Dr jekyll and mr hyde minor characters

Dr jekyll and mr hyde minor characters `Mr. Utterson is the narrator of the book, Utterson is a middle-aged lawyer, and a man in which all the characters confide throughout the novel. As an old friend of Jekyll, he recognizes the changes and strange occurrences of Jekyll and Hyde, and resolves to further investigate the relationship between the two men. He is perhaps the most circumspect, respected, and rational character in the book, and it is therefore significant that we view Hydes crimes and Jekylls hypocrisy through his observant, but generally sympathetic perspective. ` Dr. Lanyon, he is a famous doctor and Jekylls childhood friend. Also Mr. Uttersons close friend and he is the one who knows about Dr. Jekylls and Hydes secret. But how he knows that? Dr. Jekyll send a letter to Lanyon and in this letter there was some tasks to do for Lanyon for instance go my home, Poole will wait you with a carpenter and locksmith open my working rooms door, go inside, take the drawer that I told u where it is, go your home, wait for the man who I will send you at 12 o`clock and else Lanyon done whole of them and started to wait for the man that Jekyll will sent him. At 12 o`clock man is came they went inside of Lanyon`s house together Lanyon gave him the drawer and the man took some liquid and little drug dust he mixed both of them a green color appeared in tube that he use for mix them than he drunk it . What happened to the men, he changed to Jekyll. By this event Lanyon knew the secret between Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Mr. Enfield , Mr. Utterson`s relative and was a famous person in London. They were always making Sunday walks. On one of this Sunday when they were walking Enfield asked Utterson about a house with a black dusty door. Then he started to narrate something about this house. In this event there was a men who called, Mr. Hyde , when he was walking in a street he crushed a girl and didn`t care about it and continued to walk in his way by girl`s screams people came out from their homes and they catches the Hyde than they thread him with something and they force him to pay money for girl`s family and then Hyde came this house and brought a cheque from inside but on cheque there was Dr. Jekyll`s name on it and Enfield , other suspect from Hyde and they slept together with Hyde in one hotel. After day they went to bank and changed cheque to money. Also Enfield related the details about Mr. Hyde. Then they decided to dont talk about this again. Poole is the butler of Jekyll; he brings information about Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde also their unbelievable relation. One night when Mr. Utterson was sitting in this table and drinking his wine Poole is came they sat and talked about Dr. Jekyll. Poole told about what is going on in Jekyll house. He told that he never saw Dr. Jekyll face during a week, like he said Dr. Jekyll was sitting in his room without going outside and telling Poole that some drugs that Poole should buy from pharmacy and every time when Poole buys the drugs Jekyll told that this is not real go and find me the real one price is not important. And like Poole says Jellys hand writing, his voice and something else changed on him. He hoped that someone killed Jeklly and still hiding in his room. After Utterson and Poole went to Jeklly`s home and they broke the door of Jeklly`s working room and at that moment they saw the Hyde`s unloving body on the ground with a empty bottle next to him. By that Poole helped Mr. Utter son to solve the secret between Dr. Jeklly and Hyde. Carew, a well-known member of Parliament who is murdered by Hyde 2 . Carew was a famous man in London, the book. Hyde killed him by a hard stick in the middle of a street next to river. It was a misty night with fully silent street in London. There was a woman who was cleaning lady in one house she was looking outside from the window her seeing the Hyde when he was beating Carew with the stick. Then suddenly she faint against this terrible situation happening in street. When she gets up, she went to police to explain everything that she saw. When police came to the place that crime happened Hyde was disappeared but there were some pieces of stick that Hyde killed Carew with. From Carew`s pocket police found a letter headed by MR. UTTERSON. In the early morning police went Utterson`s house and when Utterson heard the Hyde`s name she was almost going to be crazy. Utterson helped to police for find Hyde they went Hyde`s house but Hyde wasnt at home a women opened the door police and Utterson went in and they found a stick piece which was the same type of stick that police found in the crime street. And a cheque book which was in the chimney half burned book. Than police start waited for Hyde to go bank and try to change cheque to money†¦ Conclusion: In the essay Mr. Enfield was Utterson`s relation and the starting point of Hyde search from Utterson`s side. Dr. Lanyon was the men who knows Jeklly`s and Hyde`s secret and due to this he killed by Hyde. Poole was the butter of Jeklly and helped Utterson for the solve the secret by[ they couldnt understand anything by the way.] bring information about Jeklly`s situation at that moment and house. Carew was the man who murdered by Hyde. References : Dr. Jeklly and Mr. hyde [book]/2 www.Sparknotes.com/1

Red, White, and Black by Gary Nash Essay

