A Famous Metaphysical Poet Essay Example for Free

A Famous Metaphysical Poet Essay Andrew Marvell was a famous Metaphysical Poet. Marvell lived from 1621 to 1678 and made a few accomplishments, his poem has unique style and theme for his time, and his poem contains a deep analysis. He wrote several love poems; â€Å"To His Coy Mistress† was one of his most unusual poems for the time in history which he lived. Born on March 31, 1621, in Winestead-in-Holderness, Yorkshire, England Marvell was the son of an Anglican clergy man. He attended Hull Grammar school, and at the age of 12 began college at Cambridge University. He earned his bachelor’s degree in 1638, but it is believed that he stayed at Cambridge until 1641 for a master’s degree. Not much is known about Andrew Marvell’s life; though scholars do know in the 1650s he had a part in the English Government. In 1657 He was appointed Assistant Latin Secretary to the Council of the state; in 1659 he concentrated more on political satire and stopped writing poetry. During Marvell’s life time England’s government had some surprising changes. Monarchy and parliament worked together, but King James I did not have the skill to manage a country, but the government gained more issues when his son, Charles I succeeded him. King Charles I was overthrown and beheaded. England wanted to establish a new government, after doing so; Charles II was made King of England. Marvell died on August 16, 1678 due to a fever. â€Å"While he is not thought to be married, shortly after his death, a woman claiming to be his widow published a volume of his poetry† (Ruby 276). He was one of the chief wits and satirists, a Puritan, and a public defender of individual liberty during his time. Today he is just known for his poetry. (Margoliouth, Sackville-West, Hunt, Murray, Toliver, Legouis, Wallace, Friednreich, Donno. 1) In the 1600s Marvell’s poem â€Å"To His Coy Mistress† was seen as â€Å"obscene and obscure† because of his message in the poem, and the control the church had over the people. Marvell is considered to have been a carpe diem writer, and sometimes described as a metaphysical poet. Carpe diem means the writing style encourages a reader to â€Å"seize the day† because life is short; Metaphysical poets use many unique metaphors and were very appreciated for their originality. Jeffrey Karon states â€Å"To His Coy Mistress† may be one of Marvell’s most destructive poems. â€Å"Its strength is that having turned against itself in the expected manner of ironic poems, it then turns against its own internal objections† (Karon par. 39). In the poem, the speaker describes how he could worship his mistress forever; however part two the tone shifts to time rushing past and the mistress’s physical beauty being wasted away with it. The speaker wants to beat time and enjoy his mistress’s company. There are many different themes in â€Å"To His Coy Mistress† such as time, love, passion, seduction, beauty, and death. This poem is of forty-six lines, and three paragraphs dividing up the rhyming couplets. Marvell used personification, hyperboles, and very bizarre metaphors. The speaker is speaking to his mistress in a rhetorical situation. He passionately describes his love for her and there is not enough time to live to show her how beautiful she is, and how great his love is for her. He wants his love with his mistress to go further by getting intimate with each other, although she wants to save her virginity due to her religious views with the church. He informs her if their love is true and they are in love, they should further their relationship. The woman is said to be coy because she is taking too much time, and time doesn’t stop for anyone. â€Å"’To His Coy Mistress’ is a sublime example of a carpe diem poem, a Latin phrase meaning ‘seize the day’† (Adams par. 8). The first two lines of the poem the main theme, time, is introduced to the reader. It is basically saying life passes quickly and one should not waste their youth, that they should â€Å"seize the day. † The first paragraph of the poem the speaker describes how life is too short for them to waste time. He uses exotic metaphors such as, â€Å"vegetable love† to describe how long he could love his mistress. Beginning at line seven until line eighteen he uses hyperboles to describe the amount of years he could love her and devote to worship her. He describes her physical attractiveness and how long he could love every part of her body and of course her heart. In paragraph two the speaker goes from speaking of his love for his mistress to imagining her grave. He speaks of time as the driver in a chariot hurrying closer to them; he uses â€Å"hurrying† to the show the distress of the little time they have. A few lines down in this paragraph, he describes to his mistress her virginity will eventually over time mean nothing, and when she dies it will be an unusual and worthless treasure. In the first few lines of third and final paragraph the speaker describes his mistress as â€Å"morning dew† saying she is young and her skin a healthy glow just like the dew over the grass in the early morning. Another exotic metaphor he uses is â€Å"birds of prey. † He and his mistress are the birds, and they are preying on time. They want to eat and not be eaten. The speaker finally breaks through and wins his mistress over using the last few lines of the poem. He is saying to her they should take every part of themselves, the strong, the sweet, and the vulnerable, roll it up into a ball and come together as one to beat time. Since they cannot make the sun stay still they will race with him, the speaker using personification and making the sun seem like a person literally racing with him. Marvell was not acknowledged for his unique, but brilliant poems until after his death, he changed the meaning of Metaphysical Poet. Marvell made a few accomplishments, his poems usually had unique style and theme for his time, and his poem contains a deep analysis. This could be a perfect poem for someone interested in love poems with deep meaning.

