Murder of Santiago Nasar in Gabriel Garcia Marquez's Chronicle of a Essay

Murder of Santiago Nasar in Gabriel Garcia Marquez's Chronicle of a Death Foretold - Essay Example Since Santiago was responsible for Angela’s loss of virginity, his death would be expected to be caused by a member or members of the Vicario family; more precisely, Santiago Nasar was killed by two brothers, Pablo and Pedro, from the Vicario family.  Santiago Nasar was going to be killed according to Marquez (67). The two brothers from the Vicario family had vowed to avenge their sister’s virginity since it robbed their family of honor. A bishop’s visit to the town threw the events of the day into disarray and shifted the attention from the foretold murder. The bishop decided, at the last minute, to stay on the boat on which he had travelled rather than get in town. Santiago Nasar was a member of the ruling class, together with his friends’ family. The family of the narrator in the story was close friends with Santiago’s family, which gave the narrator the expectation that before the bishop left the town; he would have personally paid them a visi t. Everyone, for sometime forgets about the saga that involved the return of Angela to her home after the wedding. The Vicario brothers were going to kill Santiago. Except few people, almost all the dwellers of the town including the priest and the mayor were aware that two identical twin brothers, Pablo and Pedro Vicario, were in a mission to find Santiago Nasar with the intention of killing him (Marquez 163). Santiago Nasar remained unaware of the plot by Vicario brothers to kill him until the time they accosted and attacked him. The manner in which the story unfolds is inverted, hence does not give very clear evidence of the murder at first. The story unfolds backwards rather than forwards. The possible reasons for the murder, the circumstances surrounding the murder and the motivation behind it are traced. The evidence that the Vicario brothers were going to kill Santiago is built from the importance they give to accomplishing their revenge mission. Angela Vicario was married by Bayardo San Roman in a flamboyant wedding ceremony. Barely five hours later, Bayardo returned her to her parents. The consequences of not being a virgin were potentially dangerous, a fact that Angela was very much aware. She, in fact, wanted to stop the marriage knowing very well that there existed no love between them. The Vicarious family, were so much impressed by Bayardo’s wealth and were, therefore, opposed to the decision by their daughter to stop the marriage. Her brothers were particularly not pleased by the incident and had vowed to kill whoever had deflowered their sister. Bayardo did not love Angela and neither did she love him. Rather, Bayardo was excited about the idea of marrying a beautiful woman. Bayardo San Roman used the wedding ceremony as an excuse to show off the power and wealth he wielded. According to the narrator’s comment, Bayardo San Roman could marry any woman he wanted to. His wealth and power came from the fact that he had been born of a decorated hero, the only one to defeat Colonel Aureliano Buendia, in a civil war fought in the nineteenth century. Lack of love may not have been a reason good enough to stop the marriage between Angela Vicario and Bayardo San Roman. However, the fact that Angela had lost her virginity to somebody other than her proud husband, Bayardo, was a reason enough to make her return to

Euthanasia vs Palliative Sedation Essay Example for Free

Euthanasia vs Palliative Sedation Essay In this paper the author will discuss the difference between euthanasia, physician assisted suicide, and palliative sedation. The author will discuss the legal and ethical side of palliative sedation. Palliative sedation is where they use education to induce or decrease awareness of ones intractable suffering at the end of life (Olsen, Swetz, Mueller, 2010, p. 949). They use this type of sedation when other most common forms of pain control does not relieve the pain the patient is feeling. Not only is it used to treat pain but it is also used to treat delirium, pain, dyspnea, nausea or other physical symptoms (Olsen et al. , 2010, p. 950). In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina reviewers concluded that physicians choice of benzodiazepines instead of barbiturates indicated a goal of palliative rather than euthanasia, stating that barbiturates were more deadly. Some institutions used ketamine or propoful in patients condition is refractory to opioids and midazolam. Opiates should not be used for primary purpose of sedation, but rather should be continued adjunctively during palliative sedation for analgesic purpose to prevent opiate withdrawal (Olsen et al. , 2010, p. 950). Usually palliative sedation is given in a form of continuous drip but there has been times when palliative sedation has been given intermittently. Palliative sedation should be given in the areas of general care or hospice settings, ICU settings can be too hectic and uncomfortable for families. Cardiac monitoring