Gary Nash author of Red, White, and Black purpose to their readers is describing the early colonists, but also the relationships toward Europeans, the Indians, and the Africans. Nash successfully analyzes the impact of the colliding three cultures and interprets them to give an overall theme about the relationships between those who made America what it is today. He has shown another point of view to his reader that we grew up and was raise in a white people land; learning only the White people point of view through history. His purpose of writing Red, White & Black was to prove that Native Americans and Africans were not victims, but played as a active role to American history. Nash major theme that he covers in his book was about the three cultures in America and to interpret them overall. The theme is about the issue that Americans have towards the Native American and Africans. He wanted to examine and studied other culture history instead of only learning from the American side. He figures out that they were victims to the history and was just a role in the American history. His main point of time frame was from 1492-1796. The introduction to Nash research took place in Eastern and Northern America. Nash was against how the founding fathers came to America and affected the Natives and Africans. He was against how the founding fathers came to their land and changed their destiny of lives and culture because they took what belong to them first. Anthropologists call this process â€Å"transculturation† and historians call it â€Å"Social change. † His argument towards the historical terms is that we are studying a dynamic process of interaction that shaped the history of American Indians, Europeans, and Africans in the North America in the 17 & 18 centuries. Gary B. Nash was arguing of something different than what is written to us. He believes of what the founding father want us to know and was marked down through history. But reality during those times American Indians and Africans had a big destiny change when the European came along. They changed and affected their lives in there home land. Gary B. Nash written Red, White, and Black purpose was mainly to let people know that, what’s ever that was passed down from the founding father in history is only what their views were and marked down in papers. How the Americans European changed the lives of all Native American and African that was located at Eastern and Northern America.

Followership and Model I and II

The model of followership presented by Goffe and Jones indicates the significance of three emotions which an individual produces in a person which leads them to follow him. These three emotions are summarized as given below. (a) The first emotional response an individual evokes is that of a feeling of   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   significance or importance. Thus leaders who create an impression in people that they matter will be able to obtain even the, â€Å"heart and soul† of their followers.    This is not just a response of blind adulation. It flows from an appreciation by   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   the leader not just their personalities but also their work. Thus the follower will    give loyalty and even implicit obedience. (b)   The second response is that of a feeling of community, a sense of belonging to an organization where the leader creates unity of purpose around the work   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   which they all do. The leader is one who the follower sees as having created a   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   feeling of the community. (c)   The third emotional response is the feeling of buzz, an excitement which is   Ã‚   created by the sheer presence of the leader. His energy and enthusiasm is   Ã‚  Ã‚   contagious.   Followers are willingly led by such leaders who provide them   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   excitement, challenge and a passion to live their lives. This may be called as    charisma but actually is much more than that. Argyris and Schon (Dick. Dalmau, 1990) have provided an understanding of the conscious and subconscious processes of reasoning. This fits in well with the emotional aspects of followership indicated by Goffe and Jones. Argyris Model II ideally fits into the theory of followership espoused by Goffee and Jones. In Model II, the leader provides a scope for double loop learning. This implies that there is open inquiry of issues thereby which people are placed in a position of significance and respond to a situation based on a community based pattern of involvement which is highlighted in double loop learning model of Argyris. The emotional feeling of a buzz created by a leader’s presence is heightened in the Model II for the leader provides inspiration. On the other hand, Model I is based on the single loop theory through which most leaders operate till they understood the advantage of the double loop theory (Argyris et al.   1985, p.   89). The excessive control exercised by the leader in Model I is not conducive to creating an emotional feeling of importance as well as a sense of belonging to a larger organization or establishment (Argyris, et al. 1985, p.   89). Power: How Its Meaning in Corporate Life is Changing Gary in his summary on the various views of power has provided us how perception of power has changed over the years. In the initial years it was the emotional response of charisma, the buzz that is categorized as the third factor by Goffee and Jones that was the essence of power in leaders. However gradually this perception has changed and power came to regarded as an issue for organizations productivity. This is the power used for creating a feeling of community of belonging and one which provided a unity of purpose. Thus we see a shift in power from Model I to Model II very gradually. Model II or the double loop theory propounded by Argyris is a power paradigm which can be associated with that advocated by David McCelland and David Burnham. Thus managers in this model were democratic and more willing to share their power with others with a view to creating a community feeling in the organization but one which was primarily driven towards achieving goals of the organization (McCelland. Burnham, 1995). James Hillman in his in depth analysis of power has indicated that there could be more elements or purposes to power than that indicated by the purely simplistic explanation of exercising coercive force. He provides a benign expression of power that of providing service to the organization (Hillman, 1995). While Model I denoted by Argyris has indicated power in its coercive function as defined by Hillman, for in it the leader will attempt to control unilaterally, the subsequent transformation indicates development towards Model II   (Argyris. 