The Harlem Renaissance: Writers Reacting To Their Political Environmen

The Harlem Renaissance emerged during turbulent times for the world, the United States, and black Americans. World War I and the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 had left the world in disorder and stimulated anticolonial movements throughout the third world. In America, twenty years of progressive reform ended with the red scare, race riots, and isolationism throughout 1919 and led to conservative administrations through the twenties. While blacks were stunned by racial violence near the end of the decade and were frustrated by the lack of racial progress that progressivism had made, they were now armed with new civil rights organizations and confronted the approaching decade with new hope and determination. Education and employment opportunities had led to the development of a small black middle class. Few blacks thought that their future lay in the economically depressed rural South and hundreds of thousands migrated to seek prosperity and opportunity in the North. As these more educa ted and socially conscious blacks settled into New York’s neighborhood of Harlem, it developed into the cultural and political center of black America.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The 1910s also marked the rising of a political agenda advocating racial equality throughout the black community, especially in the growing black middle class. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), founded to fight for the rights of blacks, and black sociologist W. E. B. Du Bois pushed the agenda. Black nationalist Marcus Garvey and the Universal Negro Improvement Association’s efforts also reflected the agenda and helped to inspire racial pride among working class blacks in the 1920s. This decade would bear witness to the long struggle against political disenfranchisement in the South and a change from traditional black political alignments in the North. Feminists too, having achieved victory in their campaign for suffrage, still faced more subtle obstacles on their road to equality. In addition, the ghettoization of American cities, the persistence of poverty in the midst of prosperity, and the disproportionate involvemen t of blacks in both of these processes challenged perceptions about the effectiveness of the American system.1 In 1926, professor Alain Locke observed, â€Å"The younger generation is vibrant with a new psychology.† which was shown by a shift from â€Å"†¦soci... ...nce. NY: Doubleday, 1991. Gates, Jr., Henry Louis and McKay, Nellie Y. African American Literature. NY: W.W. Norton and Company, 1997. The Harlem Renaissance. University of North Carolina. 20 March 2001.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Haskins, Jim. The Harlem Renaissance. Brookfield, CT: The Millbrook Press, 1996. Hornsby, Jr., Alton. â€Å"Black Americans.† The World Book Encyclopedia. Chicago, World Book, Inc., 1992. Langston Hughes. University of North Carolina. 20 March 2001.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  < http://www.unc.edu/courses/eng81br1/lang2.html>. Lewis, David Levering, ed. The Portable Harlem Renaissance Reader. NY: Viking Penguin, 1994. Meltzer, Milton. The Black Americans: A History in Their Own Words. NY: Ty Crowell, 1984. Rampersad, Arnold. The Life of Langston Hughes. 2 vol. NY: Oxford Publishing, 1988. Turner, Darwin T. â€Å"Langston Hughes.† The World Book Encyclopedia. Chicago: World Book, Inc., 1992. Wintz, Cary D. Black Culture and the Harlem Renaissance. Houston, Rice University Press, 1988. Wintz, Cary DeCordova. â€Å"Harlem Renaissance.† The Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia. Danbury, CT: Microsoft, Inc., 1999.

American History Research Paper: Was Entering The Vietnam War A Good Idea?

