Flattery in Pride and Prejudice Essay example -- Pride and Prejudice

Flattery in Pride and Prejudice Since its composition in 1797, Jane Austin's Pride and Prejudice has enjoyed two centuries of literary esteem not because of its witty dialogue or its tantalizing plot, but because of its universal themes that allow modern readers to identify with early Victorian life. Although the novel focuses on the etiquette of courtship, related social rituals are also prevalent throughout the story. William Collins, a rector in Pride and Prejudice, uses excessive flattery to persuade people to look upon him favorably. He even lavishly praises himself to enhance his self-esteem. While the sycophant's peculiar behavior is comical at first glance, its emphasis in the story portends a greater social meaning that is illuminated upon evaluation of his flattery with relevance to the plot. In Pride and Prejudice, Austin suggests through Collins' mannerisms that one flatters others to enlist their future support and one flatters oneself to ensure individual prosperity. Pertaining to others, Austin endows Collins with a motive of personal gain and later removes that objective, establishing a strong correlation between flattery and selfish advantage. As the legal heir to the Bennet family's estate once its patriarch dies, Collins offers unwarranted praise along with his hand in marriage to one of the daughters. Apart from flattering the family to marry one of its girls, his profuse compliments also extend to his wealthy benefactress and also, of course, to himself. However, Collins' compliments toward the family end after he fails to marry on... ...lattery may have academic influence, she allows Collins to smother praise on anything that might prove advantageous to his affluence, from which one may surmise that flattery contributes to personal prosperity in any form. This truth becomes readily apparent upon contrasting Collins' behavior in situations wherein he may or may not have something to gain through flattery. Of course, this mundane reiteration about flattery must be particularly monotonous to a reader who has already demonstrated a profound grasp of literature by deftly maneuvering through and deliberating upon mistakes previous to this point, so it is for that intelligent and sophisticated reader that this paper ends abruptly. Work Cited Austin, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. Norwalk: The Easton Press, 1997.