is no good in achieving the goals of palliative sedation (Olsen et al. , 2010, p. 951). Before palliative care is given written consent should be obtained by the patient or the patients family. In the state f Arizona the Arizona State Board of Nursing has develop an advisory opinion of the scope of practice of what palliative sedation is. it states that it is in the scope of practice for the register nurse to administer medications that provide palliative sedation at the end of life (Brewer Ridenour, 2010, p. 1). Arizona State board of Nursing defined palliative sedation as follows: The monitored use of medications intended to provide relief of refractory symptoms but not to intentionally hasten death (Brewer Ridenour, 2010, p. 1). What is a refractory symptom? It is one that cannot be adequately controlled in a tolerable time frame despite aggressive use of usual therapies and seems unlikely to be adequately controlled by further invasive or noninvasive therapies without excessive or intolerable acute or chronic side effects or complications (Brewer Ridenour, 2010, p. ). In Arizonas advisory opinion they rote general requirements that must be followed and they are listed below: * Written Policy and Procedure is maintained by the employer. * Administration of medications must be on the order of a person licensed in this state to prescribe such medications. * The patent has to have sufficient level of nursing care to maintained sedation. * The agency has identified medications allowed for palliative sedation, preferably y an interdisciplinary committee including nurses. * Pre-sedation symptom assessment is performed by the RN Post-sedation symptom assessment and ongoing assessments performed by the RN (Brewer Ridenour, 2010, p. 1) * Only an RN with all of the following criteria are permitted to administer medications for palliative sedation. * Current certification in basic Life Support ( BLS). * The RN must possess sufficient knowledge about the issues surrounding the use of palliative sedation to inform patients, families, and other health care providers in making decisions about its use. (Brewer Ridenour, 2010, p. 1). Palliative sedation is also referred to as terminal sedation. The role of the oncology nurse is to be able to administer the medications used n palliative sedation, be able to teach the patient and family what palliative sedation is and its purpose(Lawson, 2011). She has to be able to assess the patients signs and symptoms to know if the palliative sedation is working . One must understand the role of palliative sedation and its role in management of the patients symptoms in providing care of patients with advanced cancer at the end of life(Lawson, 2011). Euthanasia is defined as the act of a third party, usually physician, ending a patients life in response to severe pain or suffering. Euthanasia can be voluntary meaning that the physician has obtained the patients informed consent, on it can be involuntary meaning without the knowledge of consent of the patient (Olsen et al. , 2010, p. 953). Voluntary euthanasia is not legal in most parts of the world but the Netherlands and Belgium are currently the only countries who allow the practice (Olsen et al. , 2010, p. 954). Involuntary euthanasia is not legal anywhere. Physician-assisted suicide is the act of the physician writing a prescription for a lethal dose of medication that the patient takes himself to cause death. The main difference here is that the patient has to take the medication himself no other person can give it to him (Olsen et al. , 2010, p. 955). Physician assisted suicide is legal in the states of Oregon and Washington and in a handful of other countries (Olsen et al. , 2010). It can only be done when a patient has a terminal diagnosis and is suffering and wants to control when and how they die. If a physician or family member or a friend would give this legal dose of medicine it would not be considered physician assisted suicide but euthanasia. In considering the legal ramifications of palliative sedation we will discuss beneficence, non malfeasance, doctrine of double effect, and the principle of proportionality. Beneficence refers to the practice of treating individuals in an ethical manor. Not only by respecting their decisions and protecting them from harm, but also by making efforts to secure their wellbeing(Olsen et al. , 2010). The moral obligation of beneficence is paramount to ethics since actions are weighed for their possible good against the cost of possible Harm. Beneficence provides benefits to the patient and balances the benefits against risk and cost(Olsen et al. , 2010). Any treatment embarked upon should be with the intent to benefit and burden or discomfort o the treatment (Lawson, 2011). If the treatment will not benefit the patient it would be sound clinical judgment to withhold the treatment or even withdrawal the treatment after the discussion with the patient, family members and other members of the care team. Such decision-making would be considered both legal and ethically acceptable (Berghs, Dierckx, Gastmans, 2013).