1985). Power in the Hillman model is to seek followership in which it is linked with the two emotions of making people feel important and creating a community feeling for achieving corporate goals. Ronald Heifetz indicates that power does not necessarily imply the ability to protect people from threat but to let them feel the threat through simulation and adaptation. This is the new model of power which is aligned to Argyris’ Model II wherein the protection offered by Model I which also includes protection of ones group of followers is done away with. By exposing followers to disorientation by the threats which are the essence of a new age, the 21st Century, it will lead people to transformations required to fit into the new age (Heifetz, 1994). The Living Company The Living Company is one which survives because leaders consider the company as a congregation of people and not as an organization which produces goods and services. Thus people are more valued than assets. This focus on the people is what makes these organizations perform consistently over a long period in some cases as the Sumitomo over the centuries. People are given importance which is due to them because they are working in the company efficiently and effectively. They provide a feeling of belonging to the organization such as Unilever and finally they have a series of leaders who define the trajectory of growth for individuals as well as the company. These leaders see themselves as shaping a human community The Living company follows the Argyris Model II with powerful double loop learning systems which effectively provides feedback, creates internal commitment as well as leads to informed decision making. This in turn continuously provides a perception of the deficiencies to the management which undertakes continuous improvements. This also leads to generation of new ideas and development of new businesses. Managing in the Cappuccino Economy The companies in the Cappuccino economy provide a high degree of importance to people even in junior positions by allowing them to make independent decisions. They are in turn spurred by the faith placed by the management in their abilities even for critical decisions which affect the company’s bottom line. On the other hand the non cappuccino companies do not provide such freedom to the management. The results achieved by these companies are of a higher order which is benchmarked by the rise in equity of these companies by the author. The top end companies of the Cappuccino economy follow Model II which comprises of empowerment and sharing in decision making right down to the last level. These companies also delimit control by the higher executives though given Argyris predictions once the companies grow, the instinctive response to control may come back. However by establishing training and coaching, Argyris has indicated that Model II skills can be built up in these companies on a continuous basis. The non Cappuccino companies on the other hand follow Model I; thereby they are unable to adjust to the changing circumstances lacking a double loop feedback. Empowerment : The Emperor’s New Clothes Empowerment implies enhancing an employee’s self worth which in turn will build his commitment to the organization. Thus a firm which demonstrates to an employee that he can control his own destiny, that he is important will get maximum commitment from him. On the other hand Argyris also indicates that the process of change itself does not make people feel important as it only indicates to them what change is required (Argyris, 1998).   It is change that is more important than the employee, thus he may not be fully committed to the process. Empowerment is many times inhibited by leadership in most organizations. These executives are control oriented, hence are unable to be seen as charismatic, â€Å"light houses†. He has also indicated that many people do not want to be empowered. They feel more comfortable in being led. Argyris also feels that it is performance per se which is the most important factor and not empowerment (Argyris, 1998). Thus some organizations in their enthusiasm for empowering the employee by making him feel important, tend to overlook the results that are produced by him. This empowerment is considered self defeating. Argyris Model I corresponds to external commitment that does not provide much leeway to employees to define their own goals and tasks. This thus does not profess empowerment (Argyris, 1998)   Control remains with the management or the higher leadership and employees are expected to merely follow the laid down norms. Argyris has advocated Model I for most routine jobs which may not entail too much empowerment. Such jobs are better performed through external commitment rather than internal. Argyris Model II corresponds to an organization which offers its employees internal commitment. This enables maximum participation by employees in the project in turn