I. Intro Going to Vietnam was a good thing for the U.S. It is, however, the most hated and protested war in all of U.S. history. However, it was a needed war. We went to Vietnam to stop the spread of communism, and for the most part succeeded. Even thought it was the most military drafts ever given out, and it caused massive inflation in the U.S. The Vietnam War was an effect of the Cold War, which was an arms build up between Russia and the U.S. Then Russia tried to turn Vietnam into a communist country, so the U.S. intervened. In the following you will see that entering the Vietnam War was a good thing and that otherwise communism would still be very popular today, even though it was the only war the U.S. ever lost. II. Evidence The first reason that going to Vietnam was a good idea was that we needed to stop the spread of communism (Brownell 12). It was a growing threat, and needed to be stopped as quickly as possible (Brownell 87). We entered the war, and for the support of France and to stop communism in its steps (Welch 2). With little success in both areas at first, in the long run we were successful in our main goals (Welch 7). The spread of communism started the Vietnam War and The Korean War. Both wars had the same objective, stopping the spread of communism (O'Brien 1). We succeeded in both wars with this idea, but we pulled our troops out of Vietnam towards the end of the war (Brownell 5). The war officially ended in 1974 when the North Vietnamese took control of South Vietnam and made the entire country communist governed (Brownell 5). They may have been communist in the end, but much of the surrounding countries remained democratic (Welch 98). So we lost the country of Vietnam to communism, but gained many of the surrounding countries (O'Brien 2). So we went in to stop the spread of communism, and we did stop it from spreading, it just got Vietnam in the end (Welch 7). Another reason entering The Vietnam War was a good idea was that we gained the support of the French. They initially started the war, but we entered and helped them out (O'Brien 3). We entered the war with the intention of stopping the spread of communism, and we gained the support of the French. In doing this we gained a little help from them in future wars (O'Brien 3). We also gained some financial gain from the war. With people buying war bonds and the draft, we didn't need to worry too much about money (Welch 12). Plus, with the withdraw of our soldiers we had an excess amount of money (Welch 13). So we gained the support of the French and got some money, but unfortunately it was at the cost of 58,168 U.S. troops (Maraniss 307). A huge reason that entering The Vietnam War was that it really helped boost our economy as a country. When we entered we had a mad rush of people buying war bonds to help support our troops and the war cause (Maraniss 256). Then when we pulled out of the war, we actually didn't spend all our money on the war. So we gained some money. Unfortunately a lot of the money went missing with President Nixon resigning (Brownell 56). Some speculate that he took it and spent in on more private things, while others claim he hid it away if he was ever run out of the country. The ideas continue into the improbable all the way to the just insane (Marraniss 25). Yet it is still very curious as to where all that money disappeared to. Many consider it one of the main reasons President Nixon resigned before congress could impeach him. However, it was nothing compared to what was left (Brownell 56). Most of the money went to covering up and paying off the officers involved it the drug trade that took place during The Vietnam War. Instead of it rightfully going back to the people, or the troops, it went right into the pockets of traitors and lying drug junkies. Yet what remained mostly went into repairing roads of all things. So we traded a war for not getting caught up in another one of the government's scandals, and nice roads (Brownell 57). III. Contradictions One of the reasons that entering The Vietnam War was a bad idea is that it is the most protested war in all of U.S. history (Brownell 12). We had more people voice there protests against The Vietnam War than ever in U.S. history, even more than The Korean War (Brownell 13). Another reason is that we lost more men in The Vietnam War than in any other war, except The Civil War. It was mostly protest because of the draft (Welch 26). The draft was 1,728,344 people, but only 17,000 were accounted for in deaths (Brownell 1). It was so protested that many of the people who were drafted left the country and fled to Canada. The people who didn't go after the war were pardoned (O'Brien 5). The last reason that it was a bad idea entering The Vietnam was that it was the only war we ever lost. However, many people believe it was a good thing because it showed the world that America could infact lose a war, that we weren't all powerful (Welch 10). IV. Conclusion With the facts given, it is obvious that going to Vietnam was a good thing for the U.S. Even it was the most protested and hated war in all of U.S. history; we still accomplished the main goal of what we went there for. This was to stop the spread of communism. We also got, sort of, a head start in The Cold War. Even though the Vietnam War was technically caused by the beginning of The Cold War. Not to mention that it was the most military drafts ever give. However, you can't really deny the fact that it was a necessary war, that without it, communism would be still popular today.

