? DS Now Moses question may seem to be valid, but its actually a denial of Gods clear promise because if you look back in chapter 3, verse 18, God said, The elders of Israel will listen to you and Moses says, in essence, Yes, but what if they dont? Now that shows you what failure can do to a mans thinking. If we have tried and we have failed, it has a way of inhibiting us, it has a way of paralyzing us for years to come. In Moses mind, he was certain that he was damaged goods. There was no way that he could ever go back to the Hebrews and effectively exercise any authority in their eyes. He says, Lord, youve got the wrong guy. Ive got no credibility with those people. Now God graciously recognizes what Moses is worried about and the difficulty hes facing. So what God says is, All right, Moses, heres what were going to do. Im going to give you some authenticating miracles so that you can be convinced that you do have my credibility and you can be a man they can listen to. The first thing God says is, Take that staff and throw it down. So he did. It became a snake and the Bible says that Moses ran away from it. Now theres finally one thing that Moses and I have in common. If we see snakes, we both run away from them. I do not understand people who want snakes for pets. Snake experts will tell you that most snakes are not poisonous, and you can tell the pit vipers theyre the poisonous ones they have these little pits behind their snouts. I remember hearing that for the first time and thinking, You idiot! I dont ever intend to be close enough to the face of a snake to see if hes got pits! You dont take any chances. You see a snake, you run. Now God knows exactly what hes doing with Moses. Hes got to deal with Moses fear. So that thing becomes a snake. And then what did he say next? Pick it up by the tail. You dont do that to snakes! But God said, Pick it up by the tail. And Moses obeyed. And it turned into a staff. Jane Then God said, Put your hand in your cloak. Derek And Moses did, and when it came out it was covered with leprosy. You need to remember you couldnt cure leprosy in those days. Leprosy was fatal. You dont think Moses was afraid? Whats God doing? Hes teaching Moses, Listen, the things that you think are deadly are nothing in my hands. Like Pharaoh. The things that frighten you dont need to frighten you. You dont need to be afraid. And God says, Moses, you dont need to promote your authority. You just need to report and represent my authority. God has all the credibility he needs to deliver people from their bondage. You and I dont need to worry about credibility. Sometimes I make the mistake of thinking, Theres nothing I can say that will change this persons life. Who am I that he should listen to me? Folks, the authoritys not ours. Its Gods. Were just his ambassadors. We need to go and tell people what God said they need to hear, and Gods got enough credibility to take care of both of us. Jane Paul said to the Thessalonians, For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God. Derek And so, the second excuse. He said to God, I dont have the ability. Jane Verse 10, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither before nor since You have spoken to Your servant; but I am slow of speech and slow of tongue. Derek Its strange that Moses should say that, because Stephen said in his sermon in Acts 7 that Moses was powerful in speech. So either Moses didnt want to admit his ability, or Moses had forgotten about his ability, or maybe after 40 years in the desert, he felt like he lost that ability. But at any rate, Moses is absolutely persuaded, God, youve got the wrong man. I dont have the gifts. I dont have the ability. And it sounds as if Moses is being very humble. Lord, Im just not good enough. Jane He said the same thing back in chapter 3 when God said to Moses, Im going to send you to Pharaoh, and Moses responded in verse 11, Who am I, that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the Israelites out of Egypt? Derek Now that sounds very humble, doesnt it? I hear Christians say the same thing all the time, Id love to teach a church class, but Im just dont have the ability. Id love to do this or do that, but I just dont feel qualified. And that sounds so very humble. After all, doesnt the Bible say we shouldnt think of ourselves more highly than we ought to think? I want you to learn something. Be careful not to confuse the virtue of humility with a spirit of inadequacy that causes us not to do Gods will. Now were supposed to deny self. So if youre talking about a humility that denies self, thats good. But if youre talking about a humility that denies Gods ability to use you, thats not real humility. But thats what we often do. We often refuse the call of God under the guise of humility, when thats not what it is at all. When Moses says, I dont have the ability, this is