Comparing The Scarlet Letter and Long Black Veil :: comparison compare contrast essays

Comparing The Scarlet Letter and Long Black Veil      Ã‚  Ã‚   The song, "Long Black Veil", written by Johnny Cash has many similar elements to The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne. Both have to do with the sin of adultery that ends up hurting the characters in the stories. In "Long Black Veil" a man is convicted of a murder because he cannot provide an alibi for the night that another man was killed. It turns out that the night of the murder, this man had been "in the arms of his best friend's wife." The man ends up being executed while the woman punishes herself for not saving his life by wearing a long black veil. "Long Black Veil" and The Scarlet Letter both demonstrate how secrets can destroy one's life. This theme is shown through the sin of adultery, the punishments that the characters go through and the symbolism of the long black veil and the scarlet letter.    The original sin of adultery is what starts the events that end up ruining the characters' lives. "Come up hither, Hester, thou and little Pearl...Ye have both been here before, but I was not with you. Come up hither once again, and we will stand all three together!" (p. 133). Though it is never said out in the open, you come to the realization that Hester Prynne and Arthur Dimmesdale have committed the sin of adultery and when Hester becomes pregnant, she is convicted for that sin. "I'd been in the arms of my best friend's / wife" The man and his best friend's wife also commit the sin of adultery and when he cannot give an alibi to a judge because he does not want anyone to know where he was that night, he is convicted for murder and executed. Adultery is what ends up destroying the characters lives because none except for Hester are willing to admit to the sin of adultery.    The punishments that the characters must undergo are worsened by the fact that they do not tell the whole truth. Hester has been found guilty of adultery but when she is asked to tell whom it was that she committed the sin with she refuses saying "Never.