Showing up the Actor :: Boxing Personal Narrative Papers

Showing up the Actor When I was younger I spent much of my time alone. My father bred in me, perhaps by nothing more than his example, a certain New England stoicism which thrived on solitude. Nothing displayed this rustic discipline more than the pop-up camper my father bought from our neighbors when I was six. From that summer our family spent most vacations on the road, pulling the camper behind us, my father winching it up and spreading the canvas roofing in Nova Scotia or Florida or upstate New York. Many summers later I insisted that I live in the camper, parked in the driveway. My mother brought me my meals and my father decided I should begin reading Hemingway. I sat propped in the tent-like house, eating hot dogs and reading terse, athletic prose about boxers and bullfights and impotent veterans. I figured out why my father named our dog Brett. I also spent a good deal of time at elite institutions of learning. When he wasn't camping my father taught math at prep schools. From my birth until my fourth birthday we lived at St. George's in Newport, Rhode Island, among the brocaded mansions like Egypt's pyramids, crafted of heavy-set stones. Then, in 1981, we moved to Phillips Academy in Andover, where the shops on the main street came in threes: bank boutique salon bank boutique salon. I can think of no better reason than that for why I took up boxing in the summer before my Senior year of college -- than that I spent most of my youth alone at elite institutions. And yet, in my four years as a student at Phillips, enrolling eleven years after my family's arrival, I wasn't entirely alone. A friend of mine, Noah -- his father also taught on the faculty. Noah also received the ninety percent tuition discount. Noah's fridge was also usually empty, because he had also eaten in school cafeterias for most of his life. He had also, for four years, somehow slipped between the kid whose wealth was a ticket to fuck around and the boy whose mother was a janitor, between the blonde suburban girl whose father owned The New York Times and the tight-knit handful of urban kids who came under the banner program of "A Better Chance" -- that is, between privilege and opportunity. This is not to say that the two sides of this educational gauntlet weighed in equally. Showing up the Actor :: Boxing Personal Narrative Papers Showing up the Actor When I was younger I spent much of my time alone. My father bred in me, perhaps by nothing more than his example, a certain New England stoicism which thrived on solitude. Nothing displayed this rustic discipline more than the pop-up camper my father bought from our neighbors when I was six. From that summer our family spent most vacations on the road, pulling the camper behind us, my father winching it up and spreading the canvas roofing in Nova Scotia or Florida or upstate New York. Many summers later I insisted that I live in the camper, parked in the driveway. My mother brought me my meals and my father decided I should begin reading Hemingway. I sat propped in the tent-like house, eating hot dogs and reading terse, athletic prose about boxers and bullfights and impotent veterans. I figured out why my father named our dog Brett. I also spent a good deal of time at elite institutions of learning. When he wasn't camping my father taught math at prep schools. From my birth until my fourth birthday we lived at St. George's in Newport, Rhode Island, among the brocaded mansions like Egypt's pyramids, crafted of heavy-set stones. Then, in 1981, we moved to Phillips Academy in Andover, where the shops on the main street came in threes: bank boutique salon bank boutique salon. I can think of no better reason than that for why I took up boxing in the summer before my Senior year of college -- than that I spent most of my youth alone at elite institutions. And yet, in my four years as a student at Phillips, enrolling eleven years after my family's arrival, I wasn't entirely alone. A friend of mine, Noah -- his father also taught on the faculty. Noah also received the ninety percent tuition discount. Noah's fridge was also usually empty, because he had also eaten in school cafeterias for most of his life. He had also, for four years, somehow slipped between the kid whose wealth was a ticket to fuck around and the boy whose mother was a janitor, between the blonde suburban girl whose father owned The New York Times and the tight-knit handful of urban kids who came under the banner program of "A Better Chance" -- that is, between privilege and opportunity. This is not to say that the two sides of this educational gauntlet weighed in equally.