Hamlet vs Gladiator essay Essay

When watching the movie Gladiator, one might notice how very similar this story is to the Shakespearean play, Hamlet. In Gladiator the main character seeks vengeance for the loss of his son and wife, as does Hamlet for the loss of his father. The vengeance sought out in Gladiator is a result of treachery involving loved ones as is the vengeance sought out in hamlet. Finally, both Hamlet and Gladiator are examples of dramatic tragedy where the main character ends up dying. Along with these similarities there are also many differences. There are the difference in characters, the difference in when these stories take place, and the difference in the endings. By comparing and contrasting a modern tragedy, Gladiator, with an ancient tragedy, Hamlet, it shows why dramatic tragedy has survived throughout the ages. In the beginning of Hamlet King Hamlet’s ghost pays a visit to Prince Hamlet. The ghost tells Hamlet that while â€Å"sleeping in [his] orchard, a serpent stung [him].† He then tells Hamlet â€Å"the serpent that did sting thy father’s life now wears his crown.† Hamlet, who already suspected his father’s death to be murder, is furious upon learning that it was not only murder, it was his father’s uncle that committed the act of treachery. In a rage of fury Hamlet swears to the ghost of his father that he will seek vengeance on Claudius, for his sake and that of his father’s. This is very similar in Gladiator when Commodus kills his father, the Roman Emperor, Marcus Aurelius. Maximus, a Roman General, was very close with Marcus who told Maximus â€Å"he [was] the son [he] should have had†¦Ã¢â‚¬  and wanted Maximus to carry on as Emperor instead of his son Commodus. Maximus seeks vengeance on Commodus not only for murdering Marcus, but also because he murdered Maximum’s wife and eight-year-old son. In both cases Claudius and Commadus wanted to reign, to have power; in both cases they were not meant to have it. Hamlet was the â€Å"heir to the throne,† and Aurelius wanted Maximus to take his place as emperor. Both Claudius and Commadus wanted power so badly, that they killed in order to get what they wanted. ———————————————————————————————– These stories are both similar in treachery because the men that they had trusted and confided in had murdered them. Claudius betrayed his brother by poisoning him then marrying his wife; Commadus betrayed his father by suffocating him after learning Aurelius did not want his only son to rule. Another example of the similarities between these two stories is that Hamlet and Maximus both had to change themselves in order to seek their vengeance. They both went from being looked highly upon in society, to being looked down on. Hamlet fooled people by acting like he was crazy. This way his stepfather could not suspect Hamlet of knowing that he had murdered Hamlet’s father. Following the death of Emperor Marcus Aurelius, Maximus finds himself an enemy of the new Emperor Commadus. He is reduced to the status of a slave and eventually falls into the hands of a gladiator trainer. He then begins to forge a new life for himself as a ruthless killing machine that entertains the fickle crowd, as the behind-the-scenes politics of second century Rome stand to make him a hero of the people. By fighting as a gladiator he seek revenge on the new Emperor of Rome. Hamlet and Maximus want to avenge those who have been killed so badly that they undergo obstacles with courage and their heads high as well as they both risking their lives for what they believe in. Throughout Hamlet, one might also notice they have taken similar ideas from â€Å"Hamlet† and used them to help make their story a (better one). Towards the beginning of the story before Aurelius is killed, Commadus tells the senators that â€Å"they’ll be pouring honey potion in people’s ears†¦Ã¢â‚¬  in order to make the country republic. What is similar is that Claudius poured â€Å"potion† into King Hamlet’s ear, in order to kill him. Another moment in Gladiator that makes you think of Hamlet is towards the end when Commodus tells his nephew, Lucius, about their ancestor Emperor Claudius. He tells Lucius that â€Å"[Claudius] was betrayed! By those closest to him†¦Ã¢â‚¬  This is similar to Hamlet because Gertrude betrays Claudius and Lucilla betrays Commodus. This is ironic because both Claudius and Commodus betrayed loved ones in order to gain power. Along with these similarities there are also many differences. For instance Hamlet was born a prince while Maximus was the general for Aurelius’s army. Also King Hamlet was killed by his brother and Aurelius was killed by his son, and Hamlet’s mother dies in the end while Commadus’ sister survives. The main difference, however, is in the end of these stories. In Hamlet, he never lets on to Claudius that he knows how his father died. Instead he acts as if he is crazy. It is not until a theatrical group re-enacts how King Hamlet was murdered that Claudius realises that Hamlet knows†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. In Gladiator, as soon as Maximus sees Commadus in the Coliseum he tells Commadus that he will kill him for the murders he has committed. In the end Maximus kills Commadus while all of Rome watches this form of â€Å"entertainment† take place. Maximus, badly wounded dies soon after giving the Empire to the senators to become republic. Even though these two stories have their differences, they are both dramatic tragedies. The emotion that a tragic character portrays helps us to relate and become more entranced with the story. Up until the heroes have died they have got to know that person. They have understood the character, their motivations, and reactions. When they die, they have died courageously for what they have believed in. In life we are always looking for an â€Å"idol† hero-worshipping. Our fascination for dramatic tragedy has survived throughout the years because man in his inadequate ways needs to have someone whom they can look up to, so to speak. Lets face it we are often intrigued by human suffering especially if it is for noble causes. People often carry the same beliefs as these leaders, and fully support them. These heroes are the epitome of what we believe in, willing to die for causes. We love to believe that someone is willing to go to that extent for our beliefs. Their deaths often accomplish what could not be done while they were alive. This is illustrated when Maximus says â€Å"what we do in life, echoes in eternity.† The similarities and differences in Hamlet and Gladiator are what help make dramatic tragedies survive through the ages. However, it is not only in movies or plays, it is also in real life. These heroes have died for what they believed in and have made a difference in our lives. It gives us strength to face the world we live in today, and it gives us understanding as to why these leaders are fighting. This is why dramatic tragedies have survived throughout the ages, and this is why they will continue to survive for years to come.