Criminal Procedure Essay

â€Å"One may well ask: How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others? The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but, a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.† – Martin Luther King, Jr. Imagine a perfect society, where the population had a standard set of rules and followed them. In that perfect society, everyone knew the rules down to a specific science hence, they knew how to obey said rules. Unfortunately in our time, we do not have a perfect society. Our civilization has lost the knowledge of their rights unless either; a.) laws were broken by an individual or b.) the individual is studying or examining criminal law. Either way, our society unknowingly forfeits their rights in certain situations. On the other hand, there are law enforcement officers who have sworn to uphold these rights to obtain their position. Some do not know themselves, when they have crossed the line of duty or violated a right. It is up to us to break down and identify the validity and righteousness of the â€Å"Officer Smith & The Gold Pontiac† situation we are presented with. Reasonable suspicion is â€Å"a standard used in criminal procedure, more relaxed than probable cause, that can justify less-intrusive searches. A reasonable suspicion exists when a reasonable person under the circumstances, would, based upon specific and articulable facts, suspect that a crime has been committed (Reasonable Suspicion, Cornell Law School Library [2013]).† Officer Smith pulled over a gold, older model Pontiac because she noticed tape on what she suspected to be broken. One might wonder why Officer Smith pulled the Pontiac over. In most states, the driver is held accountable for faulty equipment of their vehicle. Unless the tape is red, reflective and transparent, an officer has every right to pull the driver over and issue a ticket. In my own experience, it is highly likely for a police officer to pull someone over if there was an obstruction of a head or taillight. I myself have been pulled over for something similar in which I received a warning or ticket. On her way to the driver’s window, Officer Smith remembers the description of a vehicle that was recently involved in a roadside killing of another police officer. That description fit with the Pontiac she had just pulled over. Officer Smith proceeds to ask the driver to get out of the vehicle so she may conduct a quick pat down for weapons. According to the Fourth Amendment, a justifiable search begins with reasonable suspicion. In this case, Officer Smith asks the driver to endure a â€Å"stop and frisk†. This means, the officer had the right to ask for a quick pat down of the driver’s outer clothing in search of a weapon(s). In my belief, the driver’s rights were not violated and valid based on the officer’s request for a stop and frisk. Nothing illegal has happened between the two. â€Å"If, during the pat down for weapons, the officer feels a weapon on the individual, the officer then has probable cause to conduct a complete search.† (Roberson, Wallace & Stuckey, 2007; p.83) In our example, a weapon was not felt or found on the driver. Furthermore, Officer Smith has now conducted what’s known as a â€Å"Terry Stop†. What is the difference between a Terry Stop and the Stop and Frisk you ask? There isn’t any significant difference. Prior to â€Å"Terry Vs. Ohio† (1968), a stop and frisk protected against illegitimate search and seizure. Where as after, it is come to be known as; constitutional according to circumstances where a reasonably suspicious officer has a valid concern for societies or his/her safety. After the Terry Stop, Officer Smith directed the driver to have a seat in the vehicle and asks for their driver license and registration. I would think that this procedure is pretty standard in identifying who the driver is and maybe writing out a ticket for the taillight tape. The driver had other plans and speeds away from Officer Smith without giving requested information. It is to my knowledge that Officer Smith has mor e than reasonable suspicion now. She has probable cause to believe that the driver was in fact, the killer from the incident she’d heard about. With probable cause, Officer Smith proceeds to chase the Pontiac. The chase ends when the driver of the Pontiac hits a telephone pole. You may stop to ask me; â€Å"What is the difference between probable cause and reasonable suspicion?† From my understanding of the two, probable cause is grounds for a warrant or for an arrest. Reasonable suspicion is not but, it may be grounds to further investigate or for a police officer to detain a person or vehicle for further investigation (Florida State University Law Review, Summer (2006), Vol. 33, Issue 4, 1239-1248). I’m compelled to agree with officer Smith in this instance. The driver demonstrated reckless behavior, presenting exigent circumstances for Officer Smith to give chase to this vehicle. According to The Cornell Law Library, an exigent circumstance is â€Å"a circumstance that requires an immediate response. It occurs when police officers believe they have probable cause and there is no time to obtain a warrant. (Exigent Circumstance), Cornell Law School Library [2013])† Being that the chase ended with a severe crash, Officer Smith did respond immediately to the situation. Furthermore, our scenario goes on to explain that Officer Smith feared that the car might catch on fire from the leaking gas tank. She pulls out the driver from the vehicle and goes back to get her purse for identification. It is then that Officer Smith sees that the glove box has popped open and in it was a firearm with documents on top of it. We are asked to think about if the firearm was