The Tragedy of a Man

The â€Å"apparition† of Bartleby has confounded many wise men, scholars, critics and the like. The strange, almost inhuman way Bartleby resisted his employer and all forms of contact seemed supernatural—â€Å"Poe-ish†, as some would say (Reed 1). Though in recent times, the story of Bartleby has been used as an allusion of the Communist struggle against the capitalist system.Thus, they explained that Bartleby’s refusal to engage in the regular capitalist work is clearly an act of defiance against the system; and the historical vagueness and background surrounding the story accentuates this implied class struggle.The tragedy of it all, in the end, centers on the limited awareness of the narrator. His scrivener was not the originator of his tragedies; it was his humanity, and fatal defects that could not save his copyist from certain doom. His lack of insight into the depths of the human psyche and his consequent understanding of its workings rendered him u nable to understand and aid his comrade. He was only an ordinary lawyer caught in circumstances he could not understand; though had he the sufficient expertise, the answer would have been simple as to surprise him.Bartleby, if he was anything, was angry. No emotion could have driven him so potently as to his last contemptuous act upon himself and the world. For suicide is often thought of as some great act of despair or utter grief that overpowers the individual and inspire him to â€Å"escape†. It is also an act of great contempt that is needed to give a man the strength to destroy himself completely and blind him to all the protestations of his body.Thus, it was this rage that possessed Bartleby. The narrator was too struck by the pitiable, forlorn countenance as well as quiet insolence of his scrivener to discover the fire blazoning from within. In all fairness to him, he was a well-balanced man—as he readily admitted—free from the mad fits and temperaments t hat has afflicted his scriveners. He could not therefore have guessed Bartleby as anything else, as he assumed that the man was well-rounded in personality.The woes of this misunderstood individual continues on, as Marxists take the tale hostage and use it as a weapon of their own. Bartleby becomes a tool of their hatred, and example of a social revolution. In this essay, then, it is hoped to wrest it back to the individual perspective and back to the man that is Bartleby. To accomplish this, one need glimpse at the perspectives of the Marxists and one divorced from the Communist context; from here it is hoped that the Marxist logic can be successfully deconstructed.This paper will seek to redeem the soul of the story as well as the character immortalized in its pages. Citizen Bartleby Bartleby, the Scrivener’s unique â€Å"Marxist† quality—its ability to identify with the class struggle and the woes of the capitalist system—are inevitably â€Å"pulled o ut† by two critics, Barbara Foley and Naomi Reed, by the use of differing perspectives. Foley accomplished this by de-focusing from the individual and giving more emphasis on the style used in the story and how it relates to historical events of that time.Thus, the mention of John Jacob Astor and Trinity Church, which coincidentally owned huge properties across the New York area where the story’s office was located, become representations of the oppressive land monopolies (Foley 7-10). The narrator’s reducing his staff into â€Å"idiosyncracies† and an ideology of â€Å"patronage† (Foley 6) is representative of an unequal wage slavery; and the ambiguity of the date by which the story probably took place (through careful analysis it was found that there were too many inconsistencies in the dates), may have been intentional as to â€Å"underplay† the Astor Strike of 1849 (Foley 13-16).The last was re-emphasized with telling effect—by cit ing Melville’s â€Å"disillusionment† of the society of the elite and the similarities of another Melville work, â€Å"The Two Temples†. Naomi Reed, meanwhile, while centering on Bartleby the apparition and the â€Å"gentlemanly cadaver†, relates him as such, by way of substance, to the commodity discussed by Marx in Capital. Bartleby is both of two forms: the ghost and the figure between life and death; comparably, a commodity is both physical and non-physical, for it has non-material value (Reed 6-9).His insistent defiance on basic work, as well as other labors, is in fact a refusal to partake in exchange—the ideology behind his work (creating a perfect copy of the document) is that a copy may accurately portray an original document; in exchange terms, a value of one object may be substantially equaled by another. The scrivener’s act of refusing to vouch for the copy would be parallel to the rejection of the accuracy of exchange. Bartleby then represents Marx’s commodity alienating itself from the market forces (Reed 9-12). These two concepts do hold ground, in relating the individual to his environment.Having admitted to this, a third, more personal approach is to be taken: the tragedy of Bartleby’s anger and passive aggressive tendency. Turkey and Nippers Prior to introducing Bartleby, the narrator first gives us a glimpse of his two other scriveners: Turkey was an old man, of almost the same age as his employer, while Nippers was twenty-five. Of the former, it is narrated that after twelve o’clock, this legal copyist suddenly manifests discomfort throughout the day, carelessly spilling inkblots or bursting upon inanimate objects with fiery zeal with little provocation.The employer hinted that this was due to old age. Indeed, fatigue and lack of rest would be enough to wear down the propriety of even the sternest of men, more so with old ones. For his part, Turkey would not, out of pride and th e thought of wages being cut in half, do the sensible thing and stop work after twelve o’clock. Nippers, on the other hand, is most irritated when he is brimming with energy. This is attributed to his youth; though the narrator would much rather call it â€Å"ambition and indigestion†.He is impatient, rash and impetuous and would rather that the time pass and be done with his being a scrivener, as well as to finish his law studies. This here-and-now obsession manifests itself in his table, which probably symbolizes a hindrance to his objective. This impatience gradually dies down after lunch, as impetuosity is readily cured and becalmed by food. At the sight of his two scriveners’ open expressions of anger, the lawyer must not have then detected the same in Bartleby. Indeed, he was looking for a more-balanced individual, and thought that he found it in the man.He therefore was not properly warned to the dangerous patterns within Bartleby’s character. Pref er Not To The employer relates how he was thunderstruck the first time he heard of Bartleby’s quiet refusal. It was peculiarly odd, however, because there seemed to be no reason for this reluctance—he didn’t volunteer anything; he was ever quiet at his post, answering only when spoken to. He was therefore frustrated with what would seem as apparent insolence. Bartleby’s answer â€Å"I would prefer not to† is a classic passive aggressive response.The words â€Å"not to† are indeed an act of defiance and anger, though it could not be particularly directed anywhere. It was couched in the words â€Å"would prefer† because among passive aggressives, fear is commingled with anger. He has a fear of direct confrontation, and readily believes his being weaker to those around him. To say a â€Å"yes† or â€Å"no† would already be such an example of confrontation. Recognizing the â€Å"superiority† of would-be oppressors, he will express his anger, but try to make it as respectful a comment as possible.To a fairly balanced man like the employer, this self-contradiction is absurd and utterly unreasonable; that is what makes it offensive. To a passive aggressive, however, it would be unreasonable to reveal a grievance. There are a myriad of reasons for this, but chief of them is the fear of rejection and condemnation as well as a need to retain some power against his oppressor. Revealing his weakness would strip him of any control or power over the object of his contempt, and make him susceptible to denunciation.His silence then was due to fear for himself. It wasn’t so much that he didn’t want to say, he just couldn’t. The employer could also have detected something dangerously amiss in Bartleby’s refusal to do anything, except copy. He was clearly caught in some internal agony as to render him incapable of even the most mundane of tasks. He clearly needed help, and the lawye r could only ill-afford to prove it. Infernal Solitude His employer was filled with great pity the minute he found out that Bartleby was living alone.The latter did not socialize, knew no one, and generally kept to himself, using the office as a refuge. The narrator believes this as the source of the scrivener’s misery and in many chances as possible sought to connect to him. Tragically, however, Bartleby was trapped in a state of â€Å"forced solitude†Ã¢â‚¬â€while he might believe his state deplorable (though we could only assume), he is nevertheless prevented by anger and fear from reaching out, and this paralysis and stasis aggravates his misery. Bartleby did not loathe company; in his small way, he sought it.Through his dealing with the company errand boy, Ginger Nut, and that one time when he looked his employer square in the eye and said â€Å"Can’t you see it for yourself? †Ã¢â‚¬â€the passive aggressive needs understanding, though he will offer n o aid. The employer, stumbling through ways to help him, merely continues to frustrate his scrivener. Eventually the internal agony had debilitated Bartleby fully. Even