The Untouchables, a true taste of 1920s prohibition America Essays

The Untouchables, a true taste of 1920s prohibition America Essays The Untouchables, a true taste of 1920s prohibition America Paper The Untouchables, a true taste of 1920s prohibition America Paper as gangsters from rival gangs riddled each other with bullets, and deftly defied the law through slightly, less-than-honorable techniques, the 1930s were plagued with corruption on the municipal scale. Many bootleggers secured their business by bribing the authorities, namely federal agents and persons of high political status (Bowen, pg160). Many law enforcement agencies were brought into suspected areas of illegal alcoholic activity to put a stop on these banned doings. Director Brian De Palma portrayed one account of these actions in his 1987 movie, The Untouchables. The film centered on straight-arrowed cop Eliot Nesss obsession to end the infamous Capone crime syndicate in Chicago. Recruiting the help of a group of law enforcement officers who were unable to be bribed, and thus untouchable, Ness finally stopped the gangster boss on the grounds of income tax evasion. But was this movie as historically accurate as one would expect? By examining some of the elements of the movie, the true historical colors of the film might shine through. Through the use of cinematography, setting, as well as knowledge of actual events, the accuracy of this historical movie can fairly be judged. Brian De Palmas use of period specific sets really helps the viewer get the feeling they were there in the 1930s, this is achieved by filming on location and showing the eccentricity of 1920s and 1930s through architecture. One fantastic scene is where there is an overview shot of La Calle Street Canyon in Chicago when Sean Connerys character, Wallace, leads Kevin Costners character, Eliot Ness, to one of Capones booze cellars across the street. The scene displays huge, almost monolithic, buildings and rows of period cars. This was important in setting the stage of the film thus giving the viewer a sense of realism. Another important scene includes the descending of Al Capone and his men in the hotel that he considered being the headquarters of his gangster consortium. Almost everything in the scene has a golden aura to it, sharply contrasting to the prevalent power of Scarface himself. Overall, the amount of money they spent to surround the actors with scenes and memorabilia of the 1930s really paid off and made for a great film visually historic. When you see Capone leave the hotel, its almost like he was an iconic figure, the media gave him the attention as they would a movie star. Children would mimic him in the streets; many other gangsters and outlaws held this iconic status, mass murderers such as Billy the kid would also get similar media attention. Al Capone himself enjoyed a celebrity status in Chicago and was a master at public relations, Capone saw to it that the press was friendly to him and never missed a chance to play up his donations to a charitable group. To the people of Chicago he was a hero who saved them from the oppression of the people for prohibition. Al Capones popularity was incredible; this is because he was providing a banned alcohol for an alcohol hungry people, oblivious to the atrocities being caused by the underground mobs. Normal everyday people were becoming criminals, criminal groups organize around the steady source of income provided by laws against victimless crimes such as consuming alcohol (Thorton, 13). Because alcohol was no longer legally available, there was a sudden increase in crime, the public turned to gangsters to obtain alcohol, as a result the amount of money to be made caused massive rivalry between gangs, the Untouchables gives you great examples of this rivalry, by giving the viewer graphic scenes of gang violence. The profit motive caused over four hundred gang related murders a year in Chicago alone (Bowen, 175). One of the most gruesome and remembered gangster shoot-outs of all time occurred on Valentines Day, 1929, which was portrayed excellently in the film, because of business differences, Capone had his henchman, Machine Gun Jack McGurn plot the murder of the OBanions, led by Bugs Moran. McGurn staged a delivery of alcohol to Moran at a warehouse and had his gang members impersonate police officers and pretend to raid the transaction. With a sweep of machine gun fire, McGurn killed all that were inside. Capone had a solid alibi, being in Miami at the time, and no convictions were ever made. This event is an example of how prohibition fueled gang warfare and increased the crime rate in America (Bowen, 175). While the film is based on a real aspect of the hunt for Capone in Prohibition-era Chicago, the writer and director deviated from the subjects historical accuracy. While they got the major concepts of the untouchables correct, there were facts altered to benefit the storyline. First off, Eliot Ness is portrayed as a family man and didnt come from Chicago, whereas he was actually from Chicago and had no immediate family, yet both were key elements to Nesss character. Another important fact altered for the film was that Nesss original 10-man team of untouchables suffered no causalities and the fact that two of the most beloved men of the group were killed in the movie which adds to the idea of dramatizing history. Perhaps the biggest flaw of the film comes at the end. In the very climax of the film, after Nesss rooftop chase with gangster, Frank Nitti, Ness pushes Nitti over the edge of a building ending his life in another of De Palmas notoriously bloody scenes and, as expected, followed up by an aerial view of the impact. The flaw in this series of events is that Nitti was not killed by Ness. In fact, Nitti was Capones successor and lived a further 12 years as head of the illustrious crime organization. However there were also some almost unbelievable yet accurate historical events as well. One of the most famous and memorable scenes from The Untouchables was the baseball bat attack by Capone upon three suspected traitors, though slightly reworked, added to the portrayal of Capone as a dangerous criminal. So while some events were completely changed for Hollywood, some events were simply shown in their entirety adding to the historical authenticity of the film. If not totally accurate The Untouchables still gives the viewer a taste of America during Prohibition. The films convey through graphic scenes, the violence caused by prohibition and also the failings of prohibition, Prohibition did not achieve its goals. Instead, it added to the problems it was intended to solve (Thorton, pg15). The movie also gets across to the viewers the time period. Looking at De Palmas use of cinematography, setting, and the knowledge of actual events from The Untouchables lets viewers see the film in a new, more historically critical light.