not Moses being humble. This is Moses displaying a lack of faith. And again, Gods patience with his servant is amazing to me. Jane So God says to Moses in verse 12, You go, and I will help you speak and Ill teach you what to say. Derek Well I want to make three quick points here about our feelings of inadequacy. First of all, God is aware of our weaknesses when he calls us. When Moses said to God, Im not eloquent, Im not a very gifted speaker, do you think God went, Oh, I forgot. Somebody pull up the file on Moses. If you say, God, you shouldnt choose me because Ive got a lot of weaknesses, well then who in the world is he going to choose? Who doesnt? Jane Paul wrote, We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellence of the power may be of God and not of us. Derek Lets admit it, were all clay pots. Lets just admit our inability, dont hide it, but lets not be paralyzed by it. God knows our weakness when he calls us. Second point God never abandons us after he commissions us. You can search the scriptures all you want, but youre not going to find one time in the Bible where God gives a call and then he says, Now youre on your own. When he said to Abraham, Go to the land he said what? He said, that I will show you. Jane When Jesus said, Go into all the world he said what? He said, I will be with you always. Derek This whole matter of saving the Israelites doesnt depend on Moses eloquence or his lack of it. It depends on the presence and the power of God. God says, Moses, you may not have all the answers, but youve got me, and thats all you need. Third thing If God commands you to do something, if God calls you to do something, he will empower you to do it. God does not ask the impossible, it just seems that way if you try to do it without God. But and this is very important God usually chooses to supply the ability only after youve stepped out on faith to answer the call. You say, God, I cant do that because I dont have the ability. God says, Well, Ill give you the ability. And we want to say, God, you give me the ability, and then Ill go do it. God says, No, thats not how it works. You go do it, and Ill give you the ability. Let me give you an example of what I mean by that. I wonder how many times Ive stood outside a hospital room knowing that someone inside was suffering, needing a word of comfort. And if I waited outside that room until I felt adequate, I would never go in. But I pray, God help me to say what needs to be said and you step in by faith and you find that when you act by faith, God will not let you down. But if you wait outside the door and say, Im not going in until I have something profound to say youll never go in. And so, what God often does is to say, I know you dont have the ability, I know youre just a clay pot, but if youll obey me, if youll step out in faith, then I will not let you down. I believe the key to self-confidence is to have the right view of God-confidence. Paul said, I can do all things. now thats self-confidence. But thats not what he said. He said, I can do all things through him who strengthens me. Its not humility to deny that God can use you. Rather, its a blatant insult to his grace. Now Gods been patient with Moses. Moses has had some legitimate concerns. Lord, I dont think I have any credibility. God says, Ill deal with that. But Lord, I dont think I have the ability. God says, Ill deal with that, too. Then look at what Moses said next: Lord, please send someone else to do it. After all the legitimate concerns are met, Moses finally just blurts out the truth. What he said was, I dont want the responsibility. Its a good plan, Lord. The Hebrews need to be delivered. Pharaoh needs to be confronted. Its a great plan, but find somebody else to do it. By the way, have you ever noticed that all of us want to serve God, but most of us want to do it in an advisory capacity? Were quite willing to sit back and tell God how it ought to be done. Now God has been willing to work through all the specific objections that Moses has had, God has been patient, but the Bible says that finally the Lords anger burned against Moses. And I think the reason that God was angry is because basically Moses was saying, God, you told me youre going to be there for me, you told me youre going to give me the authority I need, you told me youre going to be speaking through me, but I just dont think thats going to be enough. But even in his anger, God was gracious to Moses and gave him Aaron. Jane Let me ask a question why do you think God was so patient with Moses, and why is God so patient with us when we act the same way? Derek Now one answer is obviously because he loves us. But I think theres another answer. I think its also because he loves the people whose prayers hes calling on you and me to answer. Have you ever thought about that? Have you ever thought about the fact that the