Scott Christopher Endsley - Oklahoma Author & Songwriter

The Ethics of an Unethical choice

A popular inquiry that floated around at least two decades ago was: if you and another person are too much weight for a boat taking on water and one of you needs to be sacrificed so that the other might live, would you be willing to jump into shark-infested water? This question has been revised by poet Linda Pastan in her poem called Ethics. As a child, she alludes to have been given a similar hypothetical choice in the form of a burning museum and the decision to either save the life of an elderly woman, or a priceless Rembrandt painting. Asking that such a decision be made by naïve and childish minds is a bit absurd. As she states, she and her peers were “restless on hard chairs (Lynn, 2011),” and cared little about the painting or the old woman’s welfare. To them, the painting was simply existential and they knew not the old woman. Even if these children had chosen what to do, an honest deduction of the truth would reveal that they were powerless to do either as Pastan herself affirms. 

     This dissertation attempts, by the use of deconstructionist theory, to find the ironies, contradictions and oppositions within the poem entitled Ethics. According to Jacques Derrida, the intent of a reading regarding deconstructionism is to proscribe a new structure and its meaning, through the scrutiny of the gaps that are both present and absent concerning the deliberate distraction of the text’s fixed nature (Cinnaomond, 1991). Ethics is a difficult piece to deconstruct in spite of its simplicity in both words and storyline. There is not much irony through the poem until years later, when the young schoolgirl is old and recollects the question that was presented to the class: “In ethics class so many years ago our teacher asked this question every fall” (Lynn, 2011), she writes. Immediately, one can see a correlation between the woman, the painting, and the fall season, which all allude to antiquity. The idea that this fire erupts in a museum is quite indicative as well. 

     Linda, the little girl in question, over the years began to envision her grandmother in the old woman who “borrowed her face” (Lynn, 2011). We understand now that the young girl is coming into the age of accountability and is more able to make an ethical choice. But the truth is, it is not her grandmother, yet she is now more able to see beyond her own youthful egocentric consideration and see an unfamiliar person’s value. This notion is proposed when Linda, as an older child, suggests that the old woman should make the choice between herself and the painting (Lynn, 2011). 

     The teacher suggests that Linda is apathetic and does not want to decide her fate. Linda’s behavior could be misconstrued to be recollection of Pontius Pilot, who found no reason to crucify Jesus Christ and indifferently gave this decision back to the Jewish religious hierarchy and “washed his hands” of his blood. However, she is confronted with only a hypothetical matter and not a true life and death situation. She is not mature enough to realize the worth of a priceless painting, nor the worth of the old woman to those near and dear. What could Linda do in a situation such as this anyway, especially being a child? 

     We are projected into the ironic future when Linda is herself a fairly old woman, gazing at a Rembrandt masterpiece while in a museum. “The colors within this frame are darker than autumn, darker than even winter---the browns of earth, though earth’s most radiant elements burn through the canvas” (Lynn, 2011). She is now in the autumn years of her life and the painting’s antiquity reminds her of her own mortality, and realizes that winter darkness approaches. Yet, she focuses on “earth’s most radiant elements” that burn through the canvas. We are lead to assume that she has found hope in her timeworn age, and it is not so bad after all. 

     “I know now,” she says, “that woman and painting and season are almost one.” She has come to terms with her childhood pondering of the worth of a life over a painting, as priceless as it is. But she says with ambiguity they are “almost.” one. We can deduce some ambivalence regarding her resolution of the encompassing and ethical question. Life without such things as the “earth’s most radiant elements,” reflected in the Rembrandt painting along with the seasonal passages, would render life less rewarding. In effect, she answers her youthful question and decides for herself that she is of value, even in her old age, and would decide for herself whether to be saved from the hypothetical museum fire. 

     She describes her conclusion that the woman and painting and season are all one, and more importantly, are “all beyond saving by children” (Lynn, 2011). Her conclusion affirms the unethical expectation, on the part of her teacher, for a child to assume a resolution of such magnitude. Even if these children had chosen what to do, an honest deduction of the truth would reveal that they were powerless to do either, as Pastan herself affirms.    
  
References 
Cinnaomond, J. (1991).Replicating Rhoades: Deconstructing a Deconstructionist: Comment. 
     The Journal of Higher Education, 62(6), 694-706. Retrieved from: JSTOR via Ashford 
     Library. 
Lynn, S.(2011). Texts and Contexts: Writing About Literature with Critical Theory. Longman, 
     New York, NY.    

Western Imperialism

China and India are two important nations who were exploited by imperialism in decades past. The British were significant players along with the French, Japanese, Russians, and Germans in China’s past, and in the division of its territory. However, the British had a monopoly in India for many decades until the indigenous people rose up, inspired by their leading light Mohandas K. Gandhi, and threw the English off of their backs by way of civil disobedience. China, on the other hand, was at differing times sectionalized by the aforementioned nations and nationalism in China came slowly by the success of the Chinese Communist Party. Japan was never colonized, yet instead it was itself an ethnocentric aggressor nation that implemented an inhumane rule over parts of China, and many of the South Pacific Islands. This continued until they were forced out by way surrender of those colonies at the hands of the Allies in World War Two. Today, China, Japan and India have risen from their third world position of the past and will likely ascend to become very dominant players in the future, both economically and politically, in a way that may rival, if not surpass, the west. 

     China and India had similarities that made them easier to be overrun and ruled by imperial oppressors. They both had multiple religions and divisions culturally. India was mostly Hindu, but other religions such as Buddhism, Islam, and Animism were popular enough to compete with each other in a way that made India less cohesive--- in addition to the caste system that brought further division. These differences still exist today; even someone like Gandhi could not successfully rid the Indians of their age old religious and societal rivalries and superstitions. 

     In most Indian townships before British rule, the dominant castes managed the activities of the villages. The members of these castes surely enjoyed an unbalanced share of having most of the say in these living quarters. They held the village rather than the land and ruled over the lower castes in those settlements (Neale, 1985). So India was deeply divided before British rule and this made it easier to impose authority over them. 

     When the British came they conquered India with little effort, to the chagrin of France who competed for it too, and the people of India supported the British parliamentary government up until around World War One. 800,000 Indian soldiers went to Europe and the Middle East, however, and fought in the war effort. In time, many of the people began to realize that the British were profiting off of their resources and forcing them to buy “British” goods produced in India, such as salt and clothing, with the profits going to Britain. The East India Company was unprofitable to the natives, while the British made millions of pounds selling Indian merchandise outside of India (Goff, 2008). 

     Mahatma Gandhi managed to align the Hindus and Muslims together for a very short time in the effort to bring about Indian nationalism and pride. He was greatly inspired by the teachings of Russian author Leo Tolstoy. Tolstoy was a pacifist, and some say anarchist, because he believed that Christians should not vote, pay taxes, fight in battle, or any other so called patriotic practices. He was for certain an iconoclast to say the least. 

     Gandhi was inspired by Tolstoy’s peaceful resistance movement, and taught these techniques to the differing religious and caste factions, who remarkably collaborated together in decreasing the British incentives to do business in India anymore. Once independence was achieved, and right before Gandhi was assassinated, the unity in the nation was torn in half concerning Muslims and Hindus once again, as part of India broke off into an Islamic state called Pakistan. However, India became a nation unto itself. 

     Development in post-imperial India was arduous at first. Following independence in 1947, the Indian government suggested building around 300 new cities by the end of the century. It was anticipated that these municipalities would improve communication systems, raise economic standards, bring law and order to areas torn by communal passions, and provide social mobility to the economic depressed classes. Nehru believed the machine age held the promise of liberating Indian peoples and improving society; as the dictum suggests: “modernize your house and your life will follow” (Kalia, 2006). 

      Still, even after modernization, India is still impoverished in many areas. The question begs to be asked: was India better off under British imperialism? It is true that India has a strong government, military prowess, and a strong defense structure with nuclear capability just like their adversary Pakistan. During the Cold War, India maintained a supportive friendship with the Soviets while the Pakistanis sided with the United States (Goff, 2008). When the Iron Curtain fell, India was without a strong advocate and briefly conducted foreign policy in ambiguity. 

     The future for India although still looks promising because of modernization. Bollywood, the film industry in India, is modernizing the mindset of today’s Indians. The caste system is slowly fading away, and once this is fully achieved, India’s societal infrastructure will improve and India will become a vast land of opportunity for its indigenous population. Gandhi’s dream of a united India could soon be realized.    

