The Sherlock Holmes Essay Example for Free

The Sherlock Holmes Essay The methods of both Conan Doyle and HG Wells are similar as the use plenty of descriptive passages, packed full of sinister adjectives. They make good use of thermal and sound imaging, adding to the increasingly tense atmosphere. In HG Wells Red Room, the descriptive passages are large, never sparse but thick with a different level of English. For example, Wells wouldnt say the bookcase was scary, the book case would be ominous shrouded in a foreboding illumination: I heard the sound of a stick and a shambling step on the flags and the door creaked on its hinges. This highlights my above points but also how Wells has taken your stereotypical haunted house commodities cold stone floors, creaky doors and placed them with the added intensity of adjectives, adverbs to aid the growing fear. This language is reflected not just in the description but the choice of nouns: There were candles in the sockets of the sconces. Nowadays I dont think anybody uses sconces but rather candle sticks but for a modern reader looking at this tale, this uncommon noun will add to the menacing mood, for the simple fact that it is not a normal, everyday word. In Sherlock Holmes the descriptive passages are just as important to building the tension however they dont come in solid paragraphs, rather placed in and around to create the effect. I think this is due to the complexity of Holmes is mystery, Conan Doyle is offering you, red herrings, misleading information whereas Wells is telling you like it is: A flickering oil lamp The clink of horses hooves An endless succession of sombre and deserted streets These are a few examples of the more simple nature of Conan Doyles description. However I feel that the two writers are building to different levels. HG Wells is quite simply trying to build fear, looking to create a spooky, eerie atmosphere, whereas Conan Doyle is not looking for fear rather suspense. You could argue that they are the same thing but I see the Red Room as plain fear, one straight path to conclusion, whereas Conan Doyle offers you many paths with no obvious sign post. Of course there must be some fear, as Dr. Watson and Sherlock Holmes creep through Dr Roylotts garden (past foreign beats) or through the slums of London looking for Neville St Clairs assassin, but Conan Doyle also wants in trepidation, who is the murder?, kind of attitude. This brings me onto my next point, how do the authors work with the feelings of the reader in creating these effects? The Red Room, I feel would have had a better effect on a 19 century reader for the reader will belong to a religious generation, an era of great fear of the supernatural whereas today it is accepted that there are no such things as ghosts. I think Wells worked with this audience, building on beliefs that the reader already had, aiding his creation of his desired atmosphere. Conan Doyle similarly was working with an audience gripped with fear of Jack the Ripper, a London of crime. So when Sherlock Holmes is walking through the East End of London, the reader will already experience fear in relation to Jack the Ripper, rather than any foreboding description. This is the case more so in The Man with the Twisted Lip, for the reader has more to reflect with, for practically everybody would have understood the squalor of East London but not the Mansion inhabited by Gypsies, wild animals and a passionately argumentative doctor. Another way authors choose to increase dramatic potential of their tales is to use these descriptive passages in conjunction with characters, not just setting. HG Wells has done this to an extent; I caught a glimpse of myself, abbreviated and broadened to an impossible sturdiness in the queer old mirror, My mind reverted to the three old and distorted people downstairs, their very existence spectral. Conan Doyle also chooses to embellish his story with these character references, but I feel that in comparison they go through up much more meaning. I think HG Wells barely cuts the surface of these characters but then again as a first person narrative; the association of the story with the three house workers is less meaningful to the drama. It is as though he sees the workers as objects, generating a greater spectral reference to their state, therefore creating greater fear for the reader. In comparison, Conan Doyle specifies with greater detail his characters. Dr Roylott, for instance, is a perfect example. He is an intriguing character; a original man of verve and zip, a practitioner working to cure mans ills, allows his mind to be overcome by temper. Conan Doyle builds this in to his tale, with two huge descriptive paragraphs, as told from his step daughters perspective: But a terrible change came over our stepfather about this time He shut himself up in his house and seldom came out save to indulge in ferocious quarrels. Conan Doyle then follows this on by using action. Later on Sherlock Holmes encounters Dr. Roylott for the first time. A brash of words is swiftly followed by evidence He steppes swiftly forward, seized the poker, and bent it into a curve with his huge brown hands. As a summary the authors have both made use of simple literary techniques in order to build suspense and fear. These melodramatic methods use the characters, the surrounding scenery and sounds to generate