reason that God is calling you is because somebody else has been calling God? Back in Exodus chapter 2, the Hebrews were calling out to God, and God was concerned and he heard their prayers, so God turned to Moses and said, Ive a job for you to do. And I wonder how many times God has called you and said, OK, Ive got a lot of people praying for someone to help them, someone to teach them, and so Im calling on you to do something about it. Ill give you the ability. I just want you to go be my messenger. And you were reluctant to answer the phone. You had all sorts of excuses ready as to why you couldnt do it. Be assured that God is patient, but dont take his patience as an inability to see through our flimsy excuses. Moses said, Oh, come on now, be sensible, not me, Im a terrible speaker. Theyd never listen to me. And God said, Oh, for crying out loud, OK, Ill use your brother to help with the speaking. And Moses led Gods people out of disintegration. And Jonah said, Oh, come on now, be sensible, not me. Im not the type. And after a rather unexpected vacation in the fish just thinking things over, he talked to Gods people and led them Gods way. And Zechariah said, Oh come on now, be sensible, not me. My wife and I are too old to have any kids. And God said, Oh shut up. And he did shut up. For nine months. And John was born, and the way for the Christ was opened up. And I heard a child say, I cant serve God. Im too young. And I heard a boy say, I cant serve God, Im not good enough. And I heard a woman say, I cant serve God, Im not skilled enough. I wonder if God ever gets any new problems? What is it that Gods calling you to do? I heard once about a fellow that was going to preacher training school. They were sending them out on weekends to preach in different churches. He was asked to preach at this one country church with just a few old people but he felt it was beneath his considerable skills. He made the mistake of actually making that comment out loud. It seems there was a young lady who overheard him and she said, You know, the worlds a better place because Michelangelo never said, I dont do ceilings. Think about it. This worlds a better place because Noah never said, I dont do animals. Because Abraham never said, I dont do travelling. Because Ruth never said, I dont do mothers-in-law. Because David never said, I dont do giants. Im glad Paul didnt say, I dont do correspondence. Im glad Jesus never said, I dont do crosses. And I think the world would be a better place if God didnt hear, I dont doà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ quite as much. Jane Paul wrote, We have such trust through Christ toward God. Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God. Derek Gods only option is to use clay vessels. Thats all hes got. And thinking about the audience for Word Alive, Id say theres nothing but clay vessels that listen. Its simply a matter of whether or not were willing to allow God to work through us. I love the story that is told of the famous Polish pianist, Padarewski, who went on to become prime minister of Poland. He was touring the United States, and was going to give a concert one night. There was a mother who was trying to get her little boy interested in the piano, so she bought tickets to hear this master pianist. The show was supposed to start at 8:00 and prior to that people were standing around and visiting. This mother didnt realize that her son had slipped away. Imagine her shock when she heard and saw her son at the piano playing Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star. As the story is told, Padarewski walked out in his tux, sat down beside the boy and whispered, Dont stop playing. He put his left hand out and played some bass notes, put his right hand out and started playing, and he made this beautiful sound out of Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star. I want you to see that this describes so well what God does with you and me. God says, What do you have in your hand? A staff? Give it to me. And when God calls, you just give him whatever youve got in your hand. And once you allow God to use your life, he does things with it you would never dream possible. Maybe you need to respond to God and say, OK, here I am. I want to follow you. I want to serve you. I want to dedicate my life to you. No more excuses, no more delays. Just what do you want me to do? Jane Dr. Derek Stringer is our Bible Teacher here on Word Alive and this is a Good News Broadcasting Association production. Derek My thanks to Jane Moxon and my thanks to you for being with us today. Please join us again next time as we continue to explore the life of Moses and how we can encounter God today. Jane Thats Derek Stringer and Phil Critchley has been our Producer. From all here at Good News Broadcasting Association we send you our greetings. Good-bye and God bless.