     The Chinese, on the other hand, had dominated East Asia for a millennia and its civilization had been around for some four thousand years. For half of that reign, many dynasties were easily overthrown because of incompetence. The leaders enforced Confucianism on the mostly rural society. Westerners came to China because of the silk, tea and porcelain trade. The Europeans did not have much in the way of raw materials to trade with but looked at China as nation in need of technology. By the year nineteen hundred, China had been carved up by the Russians, Germans, Brits, French, and the Japanese. Its land mass was just too large to hold together all its peoples with the centralized primitive type of governing being used across its vast territory (Goff, 2008). 

     China’s opium trade, continued at the behest of the British, benefitted China’s “landlords” immensely. In fact, opium was the catalyst that brought the British to China. The scale of the opium trade by the 1830’s was so enormous and its effects so devastating that the reigning Qing government took extreme steps to eradicate it, leading to the conflicts between Britain and China known as the “Opium Wars.” The trade had devastating economic and social effects on Qing ruled China (Kitson, 2012). 

     China’s enormous natural resources attracted many imperialistic endeavors. China had always been poor as far as the vast population was concerned, and this poverty made it less cumbersome for the colonizers to exploit their resources and dictate over them. During World War One, however, the European powers became too occupied with the conflict at hand to interfere any further in China. This allowed political factions to propagate (Goff, 2008). 

     The Russian Revolution of 1917 influenced the Chinese national movement, which was encouraged by then United States President, Woodrow Wilson’s call for self-determination in China. A national movement led by Sun Yat-sen was at hand and soon to be victorious. Being deeply disappointed in the warlords, the western powers, and his own affiliate, the KMT, Sun Yat-sen sought help from the Soviet Union and formed the new Chinese Communist Party. Eventually, Sun’s right hand man Chiang Kai-shek turned on him, and his communist ideology, and Chiang Kai-shek and his troops had to eventually flee to the island of Formosa, which today is known as Taiwan, or Free China (Goff, 2008). 

     Today, China and Taiwan are at loggerheads with each other. The mainland insists that the island nation belongs with the rest of Communist China, and because the mainland is the United States’ most favored trade nation the United States has abandoned its alliance to Taiwan. Communist China is now the leading trade nation in the world. They have successfully bolstered their communist system by manufacturing goods in return for capitalistic dollars. This puts China in a secure position to not only remain autonomous, but to also continue to spread its economic imperialism all over the western world. 

     Japan was at first very much isolated from the West until 1853, when the United States forced Japan into the trading business by way of a naval squadron anchored in Tokyo Bay with guns at the ready. Western technology fascinated them as they learned about Western science and technology, including model steam engines for locomotive power. Because of the successful development of technology and trade learned from the West, Japan became strongly autonomous. They grew into a great power and came to think of themselves as an elite people among their Asian neighbors, whom they began to colonize (Goff, 2008).   

     Part of the reason why Japan had never been occupied, other than after World War Two, was because it was not so divided religiously. Shinto and Buddhism were the main religions and neither one was a threat to the other, unlike the warring factions of Hindus and Muslims in India. Historically, Japan’s religions were based on animism and naturism. Subsequently, when Buddhism was introduced into Japan in the sixth century, the religious form of worshiping the gods evolved into what was called Shugo, which is translated into English as ‘Syncretism.’ This is because Buddhism has an orderly doctrine. Shinto, or ancestor worship, exists as the pivot of Japanese religious history. Ancestor worship has always existed in Japan (Komuro, 2003).   

     The fact that Shinto has always been the backbone of Japanese culture, and the fact that Japan was always proficient in aggressively warring against their neighbors with ethnocentric zeal, is two of the major reasons Japan has never been colonized. Christianity and western influence, by way of missionaries, came to Japan in later years but never dominated their way of thinking (Komuro, 2003)..

      This conviction of ethnic superiority has stayed pervasive, even after Japan’s defeat in World War Two. Japan’s idea that their nation is exceptional can be compared to the United States’ claim, by most Americans, to be truly the greatest nation in the world. It is that conviction that has always prevailed on the island nation. Prideful as they can be, in more recent decades, western ideas and trends have become more seductive to the Japanese. Naturally, after World War Two, with the Americans camping on Japanese territory and the huge amount of trade between the once belligerent nations, there has been a definite influence upon the Japanese to become more “American.” The Cold War also helped shape Japan toward a more western outlook as well (Sakai, 2009). 

     There are Japanese people who believe, although a minority, that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a Machiavellian necessity in order to prevent the Soviets from bringing communism to Japan. It is apparent that, as the new millennium ensued, nationalist fervor all over the globe seemed to be subsiding. A new era of ‘globalism’ has taken shape, although with a pause after the events of September 11, 2001. Very few countries are speaking out about ethnocentric exceptional nationalism. 

     We see the idealism of spreading one’s political system around the world to be taking a backseat to international trade among most nations; this is called ‘globalization.’ Post imperialist China and America, once bitter are foes, are now working together towards what benefits both countries, even though they still have their squabbles. Will once this new affluence in China bring down the oppressive Communist wall, and will their governing officials see the benefits of capitalism? One can only speculate, and yet many Americans fear China’s ensuing dominance over the United States. 

     The west has a mindset that property is a necessity, and we generally fear nations that do not espouse these same ideals. Yet the word property is an English word that originates from the associations we attribute to it from the history of English peoples (Neale, 1985). There is no reason to suggest that a country such as China cannot prosper into a nation of affluent citizens just because they do not own property. We tend to look at Communism through the window of the failed Soviet system. Surely China will treat its people more humanely, and extend certain freedoms once they see how capitalist elements are benefitting their system. If they view these elements as a threat, they will suffer the same fate as the Russians. 

     India, if it can rid itself of the backwardness of the caste system, could become a major industrialist power, and open itself to major trade with the west like China has. They must take part in international technology production if they are going to compete. They have flirted with socialism in the past as a result of their former alliance with the Soviet Union, and it has failed. They need to unleash capitalism from its chain so that their poverty can diminish, although it is unlikely to disappear totally. 

     Because India is mostly agricultural, companies could open up corporate farming and offer decent paying jobs. They are heading in the right direction by educating the populous about sexual matters concerned with decreasing the enormous birth rate. The fact that India is a nuclear power means it is not likely that they are as vulnerable to invasion or revolution, so they will hopefully be a very important player in the future of globalization. 

     India and China both have successfully gone from being imperialized, to being potential giants in the sense of having an equal opportunity to share in worldwide prosperity. As a result of their efforts, someday that success may come to fruition for all nations. Japan has already enjoyed the fruits of its labor and has transformed into a modern nation as well as a highly ranked chess piece in the game of international trade. The globalization of all nations spreading the wealth to one another is the final goal. Today, all three of these nations have risen from their third world position of the past and will likely ascend to become very dominant players in the future, both economically and politically, in a way that may rival, if not surpass the west. 
  
                      References 
Goff, R., Moss, W., Terry, J., Upshur, J., & Schroeder, M. (2008). The Twentieth Century 
     and Beyond: A Global History. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. 
Kalia, R. (2006). ) Modernism, Modernization and Post‐colonial India: A Reflective Essay. 
         Planning Perspectives, 21(2), 133-156. Retrieved from: Ashford Library via Ebscohost. 
Kitson, P. (2012). The Wordsworths, Opium, and China. Wordsworth Circle, 43(1), 2-12. 
     Retrieved from: Ashford Library via Ebscohost. 
Komuro, N. (2003). Christianity and Ancestor Worship in Japan. Studies in World Christianity, 
     9(1), 60-68. Retrieved from: Ashford Library via Ebscohost. 
Neale, W. (1985) Property in Land as Cultural Imperialism: or, Why Ethnocentric Ideas Won't 
     Work in India and Africa. Journal of Economic Issues (Association for Evolutionary 
     Economics), 19(4), 951-959. Retrieved from: Ashford Library via Ebscohost. 
Sakai, N. (2009) Imperial Nationalism and the Comparative Perspective. Positions: 
     East Asia Cultures Critique, 17(1), 159-295. Retrieved from: Ashford Library via 
     Ebscohost. 
 