their trepidation. Having said this, they have used different strategies to work to this goal. This is not to say that Conan Doyle is rubbish, unskilled or vice se versa but the plot of the stories lays restraints on the author. For instance, I think that Wells was looking to produce a moral, an ethic which tells the reader there are no such things as ghosts. Wells has then chosen to use an uncomplicated story to convey this there is really only one character. He does not have the options of different settings or people in order to generate fear and instead to provide the suspense embellishes the story with his use of language by utilising descriptive passages throughout. On the other hand Conan Doyle is able to use the personalities of his various characters and the different situations with in the storyline to create and sustain suspense for the reader. In conclusion my favourite tale was that of The Adventures of the Speckled Band. The Red Room was me least favourite. The lack of characters, I think, meant that in order to create his suspense, Wells was forced to talk at length about the setting. These descriptive passages were written in a style, a vocabulary unused today. For me the need to read the story with the use of a dictionary breaks up any sort of hold the author might start to be taking on the reader, subsequently unable to generate the same effect the story might have done a hundred years ago. The conclusion that fear is the killer not ghosts, is an interesting twist but if were not for the need to read the story I would never have gone further than the first page. The Sherlock Holmes tales are something I find easier to read. For some reason, although written about the same time the language used by Conan Doyle is more in keeping with the language in use today. I also feel that the books offer more than one basic forward moving plot. If you look at a tale as a road and that as the author creates ideas, so turnings appear on this road. The Sherlock Holmes are the spaghetti junction compared to Wells Red Room. These red herrings make me as the reader enter more into the tale, trying to workout where this conclusion will come from. My choice of The Adventures of the Speckled Band over The Man with the Twisted Lip is due to the diversity of the tale run down mansions, gypsies, wild animals, Dr Roylott just add more interest (for me) than Hugh Boone the professional beggar. Although the likelihood of a snake making the journey described and then finding sufficient reason to murder a sleeping person is slightly unrealistic I felt that Sherlock Holmes arrived at this conclusion with more evidence (making it more likely) than that of The Man with the Twisted Lip. After having spent weeks analysing these stories I think Wells was trying to create more than a scary tale rather a scenario to persuade the reader, the public that there are no such things as ghosts. Conan Doyle, I dont think was really trying to build anything extra form his tales. I mentioned earlier the proclamation of Queen Victoria possible causing him to open with a red herring however other than that I cant think as to why he wrote that tale, what sparked the imagination to generate those ideas.

Grapes of Wrath :: essays papers

Grapes of Wrath It is said that everything is done for a purpose, and if that purpose is not obvious, it could be evident within oneself. In The Grapes of Wrath, by John Steinbeck, the story not only entails the tale of the tragically poor, but also an uplifting sense of discovery. The story tells not only of the physical journey to California, but of the characters' spiritual travels as well. By examining the lives of Jim Casy, Tom Joad, and Ma Joad, one will see the enlightening changes that mark their lives through the depression. Jim Casy's journey is an astounding one. He begins his life as a preacher, yet decides one day that his work is invalid; sinful, in some way. He says to Tom, "'I used ta get the people jumpin' an' talkin' in tongues, an' glory-shoutin' till they just fell down an' passed out. . . An' then - you know what I'd do? I'd take one of them girls out in the grass, an' I'd lay with her. Done it ever' time. Then I'd feel bad, an' I'd pray an' pray, but it didn't do no good. Come the nex' time, them an' me was full of the sperit, I'd do it again. I figgered there just wasn't no hope for me, an' I was a damned ol' hypocrite. But I didn't mean to be.'" (Page 28) He decides that he is not noble enough to continue his work, and grows distempered when others ask him to preach the word of God. He spends his time with the Joad family gratefully, but little else. He does no real work to help them out; he spends most of his time thinking to himself. Although Casy repeatedly confesses his guilt for doing nothing for the family, he makes no real efforts to contribute, and remains on the sidelines. However, when Tom trips a policeman that was threatening to take everyone to the station, Casy takes the blame. "Casy turned to Al. 'Get out,' he said. 'Go on, get out - to the tent. You don't know nothin'.' 'Yeah? How 'bout you?' Casy grinned at him. 'Somebody got to take the blame. I got no kids. They'll jus' put me in jail, an' I ain't doin' nothin' but set aroun'.' A l said, 'Ain't no reason for -' Casy said softly, 'If you mess in this your whole fambly, all your folks, gonna get in trouble.