Julius Caesar Character Analysis - 785 Words

Every aspect of Shakespearean drama depends ultimately on language† (Keach 253). In the play Julius Caesar, William Shakespeare uses metals to add emphasis to the play. These references to metal are used in the play as a form of characterization, as a way to establish the mood, and as a way to explain the ideas of the characters. The characterization helps the audience to have a better understanding of the characters and their personalities, the mood further explains what the characters are feeling in relation to Caesar and his death, and they emphasize and explain the ideas that are driving the characters to act and speak. Shakespeare includes metals in his play as a method of characterization. In Act One, Cassius characterizes†¦show more content†¦Casca states â€Å"His countenance, like richest alchemy, will lead to virtue and worthiness (1.3.168-169).† He also establishes mood by mentioning metal in Act Two. When Brutus is speaking about the plot against Ca esar. Shakespeare uses the word whet, which means to sharpen in Brutus’ speech. He uses it in a way that makes it sound like Brutus was reluctant to kill Caesar . This creates a mood of sadness. â€Å"Since Cassius first did whet me against Caesar, I have not slept†(2.1.61-62). The next example comes when Antony is giving his speech at Caesar’s funeral. What he says also creates a mood of remorse for Caesar. Antony said, â€Å"and as he pluck’d his cursed steel away Mark how the blood of Caesar followed it, As rushing out of doors, to be resolved If Brutus so unkindly knocked, or no† (3.2.187). Shakespeare uses metals to create different moods throughout the play. Shakespeare uses figurative language to explain the ideas of the characters, to the audience. Shakespeare uses a metaphor as Brutus conveys his idea of the group not needing to take an oath, because what they are doing is enough to inspire cowards into action and make weak women strong. â€Å"To kindle cowards and to steel with valor the melting spirits of women† (2.1.126-127). Shakespeare uses a homophone of metal as a pun to show the ideas of Brutus when he explainsShow MoreRelatedCharacter Analysis of Julius Caesar1421 Words   |  6 PagesJulius Caesar Character Analysis Cassius Strengths and Weaknesses Cassius was one of the conspirators against Cesar and proves to be a powerful character in Shakespeares, Julius Caesar. He has much strength and very few weaknesses and this helped him achieve small goals that led to his main goal of killing Caesar. One of Cassius strengths is his ability to influence people using flattery and pressure. In Act 1, Scene 2, Cassius demonstrates this strength by influencing Brutus to think moreRead MoreJulius Caesar Character Analysis Essay1017 Words   |  5 Pages The author of Julius Caesar is William Shakespeare, an English poet, playwright, and actor, widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language. He was born on July 13 in 1564 and died in 1616. It was written to be a tragedy and was one of the seventh plays written off true events that happened in Roman time. Also includes Coriolanus, Antony, and Cleopatra. Drama of the play focuses on Brutus’ struggle between the conflicting demands of honor, patriotism, and friendship. Opens with â€Å"twoRead MoreJulius Caesar Character Analysis1332 Words   |  6 PagesBrutus’s Wife Of all female characters in Shakespeare, few possess the vigor and assertion that Portia demonstrates in Shakespeare’s classic political tragedy, Julius Caesar. Overshadowed by all of the chaos and unrest in the life of our protagonist, Brutus, a complex emotional and ethical journey is taking place, represented by Portia, Brutus’s wife. Portia exists in the text to shed light and understanding on an arch that isn’t always as apparent to the audience. In production of the play, directorsRead MoreJulius Caesar Character Analysis899 Words   |  4 PagesApparently, the North Star is also a pincushion. William Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar, is about the assassination of the titular future king and the aftermath of this event. Julius Caesar was loved by all the common people but hated by the aristocracy. Many characters in this play end up dying due to this event. Many of them had thought themselves immortal. As a genius playwright, Shakespeare was able t o include hidden messages in his plays. In this specific play, he was able to demonstrateRead MoreJulius Caesar Character Analysis852 Words   |  4 Pagesdislike people. In this play, Julius Caesar, there were many different characters with many different personalities. I believe that Soothsayer is the most honorable character, and I believe that Brutus is the most corrupt. I believe that Soothsayer is the most honorable character for multiple reasons. One reason I believe this is because he tried to warn Caesar two times about the Ides of March. Caesar marked him as unimportant, and he ignored Soothsayer. Despite Caesar saying he was unimportant, heRead MoreJulius Caesar Character Analysis1546 Words   |  7 Pagesmight, or will, start taking advantage of them. In one of Shakespeare’s plays, The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, it demonstrates that being too trusting of someone could end with bad consequences. In The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, one of the main characters, Brutus, trusted his best friend, Cassius, with everything. Brutus trusted that Cassius was right about him being a new ruler of Rome, how killing Caesar would make a safer and better living space for the community, and that the people would supportRead MoreJulius Caesar Character Analysis842 Words   |  4 PagesWhen it comes down to identifying true friends, not everyone will show lo yalty in the same way. In the play Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, Brutus and Antony have flaws and varying beliefs which led them down different paths, as well as individual ways of displaying this ardent behavior. Everyone has different faults or quirks that can get in the way and cause us to do some pretty hurtful things. But Shakespeare shows us that although these flaws produce bad outcomes, they might have more positiveRead MoreJulius Caesar Character Analysis2014 Words   |  9 PagesJulius Caesar is a play about the death of Julius Caesar and how his death affects the Roman Empire. The play was written in 1599 by William Shakespeare. Even though the play is about Julius Caesar, the main character isn’t Julius Caesar, but really is Brutus. Brutus deals with internal conflict during the play because at first he doesn’t want to cause any harm to his emperor but Cassius convinces him that the other senators and he should do something about Caesar. Cassius is another senator forRead MoreJulius Caesar Character Analysis Essay834 Words   |  4 Pageswas once a friend that ended up costing someone’s life. In the play Julius Caesar the entire situation gets out of hand, Caesar had still thought his true friend, Cassius, was loyal to him. Cassius is to be known of betraying, his once good friend, Caesar. Even someone as loyal as one may think, everyone’s potential can be unexpected and hazardous. The situation gets even more out of control as Cassius decided to deceive Caesar, only then to hurt him in the end. Cassius appears to be a threat, althoughRead More Brutus Character Analysis in Shakespeares Tragedy of Julius Caesar964 Words   |  4 PagesCharacter Analysis: Brutus William Shakespeares play, The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, was mainly based on the assassination of Julius Caesar. The character who was the mastermind behind the assassination was, ironically, Marcus Brutus, a senator and close friend to Julius Caesar. But what would cause a person to kill a close friend? After I examined Brutus relationship towards Caesar, his involvement in the conspiracy and his importance to the plot it all became clear. Brutus had one particular