Absolutes

So you say that there are no absolutes--- 
All truth is merely subjective to a personal whim. 
The Sun breathes warmth, but you suggest that, in fact, 
it may be cold according to one's perspective. 
No, a God of creation is just that, a creation. 
Purpose is a misnomer, a false hope intended to keep the masses in line. 
You suggest that haphazardly the universe came into being 
when someTHING or noTHING took indiscriminate non-matter, put it into a blender, 
powered it up, and came up with Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata." 
How do you explain the complexity of something as simple as the human eye? 
Chance is your cowardly reply. 
How do you explain the human emotion innate within 
even the least humane in the world... that being love? 
Endorphins and dopamine are your only answer. 
What a sad premise to explain what is most near and dear to you... 
When it comes time to face mortality, 
will you just shrug your shoulders and sigh, "Oh well...?" 
So you say that there are no absolutes... 
I have just one question... are you really so absolutely sure? 
 

The American VS the Russian Revolution

How do revolutions and the fight for independence gain support from a populace? How do they come to fruition in spite of the knowledge that one may die for the cause, or that life may be quite dismal until its aims are realized? The years 1776 and 1917 may have been etched in our minds ever since having to study an introductory world history course. There are many factors shared in both the American and Russian Revolutions, and many aspects not shared. When people of a nation are pushed up against a wall by either a foreign power or a less than a benevolent domestic government, they tend to up rise and seek a new form of government that is beneficial to the people as a whole, such as what happened in the Russian and American revolutions. 

     The conditions in America, with its open land, presented more economic opportunities to the colonials. Russia too was an open land blessed with much agriculture and many natural resources which gave the prospect of wealth. Contrasted to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, the American Revolution differs as the former was anti-liberal and hostile to the liberties central to the Patriots cause (O’Sullivan, 2009). 

     Eradicating the traditions, religion, equality or anything else which the people held as sacred, the Russian Revolution’s aims they fought for were not the end results they were given. By the time the Revolution was at hand, the Bolsheviks, or communists, saw the necessity of propagandizing that they were imposing “perfect freedom.” However, after less than a century of this tyrannical government, its subjects rose up in what has been termed the “Velvet Revolution” because it was mostly peaceful (O’Sullivan, 2009). 

          From the 1850’s to the dawning of the early twentieth century, Russia was a deeply divided country due to the poor economy; however the ruling class enjoyed a high standard of living. The peasants especially suffered in poverty, while many with just a “comfortable” standard of living began to voice discontent on behalf of the peasants and themselves. Author Leo Tolstoy, who enjoyed much wealth, was in favor of reforms by way of advocating socialism, as demonstrated by his book, Resurrection. Tolstoy, however, was not in favor of a Soviet style Russia, but a benevolent egalitarian society. Russians began to complain about the cushy lifestyle of the Czars. (Hosking, 2001). 

     Czar Alexander, in 1861, emancipated the peasants and began Russia’s efforts towards industrial development. But industrial development placed hardships on them also as it conflicted with the need for farmland. The Russian Jews were feeling the sting of persecution and were being driven to Zionistic fervor. Non Russians suffered as well. By 1903, Russia became fragmented into several different political groups. Capitalists and the liberal bourgeoisie came to be at odds with each other. The latter, along with other groups, established a Constitutional Democratic Party, while the peasants and the intelligentsia formed the Socialist Revolutionary Party (Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 2013). 

     In the mid seventeenth century, in the English colonies of America, many people were beginning to realize that King George was pushing the limits of his subject’s patience by threatening the existing limited freedoms of British subjects. By 1786, the British were hoping to avoid a confrontation with the discontented. At this time, it was clear that the Declaratory Act, which was a statement of a general principle that Parliament had the right to legislate the colonies “in all cases whatsoever,” was far more threatening than the fury caused by the Stamp Act. A rebellion was brewing; though small in numbers, it was still considered a threat to the crown’s authority (Draper, 1996). 

     Although these two fires of aggression and anger in Russia and America evolved into two dissimilar and conflicting ideologies, they both began with a grassroots movement among the people who were endeavoring for equality for the common man. The American Revolution, however, was the vision of statesmen like Thomas Jefferson, who was at one time the governor of Virginia, and the architect of self-rule, influenced by the writings of Tocqueville and philosopher John Locke (Draper, 1996). 

     The Bolshevik’s revolutionary efforts, conversely, were a discontented “workers” movement. They wanted self-rule, but their oppressors were Russians as well; not a foreign dictatorial monarchy. This is one of the many differences between these two revolutionary tenets. Although they were the antipathy of the Jeffersonian Americans who wanted equality for all, they did want egalitarianism for all workers. 

     The idea of communism has been credited to Karl Marx, a German Jew; but not much has been said about the sixteenth century English theologian, Sir Thomas More. He wrote the famous book, Utopia, which fictionally envisioned a “communist” society where everyone shared and everyone was equal and free as there was no government, just will of the people as a whole. Though More’s vision was a religious communal society (Durant, 1957). 

     Karl Marx differed from More’s spiritual and improbable world community with his famous quote in, A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, (a publication he was writing that was never completed) 

“Religious suffering is at one and the same time the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people” (Marx, 1843). 

      Rebelling American colonialists essentially adopted the ideals of English philosopher, John Locke, the Oxford scholar and ideologue of a revolutionary effort in England. John Locke’s were the philosophical foundation which assisted Jefferson to form his own moral principles and beliefs. In fact, Thomas Jefferson paraphrased an earlier work of Locke's when he wrote the Declaration of Independence (Draper, 1996). In Locke’s own writing, he visualized a libertarian ethic: “All mankind... being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions (Locke, 1860). 

     In 1764, in many areas the colonial people whose livelihoods depended on agriculture were in need of relief from their British overlords. This was due to a significant drought that occurred from 1758 onward. Credit in that day was not unheard of and it could endanger the small independent farmer. It was not unusual for a creditor to claim that debts had not been properly paid and to confiscate a greater sum than the original debt. This was known as usury in that day but judges consistently ruled in favor of moneyed interests. Generally, the result was that the farmer could not rely on the current laws and judges, and as a result it would endanger his family’s subsistence (Sadlier, 2012). 

     The scare of economic disaster at the hands of those in authority, those favored by the British, stirred growing despair in those such as Piedmont, Carolina agrarians. The situation was exacerbated by the disparities between coastal and western populations because of differences in devout religious beliefs. Moreover, the conflict was also spawned by this mistreatment combined with unjust taxation, which was a violation of their rights as British subjects. This propelled the men to rebel and commit acts of revolution (Sadlier, 2012).    

     Both autonomous self-government and the idea of communism, as far as inspiring revolution, were not novel ideas. However, it was unprecedented that using these models would lead to victory. The American Revolution was started officially in 1776, a year that many people casually familiar with history believe was the year that the war ended with an American victory, yet in reality it did not end in victory for the patriots until 1873. America was once again challenged by the British in 1882. The Brits, in fact, burned down the first White House.  

     The Russian Revolution was not a spontaneous effort either. Russia was infected with anarchy and revolution as far back as 1905. Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin served as Prime Minister and the frontrunner of the third Duma, from 1906 to 1911 after a weak revolution in the government echelons. His tenure was marked the determination to counter revolutionary groups and by the implementation of noteworthy agricultural restructurings because of the angered anarchists and communists and their noteworthy threats to the government. The power of the Czar in Russia was being maintained by the skin of its teeth (Hosking, 2001). 

     Stolypin was assassinated by a gunman in Kiev, Ukraine while attending an opera in 1911, after recently stepping down from the government. Russia was divided by many terrorist groups hoping to overturn the government. It would be a long six years for the final victory to be a realized by the Bolsheviks. 

     Meanwhile, a communist revolutionary and soon to be leader of the Union of the Soviet’s Socialist Republic (USSR), Vladimir Lenin, remained in exile in Germany. He was hoping to make his way back to Russia as the revolutionary effort was approaching the apex of the socialist uprising. So he promised the Kaiser that if the Germans would assist him in secretly returning to Russia, the soon to be in power Soviets would drop out of the Great War as a quid pro quo. (Hosking, 2001). 