enhancing the way in which they are empowered. However implementing Model II as per Argyris is an extremely difficult and challenging process, hence many organizations profess rather than practice the same. Why Should Anyone be Led by You? Inspirational leaders are known to possess four basic qualities, they demonstrate willingly their own weakness, they rely on intuition for seeking the appropriate time for an intervention, empathize freely yet firmly with followers and are not afraid to demonstrate their own uniqueness. By showing to the followers that they have weaknesses as other men they convey a feeling of being human thereby building up a sense of community in the group. This also helps in establishing a common bond based on a feeling of want or need. The intuitiveness and unique differences that they demonstrate contributes to the charisma which creates a buzz about them and inspires other people. The demonstration of difference is also appreciated by followers as it indicates a spirit of adventure denoted by leaders as Sir John Harvey-Jones, CEO of ICI. By empathizing with their followers, the leaders indicate to them that they are an important facet of their lives, providing the led the sense of being of consequence, thereby inviting greater loyalty. The inspirational leader is also able to use the right quality amongst this at the most appropriate time. The last quality is what is most important for practical application as it enables leaders to practice leadership by being themselves rather than creating a faà §ade. The inspirational leader denotes Model II provided by Argyris which is evident from the fact that he is not only open to a double loop feedback but also welcomes it. He uses this to sustain and support the overall good of the organization. The leader in this case is willing to share control over his self with his followers which provides them a unique sense of empowerment building an infinite sense of loyalty. Leaders are also able to gain intuitive feedback of the system thereby contributing to the double loop of Model II. By being open, fair, transparent and appropriately empathizing with their subordinates, these leaders are the anti thesis of Model I organizations where leaders are aloof, directional and do not expect or welcome a feedback. Inspirational leaders thus seem to fit in ideally with a Model II organization. Reference:- Argyris, C.   (1985) Strategy, change & defensive routines.   Boston: Pitman. Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & McLain Smith, D.   (1985) Action science: concepts, methods, and skills for research and intervention.   San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dick, B., & Dalmau, T.   (1990) Values in action: Applying the ideas of Argyris and Schon.   Brisbane: Interchange. Heifetz, Ronald. (1994). Leadership without Easy Answers. Belkap Press. Hillman, James. (1995) Kinds of Power. Currency Books. McClelland, David. Burnham, David. Power is the Great Motivator. Harvard Business Reprint. Jan-Feb 1995. (Case Study) Gary, Loren. Power: How Its Meaning in Corporate Life is Changing. (Case Study) Goffee, Robert. Jones, Gareth. Followership. Harvard Business Review. (Case Study). Gues, Arie de. The Living Company. (Case Study). Shapiro, Eileen C. Managing in the Cappuccino Economy. (Case Study). Argyris, Chris. Empowerment : The Emperor’s New Clothes. Harvard Business Review. May-June 1998. (Case Study) Goffee, Robert. Jones, Gareth. Why Should Anyone be Let by You?   Ha rvard Business Review. September – October 2000.

War on Iraq Was Not Justified - 1560 Words

War on iraq was not justified The 2003 Iraq War lasted less than three weeks. It began in the early morning hours of March 20, when American missiles struck Baghdad. By April 9, U.S. forces had advanced into Baghdad. By April 15 Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had vanished, and U.S. and allied officials pronounced the end of major combat operations. Although the war itself was short, arguments over whether it was justified had been made for months and years prior to the attack, and still continue today. Going to war in Iraq was not justified on many levels. One of the main reasons for the attacks on Iraq was to disarm them of any weapons of mass destruction that they have. This makes sense to prevent future terrorist attacks, but no†¦show more content†¦The United States, nor any of its allies had been attacked by the Iraqis, so it would be going against the basic principles of going to war that most of the world has been following for years. An attack by United States on a country that has not done anything sets a bad international precedent. Its saying that its okay to attack another country if they merely feel threatened by them. If this were acceptable, the entire world would be at war with one country or another. Similarly, from a geopolitical standpoint, an attack against Iraq made no sense and had serious negative consequences (Farley 29). For one thing, many of our allies in Europe, the Middle East, and around the world were opposed to the United States attacking Iraq. France, Germany, China, and virtually all Arab and/or Muslim countries friendly to the United States have forcefully voiced their opposition to a U.S. attack on Iraq (Farley 29). The United States has lost much needed support from around the world and have made enemies out of friends. Aside from Great Britain, we have basically lost all of our allies. With the help of these allies that we have lost, some thought that the United States military could easily accomplish disarming Saddam Hussein easily without any loss of soldiers or too much money while others predicted the costs would run high. War nay sayers dreaded that the war would put our country