Essay --

Cancer can develop anywhere in the body. Cells grow abnormally and become cancerous because of environmental factors, such as smoking cigarettes and exposure to radiation; genetics, poor diet, lack of physical activity, and even just luck (Stern et al., 2004). Even though genetics play the primary role in the development of cancer, the environment in which one lives also contributes to the chances of getting cancer. Some of the environmental factors that influence the development of cancer include alcohol use, obesity, asbestos, HIV, and Down’s syndrome. Cancer affects people of all ages. In infants and children, genetic abnormalities are generally the primary cause of cancer. Individuals over the age of 55 years old make up more than 80% of all cancers (Stern et al., 2004). 2.3 MYTHS ABOUT CANCER According to Aronson (2010), cancer is a humiliating and punishing disease as its treatments often deny people of the organs that give them their gender-identity, their sense of wholeness, and beauty. After treatment, patients also often feel less than whole. For them, cancer is not just a physical disease but rather a state of mind and a reason for societal quarantine and judgment. It is not discussed freely or accepted objectively. Cancer is seen as a "taint" upon the family, just as HIV is viewed as a disease that needs to be hidden away. There are many misconceptions across all ethnic and racial groups regarding cancer. Many believe that since no one in their family previously had cancer, then they would not get cancer. People also have a false impression that if they are healthy then they would not develop cancer (McGarvey & Brenin, 2005). According to Frymark, there are three chief myths about cancer: 1. Although chemothera... ...e. Among the members of the Solanaceae family, Solanumaculeastrumwas the most common plant used for the treatment of cancer (Koduru, Grierson & Afolayan, 2007). Scientists these days are also investigating traditional medicine for anti-cancerous effects. A popular ayurvedic herb Ashwagandha, frequently known as â€Å"Indian Winter cherry† or â€Å"Indian Ginseng† is used in ayurvedic medicine in a way similar to that Panax ginseng used in traditional Chinese medicine. This herb is normally used for its wide range of health advantages. Withaferin A, which derived from this medicinal plant, it often used for its anti-tumorigenic activity against various cancer cells. Withaniasomnifera flowers are small and green and the roots are mostly used for medicinal purposes. It is cultivated in the drier regions of India such as Punjab and Rajasthan (Singh, Verma, Pandey & Gilca, 2011).

The Development of Attachment Essays -- attachment theory, John Bowlby

One of the most important factors that affect child development is the relationship of the child with their primary caregiver. This is a tenet of developmental psychology known as attachment theory. John Bowlby, the creator of this theory, wanted to examine how early childhood experiences influence personality development. Attachment theory specifically examines infant’s reactions to being separated from their primary caregiver. Bowlby hypothesized that the differences in how children react to these situations demonstrates basic behavioral differences in infancy that will have consequences for later social and emotional development. To study attachment theory, Mary Ainsworth developed the Strange Situation Paradigm. This procedure examines the reaction of the infant when their primary caregiver leaves them for up to three minutes. The emotional response of the child to being left alone and the behavior of the child when the caregiver reappears are coded on a seven point rating scale. Based on these scores children are divided into three categories which illustrate the quality of the attachment. Securely attached children are confident in their relationship with their primary caregiver, and are not afraid to explore new things. In the Strange Situation, these infants are less distressed during separation and happy to see their caregiver during the reunion and will often make contact with them. Infants with an insecure-avoidant attachment are characterized by a lack of positive affect toward their primary caregiver. They are less distressed during the separation than most infants, and reserve their emotiona l response not for their caregiver but for toys or the experimenter. Infants with insecure-ambivalent or resistan... ...t. Child Development, 62, 906-917. Joseph, R. (1999). Environmental Influences on Neural Plasticity, the Limbic System, Emotional Development and Attachment: A Review. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 29. Koran-Karie, N., Oppenheim, D., Dolev, S., Sher, E., & Etzion-Carasso, A. (2002). Mothers’ Insightfulness Regarding Their Infants’ Internal Experience: Relations With Maternal Sensitivity and Infant Attachment. Developmental Psychology, 38, 534-542. Meins, E., Fernyhough, C., Wainwright, R., Gupta, M. D., Fradley, E., & Tuckey, M. (2002, November/December). Maternal mind-mindedness and attachment security as predictors of theory of mind understanding. Child Development, 73, 1715-1726. Sonkin, D. J. (2005, January/February). Attachment Theory and Psychotherapy. The Therapist. Retrieved from http://www.danielsonkin.com/attachment_psychotherapy.htm