     At the same time, as the communist revolution was creeping towards becoming a reality in Russia, women were rising up and endeavoring  to make gains toward universal suffrage in the United States. In Czarist Russia, the denial of enfranchisement on behalf of its people evoked a picture of medieval barbarism. Progressivism in America, however, played a prominent role in foreign relations during this period and was on the move toward liberalizing society (Smith, 1995). The fact that women in America did not attain the right to vote until much later, yet the communists in Russia made women’s right of suffrage a significant tenant of their aims in revolutionizing Russia, is quite shameful. 

     America, as a free society, currently and foundationally espouses the rights of the people and the press to criticize the representative government in Washington. This has been challenged by many “sedition laws” after wars or in the threat of war, although they are systematically repealed by new administrations voted in by the people by way of the popular vote (McCullough, 2001).   
     Freedom of the press is practiced daily by various newspapers, magazines, and the internet. These civil liberties were attained after the revolution was won, and the constitution was written. President John Adams issued sedition laws that were passed by the Federalist Party in 1798 in light of an undeclared and short naval war with revolutionary France, called the Quasi War (McCullough, 2001). 

     Paul Pirie, in this particular year, wrote a piece in the Washington Post criticizing the American Revolution, and its “flaws:” 

“The new republic started advancing life and liberty by keeping a substantial part of its population enslaved. (This, at least, proves the frequent British put-down that Americans don't have a sense of irony.) By contrast, in British-controlled Canada, the abolition of slavery began almost 20 years before the War of 1812, sometimes called America's "Second Revolution.” A good number of free blacks fought with the British against the United States in that conflict, even participating in the burning of Washington. And if, as some scholars argue, the Civil War was the unfinished business of the American Revolution, then Americans - like the Russians - paid a very high human cost for their revolutions” (Pirie, 2013). 

     Pirie is correct by today’s standards; however, eighteenth century mindsets were not as progressive. Many people of the day genuinely believed that African Americans “needed” the white man’s guidance. Not all slave owners treated their slave cruelly, but treated them as children and valuable assets. As a matter of fact, Thomas Jefferson, who fathered what was then called “mulattoes,” a term describing half-black and half-white offspring (a word considered offensive today), in later life, freed most his slaves in France (Ching, 2009). 

   As concerning the plight of freedom for the American slaves, it is a little known fact that Abraham Lincoln, as president, emancipated the slave population, but preferred to send them back to Africa; but many African Americans did not want to go there. At that time in history, the black population was born in America and they considered it home. Nevertheless, many of them were sent to western Africa where they set up their own colony called Liberia (Benjamin, 2001).    

     A historiographical notion today portrays post-Soviet Russia as having institutional, generational and intellectual conflict. The young are living in a pseudo-democracy, yet the curriculum in most universities in Russia is dominated by archaic revolutionary idealism. The old guard continues to dominate the choice of research topics and the circulation of resources, as well as administering graduation degrees (Kolonitskii, 2009). 

     This is not unlike many major universities in the United States currently. There are political taboos in both countries’ academia (Kolonitskii, 2009). It is amazing that those on the left are so adamant about resurrecting dead political systems such as socialism and communism which are proven failures with such affectionate doting as demonstrated the radical, although camouflaged as a mere democratic ideologue, Saul Alinsky. 

     In the final part of the American patriot’s efforts to push the British out of America, centuries ago, a very important and strategic location for them was the Chesapeake Bay, not just for trade purposes, but as a significant supply line between Philadelphia and the southern colonies. These were factors that were essential to General George Washington’s warring efforts, along with the fact that Eastern Shore farmers supplied food for his army. If the British had cut off supplies and communications to the region, perhaps they could have suppressed the rebellion (Neville, 2009). The life of the war that initially began after the Boston Massacre, in which only five Americans were killed, was finally coming to a head; giving the Americans the hope of an eventual victory for Washington’s originally ragtag army. 

     When total revolution in Russia was complete, the revolutionaries viewed themselves as intellectuals and the dethroned ruling class as a group of expendable and non-progressive indulgers. In the aftermath, there was not only a governmental revolution in Russia, but a scientific one as well. No patrons were more willing to support scientific breakthroughs than the Bolsheviks (Krementsov, 2006). 

     Why would the communists want scientific knowledge? It was because, as Francis Bacon once wrote, “knowledge is power!” In just twenty years, the Soviet scientists and the communist hierarchy mutually turned Russia from a modest province into a great center of learning in the world. They owned the scientific movement until the capitalist nations caught up and surpassed them (Krementsov, 2006). The same is true in the great space race, decades later. 

     The Soviet Union and the United States both attained their desired ends, and their ideologies could only be described as juxtaposition of intents and purposes for mankind in both countries. America chose an egalitarian society that espoused freedom. The Union of the Soviet Socialist Union also attained an egalitarian society as well, where everyone was equally oppressed. Yet both were birthed by a reaction of resistance to the established order of subjection. One by a monarchy from a foreign nation, and one by a basic monarchy with total power over haves and have not’s. One won independence, yet both won a revolution. 

     It is self-evident that when people of a nation are pushed up against a wall by either a foreign power or a less than a benevolent domestic government, they tend to up rise and seek a new form of government that is beneficial to the people as a whole, such as what happened in the Russian and American revolutions.     
       
    
          
References 
Benjiman, T., Hall, T., & Rutherford, D., (2001). The Atlantic World in the Age of Empire. 
     Wadsworth, Cenagae Learning, Belmont, CA. 
Ching, J. (2009). Thomas Jefferson, DK Publishing, New York, NY. 
Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th Edition (2013). Russian Revolution, p. 1-3. 
     Retrieved from: FindIt@AU. 
Draper, T. (1996). A Struggle for Power. Random House, New York, NY. 
Durant, W.(1957). The Story of Civilization: The Reformation. MJF Books, NY, New York. 
Hosking, G. (2001). Russia and the Russians. Belknap Harvard, Boston, MA. 
Krementsov, N. (2006). Big Revolution, Little Revolution: Science and Politics in Bolshevik 
     Russia. Social Research, 73(4), 1173-1204. 
Locke, J. (1860). http://www.brainyquotes.com.           
Marx, K. (1843) A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. 
     CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, New York, NY. 
McCullough, D. (2001). John Adams. Simon and Shuster, New York, NY. 
Neville, B. (2009). For God, King, and Country: Loyalism on the Eastern Shore of Maryland 
     During the American Revolution. International Social Science Review, 84(3/4), 135-156. 
     Retrieved from: FindIt@AU. 
O’Sullivan, J. (2009). Revolutionary Types. National Review, 61(13), 27-29. Retrieved from: 
     FindIt@AU. 
Pirie, P. (2013, July 4). The American Revolution was a flop. The Washington Post. 
     Retrieved from: FindIt@AU. 
Sadlier, S. (2012). Prelude to the American Revolution? The War of Regulation: A 
     Revolutionary Reaction for Reform. History Teacher, 46(1), 97-126. Retrieved from: 
     FindIt@AU. 
Smith, S. (1995). From Relief to Revolution: American Women and the Russian- 
     American Relationship, 1890-1917. Diplomatic History, 19(4), 601-617. Retrieved from: 
     FindIt@AU. 
  
  
 

Consequences of WWII

World War Two could arguably be the most significant source of both worthy and contemptible changes to the world that grew to fruition after the war, and continue to influence our global civilization today. Many aspects of life have been affected. One of the most obvious is the way diplomacy is carried out currently by a collective body of Ambassadors that come from different nations that consider world affairs inside the United Nations building in New York. However, advancements in areas like science, and especially space exploration, are not commonly recognized by ordinary people to be significant contributions from the war and its aftermath. The First World War was considered “the war to end all wars;” so what can be said about World War Two? The Second World War was expressly responsible for many noteworthy consequences and influences in our world such as the Cold War, enhancements in scientific research, and the end of colonialism. 

     As World War Two was being fought by Germany and her allies against basically just the British, the Russians and the Nazis made a deal: the Soviets would remain neutral in the war with the quid pro quo of attaining half of Poland’s territory when it was divided up between the two powers. Hitler wanted more lebensraum, and Stalin wanted new territory in the west to protect his nation from invasion. This agreement was called the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. However, in 1941, the Nazis reneged on their agreement and invaded Russia. This created a situation where Russia found herself at war. Russia later took advantage of this by conquering East and Central countries in Europe, including all of Poland. This was the birth of the Cold War. These territories would remain in the Soviet’s hands until 1990, when Soviet Empire collapsed (Plowright, 2007). 