Shannon Liegh Wynne

Shannon Leigh Wynne Advanced Placement United States History Mr. Ed Forte 1 December 2010 To America: Personal Reflections of an Historian by Stephen Ambrose vs. Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong by James W. Loewen History can be interpreted in many different ways, and has been, by many different people, who all have different views on politics and economics. Some authors try to change the audience’s opinions, some try to enhance them. Authors have different purposes for writing, different biases and ideas, different research and documentation as well.Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong by James W. Loewen and To America: Personal Reflections by an Historian by Stephen Ambrose are perfect examples of two very different books about essentially the same subject. While Loewen is a democrat, and Ambrose is a republican, not only are their philosophies and ideas different, the authors present the ide as in totally different fashions and with different audiences in mind. James W. Loewen and Stephen E. Ambrose have two distinctively different writing styles, political preferences and purposes when writing.Loewen’s Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong is democratic, liberal, and written in textbook style writing. In contrast, Stephen Ambrose’s book, America: Personal Reflections by an Historian, is republican, conservative and written with personal anecdotes and a warm tone, as if a grandfather was telling you the stories. In Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong, Loewen presented a lot of new, surprising, information on well known subjects.These new facts were supposed to sway the reader’s opinion on the subject being presented from what is popular to believe, to what is the â€Å"real† truth. Loewen presented surprising facts about Helen Keller and her political preferences, Christopher Columbus and who actually discovered America, and how some textbooks are have hidden racism and antiracism within the book. America: Personal Reflections by an Historian was written to comment on history and certain events, and the author’s experiences learning about them. Both books focus on certain events, or narrow subjects, but each chapter is a completely new subject.Ambrose interjects his personal experiences and opinions on subjects like Ulysses S. Grant and the Transcontinental Railroad, which the facts are supplied by the author himself, the author’s mentors, and other famous texts and records. Most evidence for Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong is found in documents such as newspaper articles, from both current times and archived materials, as well as books. The information is documented in the back of the book in Notes by the author along with explanations for the use of some phrases and words.Loewen us es many secondary sources, such as textbooks and analyses. Most evidence from America: Personal Reflections by an Historian is also a lot of secondary sources, but many primary sources as well. Ambrose tells many personal anecdotes about the subject and many opinions and stories his mentors and professors shared with him. James Loewen and Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong have a completely different purpose than America: Personal Reflections by an Historian, by Stephen Ambrose, but the two books have overlapping documentation and research.Both America: Personal Reflections by an Historian and Lies my Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong are presented in a somewhat logical manner, but in different ways. James W. Loewen wrote his book by focusing on one subject for an entire chapter and then moving on to the next subject and another chapter. He had the subjects go in chronological order and includes many pictur es, charts and graphs to help the reader, and are very well spaced and placed throughout the book.There was no gap in any information in Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong, but there was a plethora of repetition. Loewen almost went in circles, explaining the same thing over, and over, in slightly different ways each time he covered a subject. In contrast, Stephen Ambrose designed America: Personal Reflections by an Historian to flow with the way his mind flowed from thought to thought. The chapters, which also focus on one subject per each chapter, but do not go in chronological order.For instance, one chapter is entitled â€Å"Writing about Men in Action, 1992-2001† and a couple chapters after comes â€Å"Women’s Rights and Immigration†. Also, each chapter is not strictly about a historical subject, some focus on his personal life and experiences that have to do with history. Yet another chapter is titled â€Å"Writing about Nixon† which describes his time while he was researching and writing his biography about President Nixon. Stephen Ambrose wrote as thoughts entered his head, not in a timeline or anything, like a textbook.Ambrose does not use any visual helpers in America: Personal Reflections by an Historian, but his words make up for the absence of pictures because he describes things so colorfully, energetically, and with great care and emotion. These two books are both well organized, but are very different in their organization and layout in general. The points of America: Personal Reflections by an