Social Criticism in the Hollywood Melodramas of the Fifties Essay

Social Criticism in the Hollywood Melodramas of the Fifties In the early 1950s the films of Douglas Sirk led the way in defining the emerging genre of the Hollywood melodrama. "Melodrama" strictly means the combination of music (melos) and drama, but the term is used to refer to the "popular romances that depicted a virtuous individual (usually a woman) or couple (usually lovers) victimized by repressive and inequitable social circumstances" (Schatz 222). Sirk's films were commercially successful and boosted the careers of stars like Lauren Bacall, Jane Wyman, and Rock Hudson, who was in seven of Sirk's thirteen American films (Halliday 162-171). Although critics in the fifties called the films "trivial" and "campy" and dismissed them as "tearjerkers" or "female weepies" (Schatz 224), critics in the seventies re-examined Sirk's work and developed an "academic respect for the genre" and declared that the films actually had "subversive relationship to the dominant ideology" (Klinger xii). Douglas Sirk's Magnificent Obsession (1954) and Imitatio n of Life (1959) are representative of the techniques melodramas used to address relevant fifties issues like class, gender, and race. One characteristic of melodrama is the "lavishly artificial and visually stylized scenery (Schatz 234) which is exploited in Magnificent Obsession. Numerous scenes take place in moving convertibles, where the motion of the car is out of synch with the motion of the scenery. Whenever possible, rooms have large picture windows showing magnificent, but obviously fake outdoor landscapes. At one point a scene on the lakeshore cuts directly from a shot of Helen (Jane Wyman) sitting in front of a real horizon to a close-up of her sitting in front of a brightly c... ...ltural form" (Klinger xii). Works cited Aull, Felice. "Magnificent Obsession". http://mchipO0.med.nyu.edu/lit-med/lit-me...cs/webfilms.magnificent.obses3-film-.html Ellison, Ralph. Shadow and Act. Vintage International: New York, 1953. FilmFrog Archives: Lecture given at Sonoma State University (1995), Imitation of Life (1959). http://yorty.sonoma.edu:80/filmfrog/archive/Imitation_of_Life.html Halliday, Jon. Sirk on Sirk: Interviews With Jon Halliday. New York: Viking, 1972. Imitation of Life. Dir. Douglas Sirk. Universal, 1959. Klinger, Barbara. Melodrama and Meaning: History, Culture, and the Films of Douglas Sirk. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1994. Magnificent Obsession. Dir. Douglas Sirk. Universal, 1954. Schatz, Thomas. Hollywood Genres: Formulas, Filmmaking, and the Studio System. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1981.

Dance Philosophy Essay

Dance is the reason I exist and as cheesy as it sounds its true. In 1982 my father met my mother at a dance club. He said after watching her dancing with her friends he had to talk to her. Dance has the power to cross boundaries and touch one’s soul. As a form dance can be anything. Rain falling into a pound, an individual tying their shoe, a swan boureeing across a stage or man rolling across a stage can all be dance. Dance is a series of movements stitched together with an intent and frame. Weather the intent is to express emotion, showcase technique, or make a statement it is all dance. I started dancing in high school after a teacher of mine recommended I take a class. My first real dance class was ballet. It was a foreign language to me. At first it was a string of movements empty in meaning and emotion. I just danced through the motions until one day my teacher told us that we needed to bring the movement to life. I did not understand this concept at first, how could movement come to life? It wasn’t until I began taking a modern class that I understood this concept. I could use movement to express my own thoughts, fears, joys, and questions. When I try and analyze what dances means to me, ultimately, I see it as a multifaceted entity. Dance is part of my identity and without it I believe I would struggle with understanding who I am. First and foremost dance for me has always been a form of therapy. Growing up I hated conflict and as a result internalized my issues. Through dance I was able to find a reliable outlet to release my frustrations, fears, and inhibitions, which allowed me to explore my personal struggles through movement. Secondly I believe that movement has the power to transcend boundaries and make statements that are often hard to say. Movement is an outlet to foster awareness, dialogue, change and growth while bridging the gap between artistic expression and community dialogue.