     The Western half of Europe was now left to the Allies, especially as they occupied surrendered Germany, which was diced up into four quarters between the United States, Britain, France, and the Soviet Union. In succeeding years, Germany became merely divided into two separate nations with the Western portion being overseen by the United States and the East by the Russians. The Soviets, after “liberating” East and Central Europe, set up puppet regimes in these nation-states. The city of Berlin was also divided east and west by the superpowers, and in 1961 it was surrounded and split by an impenetrable wall of two different ideologies. One must wonder had the Second World War not have been fought would there have been a Cold War? Clearly, the consequences of World War Two brought about the possibility for war in Europe that lasted for seventy years. (Plowright, 2007). 

     The Cold War was basically a continuation of World War Two in which two former allied countries, the United States and the Soviet Union, fought an “ideological war” around the globe. This escalated with regional battles later which included Korea, Viet Nam, and various countries in Africa, where both were trying to construct spheres of influence, although the two ensuing superpowers never fought each other directly. 

     There are those who maintain that the reason that the atom bombs were dropped on Japan was because the United States government was leery of Russia occupying it if they had the chance to intervene. It was at this point in the war that the Western powers were realizing that the Soviets had ulterior motives. It is possible to surmise that the Soviets benefitted from the war more than any other country. Unlike the West, Stalin “purged” politicians and government personnel once the Russians “liberated” a nation from the Nazis. Had Roosevelt not been so drained by illness shortly before he died, perhaps the Americans would have been tougher on Stalin during the Yalta Conference (Plowright, 2007). 

      A few years later, the “propaganda war” began with worldwide radio transmissions that originated during the world conflict and were “beefed up” after it. The United States began broadcasting all over the world via the Voice of America, and the Soviets counteracted with Radio Moscow. Both countries were just as guilty about jamming each other’s signals in hopes of preventing their inhabitants from hearing these stations. The British Broadcast Corporation, known as the BBC, had their part to play in this ideological battle as well. 

     At the beginning of the Second World War, amateur radio operators, or hams, were “silenced” by the American government in the United States, and their radio equipment was confiscated, right after the Pearl Harbor attack by the Japanese. Many hams joined the military and used their communication prowess to benefit “Uncle Sam.” After the war was over, the radio transmission blackout ended and amateur radio became a national resource as a reward for their defense of the nation, in gratitude for their contributions during the war. The fraternity of amateur radio still exists to this day; however, its members are not as numerous as in the past, due to the advent of the Internet (Bartlett, 2008). 

     The Voice of America, the BBC, and the Voice of Russia no longer transmit their stations over shortwave radio; they have embraced the Internet revolution and you can now only listen to them online. As a licensed amateur radio operator myself, I have personally witnessed the thawing of the Cold War over the airwaves. Once I received my license in the early 1980’s, I communicated with many hams behind the Iron Curtain. Their conversations were brief, impersonal, and usually just an exchange of name, location, and signal strength. It would take as long as two years to receive a communication confirmation or QSL card, in the mail. After the Cold War thawed, it was startling to discover how much English the Russian stations had learned, and that you could now actually carry on a normal conversation with them!     

     Now that the Cold War is over, Russia has embraced capitalism along with her other former satellite countries. Yet they still have not learned all the ways of democracy as Vladimir Putin, Russia’s President, has been accused of megalomania by his own people as a result of broadcast stations being shut down for ridiculing him, and various Russian citizens going to jail for similar violations. While Russia is experimenting with capitalism, America seems to be turning left and subtly embracing certain aspects of socialism. This is quite ironic considering their two conflicting goals during the Cold War. The two nations, although on lukewarm friendly terms, still distrust each other, and are still trying to compete as superpowers with one another in a post-Cold War world.  

                  
      Science is another avenue of breakthroughs during the Second World War that have had major significance in today’s world. One of the most important discoveries in science during the period of the war would have been that of nuclear power, which both the United States and the Soviet Union attained. This made the world more dangerous of course, but there are peaceful uses of this new technology as well, especially in commercial power. 

     Over the past years, more than 40 countries that do not have nuclear power have expressed interest in acquiring it to address their future energy needs. Nuclear reactors do not emit carbon dioxide to produce electricity because the fuel is uranium-based. With all of the discourse about global warming this could be harnessed for the good of all mankind. Totally safe nuclear power is still a dream, but potentially a much more realistic one than carbon capture and storage. Nuclear power could offer a complete decarbonisation of the world’s electricity supply (Lynas, 2008). Nuclear energy is one technology invented in World War Two that has positive possibilities to enhance life as we know it. We just need more research and to learn from our mistakes such as Chernobyl and Fukushima. Nuclear medicine is another use for this technology, and once freed of the dangers, it can be implemented to save lives! 

     Other more significant scientific breakthroughs have their origins in World War Two. In the history of science, World War Two is enshrined as the “scientist’s war” and was the start of a new partnership between the governments and academic researchers, especially in the United States. The view that sciences won the war through medical contributions such as penicillin have been remarkably persistent and a focus of historical debate. Leading scientists became deeply involved with the war effort as new drugs found their way into the battlefield (Rasmussen, 2011). 

     Penicillin, as mentioned above, especially was a “lifesaver.” Sulfa drugs were also invented at this time and dispensed on the battlefield to fight infection in wounds. Amphetamines were a new drug at the time of the war and barely researched. That the topic of Allied amphetamine use has received little historical attention is surprising given that amphetamine abuse has been a significant problem ever since the war. This was brought to light with the information that both the Allies and the Axis soldiers were prescribed these drugs to make them fiercer in battle and to fight sleep (Rasmussen, 2011). 

     Many different scientific breakthroughs in medicine were created out of necessity on the battlefields of World War Two. It is a sad fact that the cruel experiments done on Jewish “specimens” at the hands of the Nazis benefited modern science and the research in medical science, much to ones’ disgust. Resources for genetic research increased during World War Two. The experiments carried out by the evil doctor, Josef Mengele, in the Auschwitz concentration camp were among the most radical demonstrations of genetic research which established criteria that differentiated inherent diseases from acquired diseases. His investigations addressed questions such as the genetics of specific proteins protecting against infections, or the heredity of eye color. Mengele correlated experimental data gained from examination of living people, most commonly twins, with biochemical analyses done after they had been killed. Tissue samples were sent to the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology. In the context of unlimited access to unconsenting people who were defined as “biologically inferior,” the research program was accompanied by a complete disregard for the victims, and many cruelties ensued. Healthy prisoners were given injections from the festering tissues of other inmates who had wound infections. Many of these experiments, though cruelly conducted on Jews, benefited medical science by finding better remedies for treating open wounds acquired on the battlefield. There is no denying that genetic research especially was greatly enhanced by these morbid experiments, and medical science benefitted even after the war (Roelcke, 2004). 

     The end of World War Two and the Cold War brought about technology which eventually ignited the space race between Russia and America. The Nazis were close to creating intercontinental ballistic missiles, yet they were defeated before such breakthroughs came to completion. Many ex-Nazi rocket scientists sought safe haven in the United States, whose government eagerly welcomed them and swiftly put them to work. There was even a government recruitment program, code-named “Operation Paperclip”, which covered up the Nazi activities of some scientists so they could legally emigrate and work in the United States (Operation Paperclip, 2013). One such scientist, Wernher von Braun was an essential contributor to the Apollo missions to the Moon. World War Two could have ended much differently if these scientists had managed to complete the technologies they envisioned while working on Germany’s behalf.      

  
     Colonialism was another aspect of the world that was greatly affected by the war and it instigated the slow process of worldwide decolonization. The war hastened a change in the empirical outlook of Europe. The British especially were transformed by the war into second place, in back of the United States, as the world’s most prosperous superpower by the war’s end. The old axiom: “the sun never sets on the British empire” was accurate in its boast. England enjoyed world dominancy until World War Two when many of her possessions were lost to the Germans and the Japanese. However, many other countries such as India that were not part of the war simply wanted to break away from dominance by the British. 