The Magic Barrel essays

The Magic Barrel essays He found his characters in real Jewish community. That is why the tone and style of "The Magic Barrel" are so unmistakable and truthful. Through two main characters author involves us in a specific business going on between Leo Finkle, a lonely rabbinical student, and Pinye Salzman, a matchmaker. In order to get a good congregation Leo supposed to be married. How a man, who was studying for six years and who never was in a company of woman, easily can find a wife? The same way as his parents did. He went to the matchmaker. It was not so easy for Leo to appeal to Salzman, because he hoped to find the wife by himself. He wanted to be in love before he gets married. But he resorted to help. It was a firs time when he turned his mind over. Pine Salzman, the marriage broker, represented the old generation, and respected the old Jewish tradition. Marriage is a very important part of a Jew's life, and the family is more important than the girl herself is. He does not think about love. It is possible to imagine how Leo was disappointed when Salzmen introduced the girls to him. "Sophie P. Widow. Father promises eight thousand dollars. Has wonderful wholesale business. Also realestate." "Lily H. Regular. Father is successful dentist thirty-five years. Interested in professional man. Wonderful opportunity." Moreover, "She is a partikiler. She wants the best." Leo's interest to Lily was aroused, and he began seriously to consider calling on her. Finally they met. She provoked him to say the strange, but a very capacious and valuable phrase: "I think, that I came to God not because I loved Him, but because I did not." But Lily didn't dream about him, she dreamed about an invented hero. After this date he turned his mind over again. He felt that he could not love a girl. Although Leo returned to his regular routine, he was in panic and depression from one thought: nobody loves him and he does not love anybody either. There was no br ...