Historian and Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong are almost as different as history reviews can get.Stephen Ambrose’s book was meant to explain historical figures and events and expand on the way Americans already feel on the subject. His object was not to diminish or change the reader’s view on the subject, like James Loewen did, only heighten it. James W. In the chapter in America: Personal Reflections by an Historian about President Ulysses S. Grant, he takes the good image of the war hero, and enhanced it, with unknown stories of his greatness.Loewen’s purpose when writing Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong was to change the reader’s opinion on the subject that he was talking about at the time. For example, most people see Helen Keller as a hero or as very brave, because she overcame her disabilities to help others with the same disability to function in society. Loewen told the readers only a little about her accomplishments about that but spent the rest of the chapter telling all about her political views and career as a socialist and how she publically supported Russia in its new administration as a communist nation.Anyone who reads this book cannot help but feel cheated both my James Loewen for ruining a respectable icon and role model, and at ot her historians and textbooks for not telling the whole truth. He also tells the readers that Christopher Columbus was a thief and a bad person and that he doesn’t deserve to be nationally celebrated. Both Helen Keller and Christopher Columbus are looked up to by many people, especially children, who are only at school to learn the alphabet and how to share, but Loewen is setting out to ruin all the little pilgrim and Christopher Columbus books for them, and he is okay with that.He wants the public to know the truth, and that is worth everything to him. America: Personal Reflections by an Historian is mainly supporting America’s loved ones, and Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong is shooting them down. Before his death in 2002, Stephen Ambrose was a famous biographer and historian. He was also a professor or taught at the University of New Orleans, Kansas State University, Johns Hopkins University, Rutgers University, U. C. Berke ley, and some European schools.He was mentored by some very famous older historians as well, though he always formed his own opinion on the subject he was being mentored on, even if he did not agree with his mentor. Ambrose was definitely a republican, and interjected his republican views during many parts of America: Personal Reflections by an Historian, and he has also published biographies of Presidents Nixon and Eisenhower, as well as Emory Upton and Henry Halleck. James W. Loewen is very liberal, and it shows in Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong.James Loewen has a PHD in sociology from Harvard, co-authored a U. S. history textbook called Mississippi: Conflict and Change , which won the Lillian Smith Award, and has also taught at The Catholic University of America, The University of Vermont, and Tougaloo College. When writing Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong, Loewen studies and stayed at the S mithsonian Institution, where he formed his opinion that no textbook makes history interesting or even documents it correctly.Loewen has written a total eight books, almost all of the same style writing; liberal and decisive. The intended audience for both America: Personal Reflections by an Historian and Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong was a person or student with a general knowledge of history in general and a mainstream idea of many components and events, who is willing to learn and accept new facts about these components and events.The language is that of an educated adult or young adult, so that students and working people alike could understand and relate to the book and author. Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong is more of a student’s book, because it focuses on how textbooks get history wrong, but adults are still attracted to the title and style of writing. America: Personal Reflec tions by an Historian probably brings in more adult readers, because of the style of the writing, more of a story and personal reflections than plain facts.Overall, both books have tremendous value to any reader who is willing to learn, and is patient with the author. At some points in both America: Personal Reflections by an Historian and Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong, the storyline got a little bit slow, which made it difficult to get through. These books could be recommended to high school students, adults and seniors; they cover multiple generations of interest. There was always something new to learn, or a new way to think of or appreciate something with James W.Loewen and Stephen Ambrose. Reading these two books change a lot of thoughts on the main subjects brought up, and the main people analyzed. America: Personal Reflections by an Historian and Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong makes a person wonder if It any leader or idol is a good leader, or role model, or icon, or if they are all really fake. It also makes a person wonder if there really is good and bad in the world, or if everything is grey, not just black and white.