     The French also lost “possessions” in Southeast Asia. After the war, the Suez Canal crisis of 1956 acted as the catalyst for expediting disengagement in Africa for both Britain and France (Kissinger, 1994). Yet the Soviet Union, at war’s end, was successful in controlling the eastern European nations it defeated. Other western European nations were in decline, or weakening and seeking political refuge from the United States. To some degree, the United States became theoretically empirical while overseeing West Germany and Japan-- after their defeat in the war there was a concern that they could possibly rise up again. This oversight was also to protect them. Because of the emergence of the Cold War, it was imperative to take such action since the Soviet Union had gained more influence than that it had held under the czars and regained the territory it had lost as a result of World War One and the Communist revolution (Carnes, 2008). It was clear that Stalin had an addiction to gaining more territory, and a weakened West Germany and Japan would have been very vulnerable.   

     The Japanese were tightly controlled by America, and their armed forces were not allowed autonomy nor were the West German’s. Decolonization, or the overthrow of Europe’s political dominion over the peoples of non-Europe, is a very important phenomenon of the mid-twentieth century. The demise of European empires and the emergence of Afro-Asian states ended the European world system, and ushered in the promise of what may be described as a global international system (Holland, 1985). As for the Soviet Union, it lost its empirical hold on East and Central Europe after its economy and its chokehold on the people collapsed. 

     In John Springhall’s book, “Decolonization Since 1945: The Collapse of European Overseas Empires,” he tells how he grew up in London during the 1950s. He states that he attended a church Sunday school which was collecting funds to help support British missionaries in Nigeria, and how as a result, a lifelong interest in the overseas activities of the dwindling Empire arose. The author goes on to describe the racist assumptions of the British mindset concerning the possibility of the African nations being not capable of ruling themselves. He goes on to explain that the decline since World War Two of empires or governments of dependencies has caused them to dwindle to a mere 0.1 percent of the current world population (Springhall, 2001). 

     The present-day contempt for any developed nation that would physically occupy and colonize another territory overseas, simply because it has the power and resources to do so, says this has become unacceptable in international opinion. This can be indirectly attributed to reactionary attitudes that developed during World War Two, after Hitler and Stalin collected empires for themselves with disregard, or malice for their indigenous populations (Springhall, 2001). 

     Today imperialism is almost impossible as the United Nations, which was envisioned right after the war to keep peace as best as it could between all nations, would intervene if a single country attempted to colonize another nation. A good example of this was the reaction by the world community when Iraq invaded and occupied Kuwait. The world after the Cold War was and is now destabilized. The Soviet Union and the United States had a monopoly on atomic weapons in a bi-polar world of East and West. Today the Soviet Empire no longer exists and former Communist, independent states still have access to nuclear weaponry, and they are more likely to be used by some of these breakaway countries than the former Soviets. The world in which we live today, because of rapid globalization, needs a new world order. Many modern nations are clambering to find a place in the global reality of the world today (Kissinger, 1994). 

     The world is a far different place than it was during World War Two. There would be no D-Day surprise in wartime today because of the location devices such as satellite. These locating systems were scientifically envisioned during World War Two; they were later developed during the Cold War and they kept both sides in check. People of current times are living longer due to scientific breakthroughs in medicines that were created during the war for use on the battlefields. Today, most nations of the world celebrate their own autonomy, and are not having to deal with colonizers. The Second World War was responsible for these noteworthy consequences and influences in our world after the war, changes such as the Cold War, enhancements in scientific research, and the end of colonialism. 
  
  
References 
Bartlett, R. (2008). The World of Ham Radio, 1910-1950: A Social History. Journal of 
     Popular Culture, 41(5), 880-881. Retrieved from: Ashford library via EBSCOhost. 
Holland, R.F.(1985). European Decolonization 1918-1981: An Introductory Survey. 
     Blackwell Publishing, NY, New York. 
Kissinger, H. (1994) Diplomacy. Simon and Schuster, NY, New York. 
Lynas, M. (2008). How Nuclear Power Can Save the Planet. New Statesman Ltd., 137(4910), 
     24-25. Retrieved from: Ashford library via EBSCOhost. 
Operation Paperclip (2013). Retrieved from: www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org. 
Plowright, J. (2007) The Causes, Course, and Outcomes of World War Two. Palgrave Mcmillian, 
     NY, New York. 
Rasmussen, N. (2011). Medical Science and the Military Use of Amphetamines During WWII. 
     Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 42(2), 205-233. Retrieved from: Ashford library via 
     EBSCOhost. 
Roelcke, V.(2004). Nazi Medicine and Research on Human Beings. Lancet Supplement, 
     Vol. 364, 6-7. Retrieved from: Ashford library via EBSCOhost. 
Springhall, J. (2001). Decolonization Since 1945: The Collapse of European Overseas Empires.] 
     University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida. 
  
    
   

The Origins of Beowolf

The story of Beowulf was first an oral pagan tale that progressed though time into an iconic written Christian poem. There are those who contend that it is more fittingly a pagan piece of literature. They maintain that it was simply “hijacked” by the early Catholic Church much like many pagan celebrations such as Easter and Christmas, which were important pagan festivities at one time. It is true that they used many primitive ideas to further the Christian faith. Although it is true that the story of Beowulf may have originated as an oral pagan tale, after centuries of revisions and finally being committed to writing, today it stands as an epic tale that is solely indicative and more fitting of a Christian perspective. 

     “For well over a century, scholars have puzzled over the question of whether Beowulf is a Christian poem with pagan overtones or a pagan poem with a Christian overlay,” researcher Richard Bodek states. J.R.R. Tolkien, the author of the famed story, The Lord of the Rings, said that it is a Christian poem that reflects on the pre-Christian past (Bodek, 2004). Those arguments will more than likely never be settled with certainty. The period was a simple one, politically. When Beowulf was originated as a verbal tale, the pagan society consisted of Lords and the thanes who served them. By the time it was penned, society was mostly Christianized.   

     It is the purpose of this dissertation to argue that Beowulf, though once a pagan poem, stands today as a completely Christianized epic that has a message that magnifies the ethic of Jesus Christ in avenging evil in the world. The linage of the evil Grendel is said in the poem to belong to the decadence of Cain, who murdered his brother Abel over jealousy of Abel’s being favored by God. God, however, gave Cain a “mark” so that no one would kill him or his descendants. This presents a contradiction to the story but adds a bit of mystery. Regardless of this discrepancy, Grendel is clearly the essence of evil.        

 
     Much of the ancient world described in Beowulf is still intact. Europe, in spite of its many wars, has successfully stayed integral. The Danish and Finnish people have flourished down through history as Denmark and Finland are still existing countries today. Yet, Geatland, once an existing European expanse is now a part of Sweden called Gotland (www.ancientworlds.net, 2015). Much of the ancient settings of Europe are still present and its history of thousands of years is still accessible. Many religions in this region have come and gone.  

   
     The pre-Christian era in Europe before the fourth century was filled with many differing clannish religious groups. There was no cohesive organization that Europeans as a whole submitted too. Much of pagan Europe was solidified politically by the Roman Empire. It did not matter what you believed in as long as you paid tribute to the Roman government and its leaders. If you were obedient you were in good stead. But if you were not, there were provisions made for punishment.   

     Christians in that period were largely persecuted for paying homage in totality to their God, but not the Roman gods or Caesar. Many of them were martyred in gruesome ways. However, the Roman leader Constantine was converted to Christianity in the fourth century, and Christianity became the state recognized religion. Much of paganism was outlawed and many festivals and prior pagan religious customs were “Christianized.” 

     Christianity has always been known as a religion that seemed to adapt to the cultures it became a part of, yet Christians remained focused when considering their main tenets. Even the Apostil Paul stated, “When in Rome do as the Romans.” With this concept, much of the largely oral pagan literature was converted to fit with the Christian mindset. Such was the case with the oral tale called Beowulf. Although the name of Jesus is not mentioned in the historical tale, the Christian God is made central in the story. The author who dictated the story into the written form we possess today fully intended to turn the story into one with a Christian moral. Such was the case with many stories besides the poem Beowulf. 

     Beowulf was more than likely first told around twelve hundred years ago. Christianity was the state church then yet many pagans still hung on to the old ways. The story was centuries later committed to print; by that time most of Europe practiced at least a basic form of Christianity presided over by the clergy. Literature had a novel purpose in spreading the Gospel. It is believed that the author who penned the story was a Christian who changed certain elements of the story from its earlier pagan format, and gave it a theme that was more acceptable to the times (Greenblatt et al, 2012). 