further into debtShow MoreRelatedWas The U.s. Led War Of Iraq Justified?1977 Words   |  8 PagesWas the U.S. led war in Iraq justified? Former State Department Advisor Robert Ebel stated â€Å"We didn t go into Iraq to get access to the sand. We got into Iraq to get access to oil. Period. †Conspiracy theories never fail to exist yet those surrounding this dreadful day in American history surpass any other. September 11, 2001, is a date no one old enough will ever forget considering there were roughly three thousand innocent people killed. There are those who say, though nothing is proven, thatRead MoreEssay about An American Attack on Iraq Was Not Justified1091 Words   |  5 PagesAn American Attack on Iraq Was Not Justified The 2003 Iraq War lasted less than three weeks. It began in the early morning hours of March 20, when American missiles struck Baghdad. By April 9, U.S. forces had advanced into Baghdad. By April 15 Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had vanished, and U.S. and allied officials pronounced the end of major combat operations. Although the war itself was short, arguments over whether it was justified had been made for months and years prior to the attack, andRead MoreThe Iraq War Essay examples1281 Words   |  6 Pagesthe decision of war with Iraq, most blinded United States of America citizens are still yet persuaded to support such a war. The Bush Administration has covered their schemes of war with lies to gain support. While weapons of mass destruction is supposedly the reason why the United States launched military action to begin with, all the clearly ignored consequences will haunt their final decision of war, and will remind them how the war is not and never was justified. Whither th e war is for the protectionRead MoreCritique of Article Titled An American Attack on Iraq is not Justified606 Words   |  3 PagesAn American Attack on Iraq is Not Justified was written by John E. Farley in 2002 when congress was considering a resolution to the 9-11 attacks. Farley is a professor of sociology at Southern Illinois University and still participates in war protests to this day. Farleys argument is exactly what the title states, a war in Iraq is not justifiable. The United States ultimately went to war against Iraq on March 19, 2003. Since then, the question of whether or not the war is ll, showing that he caresRead MoreThe Battle Of The War On The World1247 Words   |  5 Pageswe can determine weather or not that this invasion was legal a bigger perspective on the issues as a whole is needed. The actions in question were operations DESERT STORM and IRAQI FREEDOM between January of 1991 and the end of the Iraq war on August 31st of 2010. These conflicts ended with t he invasion of Kuwait, Iraq, and eventually the occupation of Iraq by US forces after the events of September 11th 2001. The region of the middle eat that Iraq occupies is known to many as the Cradle of CivilizationRead MoreComprehensive Argument Analysis1273 Words   |  6 Pages------------------------------------------------- Axia College Material Appendix E Critical Analysis Forms Fill out one form for each source. Source 1 Title and Citation: A U.S. Invasion of Iraq Is Not Justified | Zunes, Stephen. A U.S. Invasion of Iraq Is Not Justified. The Nation 275 (30 Sept. 2002): 11. Rpt. in Is Military Action Justified Against Nations Thought to Support Terrorism? Ed. James D. Torr. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2003. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 20 Mar. 2011. DocumentRead More The Effects of Reagan and Bush’s Policies in El Essay1696 Words   |  7 PagesThe Effects of Reagan and Bush’s Policies in El Salvador and Iraq United States foreign policy, since the Cold War, has been driven by ideology: good versus evil, capitalism versus communism, and democracy versus totalitarianism. America’s foreign policy objective from 1945 to 1991 was to contain communism, prompting Cold War calculus – the enemy of your enemy is your friend. The United States, following Cold War calculus, allied with unscrupulous leaders opposed to communism,Read MoreThe Just War : The Iraq War1132 Words   |  5 PagesThe date was March 19, 2003, people sat beside their television sets and radios to listen to U.S. President, George W. Bush, announce, â€Å"At this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger† (â€Å"War in Iraq Begins,† 2003). Bush and his advisor’s actions were based on the information that the Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein, was building weapons of mass destruct ion. The Iraq War is a â€Å"just†Read MoreShould States Ever Interfere in the Affairs of Other States?1602 Words   |  7 PagesIs the intervention of one state in the affairs of another ever justified? Do states have a moral duty or a legal right to interfere? Where is the line drawn? This essay will observe some of the answers to these and other questions surrounding the interference of one state in the affairs of others. It will also distinguish between interference and intervention and consider the conflict between these issues and sovereignty. Furthermore, it will examine different types of intervention and pro- andRead MoreDoes The Ends Justify The Means?1597 Words   |  7 Pagestime to conduct the cost of imprisoning citizens for recreational drug use versus the cost of putting legal controls in place such as was done as the alcohol prohibition was lifted. Does the Ends Justify the Means: An International Impact. In a more global example where the ends definitely justified the means historically averted a potential World War III nuclear war when US President John F. Kennedy decided risk violating international law by establishing a blockade rather than to commit to conducting