Some Interpretations Have Portrayed Tragic Heroines

Some Interpretations Have Portrayed Tragic Heroines as Manipulative Plotters Driven by Passionate Desires. Others Have Seen the Tragic Women as Victims of Powerful Individuals or Society as a Whole. Bearing in Mind By Troubleshoots Gertrude is a very minute character in Hamlet, yet the same cannot be said about her impact on the action of the play. Certain audiences view Gertrude in different ways, some sympathies with her as a character, and see her actions as empowering towards women as a whole, letting loose of the social conventions of the Shakespearian era, in addition to being a caring mother.However, I feel there are two options that can be seen here concerning Gertrude as a person, and neither of them are positive, as the only two plausible ways in which her character can be based on is a manipulative plotter, or one who is simply invested in her own ignorance. Considering her lack of concern for the social conventions of the time, alongside poor ways of dealing with an unsta ble son, it is my personal opinion that Shakespeare intended Gertrude to be seen as a manipulative plotter, rather than a woman who epitomized a tragic heroine.To begin assessing how much of a tragic heroine Gertrude really was, it is imperative o assess the tragic conventions of the time. ‘A hero must fall from fortune and power, with a tragic flaw allowing the reader to empathic with the character' (Aristotle 335 BCC) In addition to this, Shakespearean tragic conventions also suggest that a tragic heroine must show promise of further greatness and possess a character trait that would normally be a virtue, but under the circumstances of the play become a flaw.On the surface my repudiation of Gertrude as anything other than a manipulative plotter may seem a brash claim; at least it does until we are met with the way she infernos Claudia in Act 2 Scene 2. Her line thanks Guilelessness, and gentle Restaurants' (2:2:34) is used either to correct what Claudia said Just before her, or is simply her mistaking between Restaurants and Guilelessness.I think it is obvious that it is merely Gertrude correcting Claudia, as if the line were meant to be said with indecision, Shakespeare would have most likely used a question mark in the speech in order to highlight that Gertrude was meant to say the line with a certain amount of uncertainty. This shows that whilst the nature of the line may have been unsorted as one that was merely of her own confusion, I maintain the claim that it is far more likely that Shakespeare intended for this to be an indication of Gertrude out for – one who is devious, scheming and willing to plot.Considering that the social conventions of the time dictated that women were to be inferior to men, the idea of correcting a man without even a hint of uncertainty portrays to a Shakespearian audience an ignorance of social values; in my opinion this is used as a subtle hint early on to make the audience know that this is a character to watc h out for, as her expedient nature percolates and promulgates itself to the audience throughout the rest of the play.Whilst it may be conceded that a modern audience would see Gertrude in a less damning way, we cannot ignore the fact that this wildly contradicts the idea of a tragic heroine being one that the audience can empathic with, nor does it show any evidence of her having a virtue which would turn out to be a flaw.Gertrude moral turpitude is pumped at relentlessly throughout the play, and is shown further in Act 2 Scene 2, where Gertrude is shown without ambiguity or doubt hat she is aware of Hamlet's grief ‘l doubt [Hamlet's upset] is no other but the main: His father's death and our detracts marriage' (2:2:56), dispelling any possible nature that Gertrude does not know what is wrong with Hamlet.Despite this, she makes no effort to console Hamlet, and merely accepts the very brief Well, we shall sift him' reply that is given by Claudia. This meaner one of two things: that she is unable to think or speak for herself, or able to speak up but unwilling. Considering that she had already corrected Claudia earlier in the play, it thus follows that this line was not en that showed her as a victim of powerful individuals as she has already proven earlier that she is not a mindless sycophant.When we are to consider that her son has been horrifically upset to the point where he is bordering on insanity, and the reason for this is because of Gertrude marriage to his brother only two weeks after the death of his father (for whom he had the greatest admiration) yet still felt no need to console him, I would argue that by her inaction what she did was indicative of a manipulative plotter.Not only this, but her status as a tragic heroine is dispelled, s simply allowing one's own flesh and blood to suffer is the direct antithesis of what it meaner to be a tragic heroine: ‘a character which allows the audience to empathic with them'. I feel that this is st rong evidence for her status as a manipulative plotter. It