     We do not have possession of the entire poem because some of it was burned in a house fire sometime after the sixteenth century; along with other lesser known manuscripts that were totally destroyed (Greenblatt et al, 2012). It is surprising that there were no other copies of these historic pieces of literature. So Beowulf is missing some of its content which renders it ambiguous as to its total message. It is assumed, however, that it is totally representative of Christian thought and has been transformed from its pagan roots. 

     That said, many modern defenders of paganism maintain that the story is more pagan than Christian in its message even today. Some groups currently are reaching back to paganism in search of an alternative to Christianity, whether out of curiosity or rebellion against mainstream society. Such groups attempt to resurrect old religions in the name of enthusiasm for medieval history. One such group called the Society for Creative Anachronism celebrates paganism in a romantic approach to the old ways (www.sca.org, 2015). Although some of these groups are popular, they are not as serious a source for historical fact finding as they claim to be. These groups are literally trying to revive paganism and liken stories such as Beowulf as indicative to their beliefs. 

     Many literary critics argue that the Christian message in Beowulf is vague and ambiguous. They reason it as ridiculous to attempt to Christianize such a pagan message without any references to Christian tenants in the story, and deem it as perverting early Germanic literature (Cain, 1997). This particular critic fails to understand that many Christian hymns miss the mark when alluding to Christian theological points as well, yet they remain iconic throughout the ages and can be instrumental in leading one to faith. In fact, much of the hymns’ melodies themselves were in fact beer-drinking bar songs of long ago. Just because Beowulf had pagan origins does not mean it cannot be used as a Christian message. What is unique about Christianity is that it is one of the only religions that do not depend on societal models. It transcends society. 

     The concepts of good and evil are prevalent in Beowulf. Grendel is the presence of evil and destruction, yet there is no mention of his likeness (Kim, 2005). This gives him an almost demonic presence. He is indicative of the devil and Beowulf, the hero, is easily representative of Christ. The village Heorot, which translates into heart, is the embodiment of Christ’s body, or the believing church. This is what is to be supposed by a post-pagan people. One wonders what the story’s moral was before its Christian rebirth. People who read or heard the poem after the advent of the Church most likely believed it originated as a Christian story. But many people today are attempting to “re-paganize” it. 

     That the story has a tragic ending of the main character does not disqualify it as having a Christian moral. But, if one thinks of Beowulf as Christ, then why is he killed in battle toward the end and the Geatish tribe destroyed? (Thayer, 2008). This is often asked by the critics and pagan advocates who maintain that Beowulf has too much of a negative narrative to be a Christian message. They argue that if Christianity is to have any credibility as a religion, it must offer a reward of success to its believers (Moorman, 1967). 

     Christianity itself is a story about persecution and death. Many of the early saints suffered for their beliefs and much of the Bible argues, “The first shall be last, and the last shall be first.” This idea conflicts with worldly, ambitious aspiration… Christ could be looked upon to be a failure for being crucified, yet his story finishes with his resurrection. The main mantra of the faith is “Blessed are those who have not seen yet still believe.” Christianity is contrary to secular success. 

     In the final part of Beowulf, Grendel is killed and Hrothgar is avenged for those he lost at the hand of the evil one. So, Beowulf can still be used to edify believers with the overall theme of good versus evil. Beowulf’s revision into a Christian tale draws largely from the Biblical Old Testament story of David and Goliath. Although not related to Cain, Goliath the giant Philistine and possible member of the Nephilim, represents the same evil obstacle to God’s good. David, a mere boy who would be King, is the only Israelite who was willing to challenge him to the death with only a slingshot in hand. Goliath and his army scoff as David winds up his weapon, yet he slings it straight in between the giant’s eyes and kills him instantly. Goliath’s army flees as David beheads him. This story perhaps influenced the writer of Beowulf, as they are closely synonymous to each other. Might it be possible that the story could very well have evolved orally from the Biblical account by the written author who adopted Christianity? 

     No one knows whether this facet of the story was conceived and written into the pagan tale before alteration. It is a good guess that much of the original story is still intact; the idea of avenging the death of a member of a clan was and is universal. This is indicative of the verse, “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth,” in the Old Testament of the Bible (Exodus 21:24, King James Version). 

     In all societies there is a reprisal for taking the life of another human being. This is prevalent in Beowulf’s story. A man had a moral duty to avenge his kinsmen’s death whether by challenge and a fight to the death, or by exacting a payment, or wergild as it was called, from the person responsible (Greenblatt et al, 2012). Either way, the debt was paid in full and the matter was no longer brought up between the party’s families.   

     Starting on line 1384, Beowulf tells Hrothgar “It is always better to avenge dear ones than to indulge in mourning.” (Greenblatt, 2012). Some might suggest that this notion is contradictory to Christian theology that argues if one is struck on the face, “to turn the other cheek.” Yet, no one will argue that if a loved one is harmed, it is natural to defend them. The idea of protecting loved ones is indisputably a Christian concept. There is no scripture in the Bible that repudiates it. If one reads the book of Revelation, Christ makes clear he will avenge his believers by destroying Satan after his second coming. 

     Among the opinions of many scholars about Beowulf’s character as being untarnished from worldliness and indicative of all things heavenly, there are those critiques who accuse the main character guilty of avarice. Beowulf is said to fight the dragon for the pure lust for his treasure. The impurity of his motives costs him his life in the end of the poem. Despite Hogarth’s warning, Beowulf forgets that God is the ultimate gift giver. Along with avarice Beowulf falls prey to vainglories and pride (Marshall, 2010). 

     To discount the Christian message of the story because of the faults of the main character is to say that God cannot use the sinner in his scope of things larger than mortal life. To suggest this is to say that God’s grace is not sufficient. Christ himself was the only human able to live in immaculate perfection according to Christian doctrine. This in itself does not discount the Christian theme of Beowulf. The fact that the main character had flaws makes the story more believable and more conducive to the Christian message that all life is redeemable no matter how evil. Beowulf was not necessarily evil, yet he did suffer from pride which brought an end to his life. He falsely believed he was invincible, but was humbled when he realized he was dying. He removed a gold collar and handed it to a young thane who was not his son, but said starting on line 2013, “You are the last of us, the only one left of the Waegmundings. Fate has swept us away, sent my whole brave highborn clan to their final doom. Now I must follow them.” Upon his pending death he realized the sin of his pride and confessed it (Greenblatt, 2012).  

           
     Many tales follow Beowulf’s genre of chivalry and soldiering for the good of mankind such as stories like Ivanhoe, and the contemporary movie’s storyline of Braveheart. Although many today are unfamiliar with Beowulf unless they have to read it in high school and college, the theme is very well known. Its subject is imitated many times throughout historical literature. Perhaps in its infancy it was a combination of oral tales that merged into one. This is very possible, considering it was passed down from generation to generation. 

     So, we have explored two different viewpoints of the epic poem, both its Christian and Pagan nuances. Both religious systems have their monsters. It is thought that Grendel is a monster or dragon. It is possible that the written author used such a beast to lure pagans to his Christian epic. However, if one reads the Jewish/Christian texts we will find monsters such as the Nephilim, giants that were the offspring of angels and humans. One of these could have been Goliath as mentioned above. 

     Since nobody knows who the author was or anything about him, nobody can rightly state his religious intentions in writing his poem. Europe around the time of his written allegory was considered a Christian domain, what was left of the Old Roman Empire. Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the dying empire. Dubbed “Christiandom,” it was not only legal it was now mandatory to practice Christian “customs” and ways of doing things. Perhaps the author was not a heart and soul Christian, but was orally reciting a story in a way that was acceptable at that time. Many pockets of pagans secretly still practiced their rituals, however. 

     Perhaps Beowulf started out being an oral story that began one day by a fire among children and adults. It might have gone through many years of orally evolving until one day someone wrote it down, and then many scribes rewrote it and rewrote it some more until it made it to the Christian era where it took on different connotations. Upon considering the translation we have today, we have deduced that the story depicts its hero Beowulf as Christ and Grendel as the devil himself; in addition, Beowulf’s triumph over Grendel could represent the final battle of Armageddon between Satan and Christ in the book of Revelation of the Bible. 

     However, it was not until Christianity gripped Europe tightly, that its moral was most probably added to it. Without the theme of good versus evil it would have been and would have remained just a mediocre story. It is the spine of the story with which it could not live without. Its moral is what makes it stand out as an epic piece of literature. Much of the world is different today than when it was penned, we live in a post-Christian society. Many who read Beowulf may not catch the moral its written author meant to intimate. 