King Richard I, the Lionheart, of England, Crusader

King Richard I, the Lionheart, of England, Crusader King Richard I, the Lionheart (September 8, 1157–April 6, 1199) was an English king and one of the leaders of the Third Crusade. He is known both for his military skill and the neglect of his realm because of his long absence. Fast Facts: Richard I the Lionheart Known For:  Helped lead the Third Crusade, monarch of England from 1189 to 1199Also Known As:  Richard CÅ“ur de Lion, Richard the Lionheart, Richard I of EnglandBorn:  September 8, 1157 in Oxford, EnglandParents: King Henry II of England and Eleanor of AquitaineDied:  April 6, 1199 in Chà ¢lus,  Duchy of AquitaineSpouse: Berengaria of NavarreNotable Quote: We, however, place the love of God and His honour above our own and above the acquisition of many regions. Early Life Born September 8, 1157, Richard the Lionheart was the third legitimate son of King Henry II of England. Often believed to have been the favorite son of his mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine, Richard had three older siblings, William (who died in infancy), Henry, and Matilda, as well as four younger: Geoffrey, Lenora, Joan, and John. As with many English rulers of the Plantagenet line, Richard was essentially French and his focus tended to lean toward the familys lands in France rather than England. Following the separation of his parents in 1167, Richard was invested duchy of Aquitaine. Revolt Against Henry II Well-educated and of dashing appearance, Richard quickly demonstrated skill in military matters and worked to enforce his fathers rule in the French lands. In 1174, encouraged by their mother, Richard and his brothers Henry (the Young King) and Geoffrey (Duke of Brittany) rebelled against their fathers rule. Responding quickly, Henry II was able to crush this revolt and captured Eleanor. With his brothers defeated, Richard submitted to his fathers will and asked for forgiveness. His greater ambitions checked, Richard turned his focus to maintaining his rule over Aquitaine and controlling his nobles. Shifting Alliances Ruling with an iron fist, Richard was forced to put down major revolts in 1179 and 1181–1182. During this time, tensions again rose between Richard and his father when the latter demanded that his son pay homage to his older brother Henry. Refusing, Richard was soon attacked by Henry the Young King and Geoffrey in 1183. Confronted by this invasion and a revolt of his own barons, Richard was able to skillfully turn back these attacks. Following the death of Henry the Young King in June 1183, Richards father King Henry II ordered John to continue the campaign. Seeking aid, Richard formed an alliance with King Philip II of France in 1187. In return for Philips assistance, Richard ceded his rights to Normandy and Anjou. That summer, upon hearing of the Christian defeat at the Battle of Hattin, Richard took the cross at Tours with other members of the French nobility. Victory and Becoming King In 1189, Richard and Philips forces united against Henry II and won a victory at Ballans in July. Meeting with Richard, Henry agreed to name him as his heir. Two days later, Henry died and Richard ascended to the English throne. He was crowned at Westminster Abbey in September 1189. Following his coronation, a rash of anti-Semitic violence swept through the country as Jews had been barred from the ceremony. Punishing the perpetrators, Richard immediately began making plans to go on a crusade to the Holy Land. Going to extremes to raise money for the army, he finally was able to assemble a force of around 8,000 men. After making preparations for the protection of his realm in his absence, Richard and his army departed in the summer of 1190. Dubbed the Third Crusade, Richard planned to campaign in conjunction with Philip II and Emperor Frederick I Barbarossa of the Holy Roman Empire. The Crusade Begins Rendezvousing with Philip at Sicily, Richard aided in settling a succession dispute on the island, which involved his sister Joan, and conducted a brief campaign against Messina. During this time, he proclaimed his nephew, Arthur of Brittany, to be his heir, leading his brother John to start planning a revolt at home. Moving on, Richard landed in Cyprus to rescue his mother and his future bride, Berengaria of Navarre. Defeating the islands despot, Isaac Komnenos, he completed his conquest and married Berengaria on May 12, 1191. Pressing on, he landed in the Holy Land at Acre on June 8. Shifting Alliances in the Holy Land Arriving in the Holy Land, Richard gave his support to Guy of Lusignan, who was fighting a challenge from Conrad of Montferrat for the kingship of Jerusalem. Conrad was in turn backed by Philip and Duke Leopold V of Austria. Putting aside their differences, the Crusaders captured Acre that summer. After taking the city, problems again arose as Richard contested Leopolds place in the Crusade. Though not a king, Leopold had ascended to the command of Imperial forces in the Holy Land after the death of Frederick Barbarossa in 1190. After Richards men pulled down Leopolds banner at Acre, the Austrian departed and returned home in anger. Soon after, Richard and Philip began arguing in regard to the status of Cyprus and the kingship of Jerusalem. In poor health, Philip elected to return to France leaving Richard without allies to face Saladins Muslim forces. Battling Saladin Pushing south, Richard defeated Saladin at Arsuf on September 7, 1191, and then attempted to open peace negotiations. Initially rebuffed by Saladin, Richard spent the early months of 1192 refortifying Ascalon. As the year wore on, both Richard and Saladins positions began to weaken and the two men entered into negotiations. Knowing that he could not hold Jerusalem if he took it and that John and Philip were plotting against him at home, Richard agreed to raze walls at Ascalon in exchange for a three-year truce and Christian access to Jerusalem. After the agreement was signed on September 2, 1192, Richard departed for home. Returning to England Shipwrecked en route to England, Richard was forced to travel overland and was captured by Leopold in December. Imprisoned first in Dà ¼rnstein and then at Trifels Castle in the Palatinate, Richard was largely kept in comfortable captivity. For his release, the Holy Roman Emperor Henry VI demanded 150,000 marks. While Eleanor of Aquitaine worked to raise the money for his release, John and Philip offered Henry VI 80,000 marks to hold Richard until at least Michaelmas 1194. Refusing, the emperor accepted the ransom and released Richard on February 4, 1194. Returning to England, Richard quickly forced John to submit to his will but did name his brother as his heir, supplanting his nephew Arthur. With the situation in England in hand, Richard returned to France to deal with Philip. Death Constructing an alliance against his former friend, Richard won several victories over the French during the next five years. In March 1199, Richard laid siege to the small castle of Chalus-Chabrol. On the night of March 25, while walking along the siege lines, he was struck in the left shoulder by an arrow. Unable to remove it himself, he summoned a surgeon who took out the arrow but severely worsened the wound in the process. Shortly thereafter, gangrene set in and the king died in his mothers arms on April 6, 1199. Legacy Richard has a mixed legacy, as some historians point to his military skill and the daring necessary to go on crusade, while others emphasize his cruelty and neglect for his realm. Though king for 10 years, he only spent around six months in England and the remainder of his reign in his French lands or abroad. He was succeeded by his brother John. Sources Dafoe, Stephen. â€Å"King Richard I – The Lionheart.†Ã‚  TemplarHistory.com.â€Å"History - King Richard I.†Ã‚  BBC, BBC.â€Å"Medieval Sourcebook: Itinerarium Peregrinorum Et Gesta Regis Ricardi: Richard the Lionheart Makes Peace with Saladin, 1192.†Ã‚  Internet History Sourcebooks Project.