Eurobonds - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 5 Words: 1488 Downloads: 1 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Economics Essay Type Narrative essay Did you like this example? Before looking at the resolutions that are open to the companies on default of the bond it is first important to look at the type of bond that we are dealing with. The bond in this situation is a Eurobond. A Eurobond is a bond which is outside of the control of the country in whose currency they are denominated and they are sold n different countries at the same time by large companies. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Eurobonds" essay for you Create order Eurobonds typically have maturities of 5 to 15 years and interest on them, which is payable gross may be at either a fixed or a floating rate. Eurobonds are bearer securities, which means that their owners are unregistered, and so they offer investors the attraction of anonymity. Because Eurobonds are unsecured, companies that issue them must be internationally known and have an excellent credit ratings. Companies may find that Eurobonds useful for financing long-term investment, or as a way of balancing their long term asset and liability structures in terms of exposure to exchange rate risks. Next to look at the situation on default if there is a trustee in place. A trustee will be able to deal with the default and the issues that arise out of this. The fundamental feature of the trust is the separation of legal and equitable title. In the commercial sphere various advantages flow from this. Equitable ownership vests in the beneficiaries of the trust. The use of a trust permi ts the trustees to exercise their discretion in the vent of a default and thereby protects the borrower from arbitrary legal action at the hands of an individual bondholder. If there is a trustee in place the bondholders will enjoy the equitable protection of being treated equally and the financial expertise of the trustee, who has the resources to bring action against the borrower if required. As S C are Italian the Hague Convention will apply to this transaction. Article 2 of the Hague Convention states that the trustee has the power and the duty, for in respect of which he is accountable, to manage, employ or dispose of the assets in accordance with the terms of he trust and the special duties imposed upon him by law. As safeguards, nothing in the Hague Convention prejudices the powers of states in fiscal matters or the power of a court to apply its own public policy rules, while if all maters are internal to a state, other than the choice of a foreign law to govern the tru st and foreign trustees, a court of hat state had the option not to recognise the trust. Where there is a trustee in a bond issue, it is common that the trustee should be given discretion to make determinations as to whether or not a matter is material. This will be relevant to issues such as whether the trustee, of its own volition and without seeking instructions from the bondholders, should be permitted to consent to a request made by the issuer for a minor amendment to the conditions attached to the bonds or to the giving of an inconsequential waiver from compliance with such conditions. It is also not uncommon for the documentation to provide in relation to certain of the events of default set forth in the relevant clause, that enforcement action will only be taken where such an event has arisen if the trustee considers that what has occurred is materially prejudicial to the interests of the bondholders. Peter Smith J. in the High Court considered that phrase in Law Deben ture Trust Corporation PLC v Acciona SA[1] where an event of default allegedly had occurred occurrence of an event of default was materially prejudicial to the interests of the bondholders, so that enforcement action could be taken, the trustee had first to determine that the event was presently occurring and secondly that it was prejudicial to the interests of the bondholders in a material way. By way of further amplification, his Lordship said that the interests of the bondholders related to their interests in the bonds, that is, their contractual entitlement to the payment of interest and capital and, as well, any ancillary rights which the bondholders might have to protect their entitlement to the payment of interest and principal, such as security rights and significant rights having a commercial protective interest, such as the right in this case to appoint a director to the board of the issuer. Material prejudice did not necessarily mean the same thing as material breach, as such prejudice might exist even without such a breach and even the existence of a material breach might not, on the facts, mean that the interests of the bondholders had been materially prejudiced. In most cases, the trustee would need to investigate the circumstances and their consequences to determine if the relevant element of material prejudice existed. However, the facts on their face might be sufficient to establish the relevant degree of material prejudice without the