in plain view and if it was legally obtained? Since I am just a Criminal Justice student, I would have to say affirmative to both. I say that in full confidence because it is legal for an officer to enter a vehicle at the scene of an accident to assist without an issued search warrant. Without rummaging through the vehicles co ntents, the officer sees a weapon or narcotics. Even with the use of a flashlight, it is still considered legal. Just because something is hidden behind darkness, doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be seen during daylight, right? The other permissible circumstance regarding the plain view doctrine is, if the officer moves him or herself around to take a look. The object in plain view (without a thorough search) can be seized and is admissible evidence in court. The fact that the gun was seen through the documentation clearly shows that it was in plain view and didn’t have to be searched for. Officer Smith goes on to find the driver’s purse. In an attempt to locate the driver’s identification, she finds a baggie of Marijuana in the driver’s purse. Although I do not believe that this will uphold as evidence in this case, it may present the driver with another set of charges against her. Perhaps the driver may get charged with possession of an illegal substance? However, I really feel that Officer Smith did not have the right to search for anything other than the drivers license, even though she did find the Marijuana in the purse. In my studies it would be considered â€Å"Fruit of the Poisonous Tree†. Although Officer Smith was legally allowed to enter the vehicle without a search warrant and assist in identifying the driver, I believe that the retrieval of the cannabis will not be permissible in court for the reasons I’ve stated above. Our scenario also goes on to state that it was later found that this vehicle was not the vehicle involved in the death of the officer. It also states that it was determined that the taillight was not in fact broken. One might question or argue at this point, whether the entire scenario is justifiable or necessary? From my point of view it was entirely correct. The officer had a valid reason to pull the car over. She had reasonable suspicion for a Terry Stop. Her reasonable suspicion then turned to probable cause when the driver fled the sight without presenting the officer with what she’d asked for. The officer then acted within a responsible manner to help the driver out of the crashed vehicle. After all, law enforcement is there to â€Å"protect and serve† our community. The firearm was in plain sight of the officer while she tried to locate the driver’s identification. Nothing except the search and seizure of the contents of the purse violated the rights of the driver; nor incriminated the police officer. It is in my belief that Officer Smith could’ve called for backup or help once she found the scene of the accident. She could’ve taken the purse out of the vehicle and even seized the gun. However, she had time to obtain a warrant to search the purse. In instances like we have just gone through, it is interesting to see just how knowledgeable each player is with their rights and responsibilities. We see these cases often in the news and some do not even make it to trial because either a right was violated or a piece of evidence was gathered with some mistake made in obtaining it. â€Å"Don’t interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties.†- President Abraham Lincoln References Exigent Circumstance [Def.1], In Legal Information Institute, Cornell Univeristy Law School Libarary. Retrieved February 13, 2013, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/exigent_circumstances Plain View Doctrine [Def.1], In Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School Library. Retrieved February 15, 2013, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/plain_view_doctrine Reasonable Suspicion [Def.1]. In Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School Library. Retrieved February 13, 2013, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/reasonable_suspicion Stuckey, G., Roberson, C., & Wallace, H., (2006). Procedures in the Justice System (8th Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall. Florida State University Law Review, Summer (2006), Vol. 33, Issue 4, 1239-1248, Retrieved February 14, 2013, from http://www.heinonline.org.lib.kaplan.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/flsulr33&div=61

Saint Dominic Quotations

Born in 1170 and founder of the Order of Friars Preachers, Domingo de Guzmà ¡n lived an austere life, traveling and spreading the Gospel. He was also good friends with Saint Francis of Assisi. Here are some quotations attributed to Saint Dominic. On Austerity and Charity Arm yourself with prayer instead of a sword; be clothed with humility instead of fine raiment. These, my  much loved  ones, are the bequests which I leave to you as my sons; have charity among yourselves; hold fast to humility; keep a willing poverty. We must sow the seed, not hoard it. I could not bear to prize dead skins, when living skins were starving and in need.— After selling books inscribed on parchment (sheepskin) and giving the money to the poor. Other Saint Dominic Quotes I would tell them to kill me slowly and painfully, a little at a time, so that I might have a more glorious crown in Heaven.— After being asked what he would do if caught by his enemies. A man who governs his passions is master of the world. We must either rule ​them, or be ruled by them. It is better to be the hammer than the anvil. You are my companion and must walk with me. For if we hold together no earthly power can withstand us.— Upon meeting Francis of Assisi.