Authentic Assessment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Authentic Assessment - Essay Example Introduction Despite some unquestionable achievements of the over-decade-long US anti-terrorist campaign, insofar as al-Qaeda’s terrorist network and the Taliban have suffered heavy blows with the loss of many key figures from their senior leadership, most notably Osama bin Laden, the terrorism – the Islamist extremist terrorism in particular – is neither vanquished nor eradicated. Moreover, following 9/11, there was a wave of terrorist acts worldwide, including such against US military personnel and civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, etc.; while the tightened security measures, along with the intensified vigilance of the police, FBI and the intelligence community as a whole, prevented many terrorist plots to develop into violence on US territory (Mueller, 2011). Tragic occurrences such as the shootings at Fort Hood, where 13 people were killed and 32 wounded, allegedly by a radicalized Army psychiatrist, appear more or less an exception (King and Thom pson, 2011). The terrorists’ bigger success abroad, measured in sheer number of both cases of materialized violence and, regrettably, American citizens being murdered or injured, infers that the overseas security efforts of the US government are hindered by certain inadequacies. The suicidal bomb attack on the residential area inhabited by service personnel of the US military base in Floola and their families, along with the attack on the USA’s embassy in Libya, which resulted in the US Ambassador being killed, is a fresh reminder of this painful fact. Terrorism – Trends, Tactics and Perpetrators As Chasdi (2012) points out, the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System /WITS/ of the US National Counterterrorism Center /NCTC/ has identified certain trends in the field of terrorism, emerging from global, regional and national developments (p. 67). The figures provided by WITS indicate that over 10Â  000 terrorist attacks occurred in 2011, which affected 70 countries w orldwide and resulted in over 12Â  500 deaths (National Counterterrorism Center /NCTC/, 2012). While the total number of attacks has fallen by 12 percent and 29 percent, as compared to 2010 and 2007 respectively, the main foci of terrorist activities remain the regions of South Asia and the Near East; taken together, the two locations experienced almost two-thirds of the high-casualty attacks in 2009 and over 75 percent of 2011 total (NCTC, 2010; NCTC, 2012). Afghanistan, along with Iraq and Pakistan, bore the brunt of the reported attacks for the third consecutive year, both in terms of attacks’ number and ensuing death toll (NCTC, 2009; NCTC, 2010, NCTC, 2011). The number of terrorist attacks in Africa and related fatalities, mainly associated with the turmoil in Somalia and Democratic Republic of Congo, oscillated between a rise of 140 percent (2 200 fatalities) in 2008, as compared to 2007, and a drop of more than 30 percent in 2010, as against 2009 – from over 3à ‚  200 fatalities to 2Â  131 respectively (NCTC, 2009; NCTC, 2011). The increase of 11.5 percent during 2011, however, is mainly attributable to the Nigeria-based group Boko Haram (NCTC, 2012). The situation in the Western Hemisphere could be also described as variable, insofar as the number of reported terrorist attacks fell by about 25 percent in 2008 and subsequently rose by 27 percent in 2009; while in 2010, both attacks and deaths declined by

Nursing art and science Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Nursing art and science - Essay Example ernational and national health care systems and facilities is bound to facilitate a better and improved cooperation and communication amongst the varied human elements of health care, impressively bettering the standards of patient care, a systematic accumulation of data on the part of the nursing professionals to assure a better evaluation of the end results of nursing care, a greater adherence on the part of the nursing professionals to the agreed upon standards of nursing care and a realistic and satisfactory assessment of nursing care, thereby pragmatically and positively impacting the overall visibility of nursing at a national and global level (who 2006). A formal recognition of the contribution of the achievements and contributions of the nurses in the running and management of health care facilities and institutions will not only boost the morale of the nursing professionals, but could also be positively be expected to address the problem of a severe shortage of qualified and skilled nurses across the developed world. Recognition of the difference made by the nursing professionals in the cause of health care will accord a salubrious visibility to the nursing profession, thereby encouraging and stimulating the potential candidates to affiliate to the cause of health care and service. A formal recognition of the contribution of the nursing professionals in the health care systems is a subject that is not merely confined to verbal declarations and speeches, but is rather something that solicits a practical implementation and actions in the varied aspects of health care. It calls for a commitment on the part of national and international health care bodies and institutions towards the training and retention of nursing professionals, helping them develop the appropriate skill mix and abilities, applicable at all levels, be it at the level of primary health care or at state of the art, high speciality institutions (WHO 2011). This calls for the extension of