need for further investigation. His Lordship held that the facts in this case were sufficient on their own for the trustee to make a determination that there was material prejudice to the interests of the bondholders, in that the acts of the issuer in excluding the nominated director from the board, in failing to appoint a replacement nominated by the bondholders and in entering into the unauthorised transactions were obviously prejudicial as they stood, so that it was not necessary for the trustee to investi gate the consequences of those things further before it could make a determination that what had happened had actually caused material prejudice to the interests of the bondholders. A trustee may be able to prevent an event of default from triggering repayment of the bonds if the effect is not materially prejudicial to bondholders. With a fiscal agent it is possible for bonds to become repayable if a single opportunistic bondholder detects a minor event of default that cannot be cured quickly, even if the damage caused to the borrower and the remaining bondholders is potentially enormous (e.g. such as this triggering cross-default provisions in other financing agreements). Bondholders can be better off under a trust arrangement if the borrower does default. First, the trustee can require payments to be made directly to it for the bondholdersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ benefit; by contrast, funds held by the fiscal agent may be at risk of attack from a liquidator. Second, a trustee can ensure that all bondholders are treated equally, so avoiding a scramble by bondholders to start individual proceedings in different jurisdictions to establish preferential claims to the borrowerà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s assets. Trustees are able to balance the competing interest of the various bondholders, wereas, as will be shown when a bond holder meeting takes place there are complications, not only with time, logistics and expense, but with balancing the competing interests of the creditors. Perhaps the single most important role that an experienced trustee can play is in crisis management. Credit standing is matter of market confidence. A trustee can act behind the scenes in helping a borrower to overcome potential events of default. A trustee can provide an accurate gauge of bondholdersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ likely reaction to a proposed course of action. In the absence of a trustee, a borrower may have to convene a bondholdersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ meeting to agree even minor changes in the issue terms or to waive insignificant breaches of covenant. Such a meeting can be difficult to arrange, expensive to hold, and the outcome may be uncertain if the borrower has been unable to communicate with bondholders in advance. The convening of a meeting can also have an adverse impact on the borrowerà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s market standing and leaves the borrower vulnerable to the short-term whims of aggressive bondholders. Use of a trustee can avoid this expense and uncertainty. If a payment is missed on one loan, cross-default clauses may be invoked to declare the debtor in default on other instruments and to demand accelerated repayment of the entire corpus of the obligation. A material adverse conditions clause in lending agreements allows creditors to declare a default whenever a material change in the condition of the debtor leads creditors to believe that the debtor may be unable to repay[2]. These clauses are all intended to protect the interests of each individual c reditor, but when broadly exercised may end up hurting creditors as a group. Bibliography August R, (2004) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“International Business Law: Text Cases and Readingà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  Fourth Edition, Pearson Arnold G, (2002) Corporate Financial Management, Second Edition, Harlow, FT Prentice Hall Burgess R (1992) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Corporate Finance Lawà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ , à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Second Edition, Sweet and Maxwell Cranston R, (2005) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Principles of Banking Law, 3rd Edition, Oxford University Press Ferren E, (1999) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Company Law and Corporate Financeà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ , Oxford University Press Ross S, (1999) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Corporate Financeà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ , Fifth Edition, McGraw-Hill Watson D, (1998) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Corporate Finance: Principles and Practiceà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ , Pitman 1 Footnotes [1] [2004] EWHC 270, Ch D [2] For an explanation and example of such clauses, see Lee C. Buchheit, How to Negotiate Eurocurrency Loan Agreements (London: Euromoney Publication 1995) 101-05.