is not only in Gertrude treatment of Hamlet that her manipulation is evident, but in her behavior towards other characters. The Queen's hostility towards Aphelia initially appears through sophisticated strategies of aggression, but the increasing dangers force stronger defenses. Whether resulting from physical action or ethical taxation, the Queen is culpable in the death of Aphelia† (Lobber, Harmonic 2004) The quote above suggests motives for Gertrude in killing Aphelia, and thus truly securing her status as a manipulative plotter, and one completely incapable of fitting the definition for a tragic heroine.Of course, interpretation of Gertrude is a difficult thing, and a large part of this is due to Shakespeare giving Gertrude very few spoken lines during the play, yet this does seem odd considering that her role is so crucial to Hamlet's suffering. So why does Shakespeare do this? Personally, I feel her infrequent ap pearances, yet essential role are placed within the play in order to create a sense of suspicion about Gertrude, to keep the audience wondering about where Gertrude be said that this quote is not enough to completely condemn Gertrude.However, when all the evidence piles up, Shakespeare creates a special bond between Aphelia and Gertrude, particularly when we look at the following interpretation â€Å"the language of flowers creates a relationship that in effect places them in close proximity' (Radcliff, S – 1998) which again implies that Shakespeare purposely rated closeness between these two in this scene for a purpose, and I feel that in creating this bond Shakespeare was effectively offering Gertrude a chance to be seen as a tragic heroine, yet we know that at the very least she was passive or unable, both of which contradict the supposed nobility of a tragic heroine.That said, I think that the closeness created by Shakespeare was to show that Gertrude actually did have t he chance to save Aphelia, and if he had not used the language of flowers in such a way, it would have shown Gertrude inability rather than her nature as a manipulative plotter.This is supported by the fact that Gertrude ‘kills' Aphelia from the play, and whilst I realize it is completely impossible to prove the speculations about off-stage events, she does in fact ‘kill her' off from the play, as she is the one who reveals her death, making it far too coincidental for it to be unintentional, and in my opinion the most obvious interpretation seems to me that Gertrude is meant to be seen as a manipulative plotter.In conclusion, I do feel that Shakespeare intended Gertrude to be a manipulative plotter, as every possible moment of niceness she portrays within the play, in my pinion can be countered with at least an equally good reason as to why she could have done so in a meticulously fetid way. Even when we consider her name ‘Gertrude', the sounds of the g and the â €˜r' are harsh sounding, and this could well have been done in order to create an immediately disliked and nasty character.Her ignorance is a possible interpretation, but upon further exploration of her lines we have discovered that she is aware of why Hamlet is upset, and yet still chooses to take no act to relieve this. We have seen compelling evidence from other critics to suggest her involvement in Aphelion's death, combined with several remarks that come off as at the very least petty, if not malicious, in addition to the chances she has to make a big difference in the play, yet seems either incompetent or scheming.

Personal price Essay

As you market yourself to employers, the salary you demand is essentially your personal price. Keeping that in mind, what pricing strategy should you follow (penetration, skimming, or competitive)? Why? Issues to consider: a. Who is your target market? My target market is the childcare industry. b. How would you position your price to this market? I would use competitive pricing strategy. I would use competitive pricing strategy. By using this concept does not necessarily mean that the company will pay me what I want but it will put a great deal of thought into the prices of the competitors. In other words, I would take into consideration the prices of my competition and use that to determine what I believe is a fair salary. c. What are the psychological pricing considerations? I would take into consideration my level of experience. Therefore, I would charge a price that may be slightly higher but that would be because I have more experience than others. I don’t want a price that is too low because employers may wonder why so low. They may question my experience or qualifications. d. What are the image considerations? I believe that the company has high standards. I would maintain that I am reliable, responsible, and able to multi-task. I am a professional and have good work ethics. e. What are the promotional considerations? I would provide degrees, and or certificates that indicate my qualifications. I would also provide references and any other documents that show my experience in the field.