     However, there are those, familiar with the Holy Scriptures, who will be quick to notice the likeness of the two pieces of literature: the Bible and Beowulf. For it is evident that the author who penned Beowulf was motivated by the Holy Scriptures, and it was his purpose to use the story to spread the Gospel. Although it is true that the story of Beowulf may have originated as an oral pagan tale whose authorship we will never know, after centuries of revisions and finally being committed to writing, today it stands as an epic tale that is solely indicative and more fitting of a Christian perspective. 
           
         References 
www.ancientworlds.net 
Bodek, R. (2004). Beowulf. The Explicator, 62(3), 130-132. Retrieved from: Ashford Library via 
     FindIt@AU. 
Cain, C. (1997). Beowulf, the Old Testament, and the Regula Fidei. Renascence, 49(4), 226-   
     240. Retrieved from: Ashford Library via FindIt@AU. 
Greenblatt, S., et al (Eds.)(2012). The Norton Anthology of English Literature (9th ed., Vol.1). 
      New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. 
Kim, S. (2005). “As I Once Did With Grendel”: Boasting and Nostalgia in Beowulf. 
     Modern Philology, 103(1), 4-27. Retrieved from: Ashford Library via FindIt@AU. 
Marshall, J. (2010). Goldgyfan or Goldwlance: A Christian Apology for Beowulf and Treasure. 
     Studies in Philology, 107(1), 1-24. Retrieved from: Ashford Library via FindIt@AU. 
Moorman, C. (1967). The Essential Paganism of Beowulf. Modern Language Quarterly, 
     28(1), 3-19. Retrieved from: Ashford Library via FindIt@AU.

The Universe and Everything Else

I met up with an old dear friend whom I've always beheld with much respect and love, in a coffeeshop recently. He was once a devout Christian, but now a disenchanted "atheist." We had a great challenging, but friendly three hour discussion about our differing worldviews. He pointed out that he once had all of the "easy answers," but now found solace in total disbelief. While pointing out to him that he simply traded the heads of easy answers by clinging to atheism, I asked him if he estimated the big bang theory to be valid in that everything in existence came from an explosion originating from out of nothing. He answered in the affirmative. So I challenged him with a less conventional possibility that the universe, as we know it, could very well, possibly consist of one ripe and juicy apple; and that all life, including us, exists in the form of mere molecules and germs upon it. However, there are many other insignificant apples that exist hanging upon this one multi-universal tree of life. Someday, in a matter of ions of time to come, the great cosmic orchard keeper will spy our particular little apple, pluck it, and nonchalantly take a big bite out of it; and it will be all over as far as life for our kind as we know it, forever! He was speechless in consideration. I knew then that that philosophy class in college was not a waste of time, and good for something after all...

Body Modification

According to Enid Schildkrout’s 2001 article, “Body Art as Visual Language,”body modification is as old as mankind and there was never a society that has not engaged in it (Hirschberg & Hirshberg, 2012). Many societies believe they are free of such eccentric public activities, yet even in western cultures people from all “normal” walks of life are involved in personal expression, such as body art. The way a person dresses is considered a form of self-expression. Nobody is exempt! Whether through body piercing, tattooing, makeup, head shaping, or various hair changes, body modifications are quite normal and celebrated traditions all over the world. 

     In 1978, when I was only 20 years old, I decided to have rhinoplasty, or a “nose job.” I was convinced that I had a horrible and disgusting looking big nose. Little did I know, I was suffering with body dysmorphic disorder, which is as common today as obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). People with this condition exhibit excessive concerns about perceived defects in their appearance, but really have a distorted thinking disorder instead. They are often convinced that their disgust for their physical appearance is shared by their peer groups. They often engage in a classic ritual of constant mirror checking. The focus of disgust on certain body parts vary with each sufferer. Some believe they are fat when they are a normal weight for their height and age (Buhlmann et al, 2011). 

     As for my own disorder, after I had the surgery I was convinced that I was even more of a freak. Although, a great proportion of people who have plastic surgery are very happy with their results and were of sound mind before they altered a part of their body. Every one of us alters the way we look every day, and something as mundane as modifying our usual way of wearing our hair is considered acceptable by nearly every one. However, some people radically alter their bodies with piercings and tattoos, which, up until recently was frowned upon in American culture. One must wonder why that was. 

     The 1960’s, in the western world, brought radical changes in the norms of society. The “British invasion” in popular music, first ushered in by the band The Beatles, brought long hair for men with it. The establishment was taken aback and teenagers were ostracized by their parents for growing out their hair longer. I remember as a youth viewing a billboard that read: “Keep America Beautiful, Get a Haircut!” And just when longhair became the norm, British bands once again invaded America in the form of punk music in the late 1970’s. This time there was a backlash that introduced extremely short hair and body piercings. 

     Body piercings were nothing new to certain parts of the world, but were considered barbaric by most Americans at the time. Today, like long hair of old, they are quite accepted. I must admit that the day one of my daughters brought herself home with a nose ring was quite disturbing to me. I never liked earrings on men, and certainly not nose rings on anyone! Yet, for some reason when I got used to it, I decided to have some gold earrings made, shave my head, and grow a rather long goatee. I was already retired, and yes, I was approaching middle age which could have been part of it. I am a musician and songwriter, so I felt this change enhanced my stage presence and youthful acceptance. 

     Although body piercings and hair alterations are quite noticeable ways one can express body art, yet we engage in such activity as body modification everyday by the way we dress. This may be quite subconscious in some people; even so, some are quite unwavering and determined in how they dress in order to form an impression on others. On the other hand, some people in the job market, or in private schools, have no other choice but to dress how they are instructed to. Some people choose to be vegetarians or Vegans and these are also ways of creating uniqueness in western society, even if they are done for religious or conscientious reasons. 

     Once my daughters had tattoos done on themselves it alleviated the conscience restraint I maintained for myself, so I had one done on myself. Although my daughters’ tattoos are reflective of their culture, mine is quite unique: As an avid baseball fan of the Boston Red Sox, a team that had not won the World Series in over 86 years, I was quite celebratory once they won the big championship in 2004, and got one commemorating it. 

     Tattoos were once reserved in American society for what some perceived as ruffians or lowlifes. But today, they have become the norm. Modern Christian culture for years frowned on tattoos, noting that it disgraced “God’s temple,” or the body. However, early Christians donned fish tattoos to discretely indicate to other Christians that they were fellow believers. Some even wore an earring to show they were a bondservant to Christ. 

     Hairstyles, mentioned above, are largely considered a personal choice of self-expression, yet some outfit their hair according to their religious beliefs. Though most people attribute messy hair to be due to laziness or indifference, but if you were a certain sect of the Rastafarian faith it would exhibit your devoutness. Some people shave their heads because of their faith. According to Enid Schildkrout, extremely orthodox Jewish women often shave their heads and wear a wig instead out of respect for their husbands and in obedience to the Lord (Hirschberg & Hirschberg, 2012). Hare Krishna believers shave their heads too. The New Testament scriptures of the Bible maintain that Christian women cover their heads in worship, and men believers should not have long hair. Yet, most western Christians explain that this was merely a tradition in Israeli culture at the time. 

     Body modification is part of artistic expression whether one realizes it or not. All people engage in it in some form or another, and it is indicative of culture and societal protocol and acceptance. Where once women were considered “worldly” for wearing make-up up until the middle of the twentieth century, women now normally adorn themselves in less-strict religious gatherings and it is considered acceptable. There are to date some sects such as the Amish and Mennonite communities that still have strict restrictions on such forms of female expression. In spite of their efforts to be modest in their attire, by wearing such garb they do express and celebrate their own religious heritage. Whether through body piercing, tattooing, makeup, head shaping, or various hair changes, body modifications are quite normal and celebrated traditions all over the world.        
  
  
References 
Buhlmann, U., Gleiß, M, Rupf, L.,Zschenderlein, K., & Kathmann, N. (2011). Modyfying 
     Emotion Recognition Deficits in Body Dysmorphic Disorder: An Experimental Investigation. 
     Depression and Anxiety, 28(10), 924-931. Retrieved from: Ashford Library via FindIt@AU. 
Hirschberg, S. & Hirschberg, T. (2012). One World, Many Cultures. Pearson Education Inc., 
     Glenview, IL.