copying had become a burden that he would not bear. The lawyer was constantly apprehensive that he would be abandoning Bartleby if he did anything that was not to ensure his safety.He would have been right in assuming that his scrivener would have felt betrayed, for passive aggressives are generally resigned to their misery and see it as normal routine, and to those that they have stuck to with forlorn hope, failure would only accentuate the deathly gloom. His employer felt the barb of this hurt when Bartleby talked to him in jail. His statement then, and his subsequent refusal to eat can only be construed as part of his contemptuous act against self and those he feels has wronged him. Conclusion: RedemptionThe significant sequel of the Dead Letters serves as the crossroads by which Bartleby’s plight is fully understood. The employer later lamented of his finding the significant cause of Bartleby’s desolation: he had worked as a clerk making letters for relatives of the departed. The thought of constantly generating correspondence to those who have recently lost probably destroyed him as a person. It was not only the act of breaking hearts; it seemed as if acting as accomplice to murder. This soon developed to a form of self-loathing, and the genesis of the tragedy of Bartleby.There are two ways to interpret this: The question that was unveiled in the third perspective was the source of Bartleby’s anger. Throughout we have learned that it was generated towards self and collaterally to others. Humanity should be briefly expounded as centered on the act of life. The very nature of a human being is to act to preserve life: eating, sleeping and even social interaction. The task of the Dead Letters was associated with the negation of life. Death. An unnatural and inhuman task, h owever mundane, will gradually wear down an individual.Bartleby became a specter of Death, opposed to life, and therefore opposed to the world, and to society. He was reluctantly opposed, as by nature he was inclined to life. He felt this opposition unconsciously, and felt that all anger is directed against him. Passive aggressives have a source of hatred before the self. As a human being, Bartleby was inclined towards life, and was thus opposed to the Dead Letters system from the beginning. Gradually, his resentment went inward, as he needed the wage and could not conveniently express his anger.He became the figure of rebellion of the individual against the dehumanizing elements of his system as well as prevalent social forces. Reed had a point when she said that this was an act of rebellion against the system. She was, however, wrong in the sense that Bartleby is not a commodity; to admit to this truth would assume that the scrivener is equal to the commodity, comparable to the in animate object of Marx’s work. Using her concept, this is an act of equality that cannot be vouchsafed. There is nothing dehumanizing about circulation, and exchange.The practice of work was not a product of capitalism, but social interaction. Bartleby was merely opposed to the inhumanity of the system, which he was thrust into. He therefore could not trust it, and would not trust it. Having experienced the unnatural task in the Dead Letters office, those that are detached from personal living though not overtly or even covertly opposed to life, would seem the same. This then would explain the scrivener’s insistence of detachment of his private and public life.The Marxist analysts say that the subtitle â€Å"A Story of Wall Street† precludes the social forces that are implied within Bartleby. It must not, however, be forgotten that this is a story about â€Å"Bartleby, the Scrivener†, about an individual finding himself before the deathly coldness of Wall Street. He is the individual in the center of his environment. To belittle him, as Foley would do in her analysis, would again dehumanize him. To make him a slave to social forces, and the context of labor and the collective, would be like the lawyer who could not see the man crying out from within.Maybe, he had an indication of his desolation, but trapped within institutions as cold as the buildings that house it, he had not the knowledge to reach out to him. The lack of scenery around the office windows may agreeably be an allegory to his blindness. His omission of going to church may have become a defect, as he was faced with humanity, and the sermons could at least have taught him how to act before it. The scrivener could not be saved within the pages of the story. The soul of his being, however, has been snatched from the perils that haunted his life.It is hoped that in this simple gesture of understanding, Bartleby may find in death what he could not redeem in life: humanity. BIBLIOGRAPHY WORKS CITED Foley, Barbara. â€Å"From Wall Street to Astor Place: Historicizing Bartleby†. American Literature 72. 1 (2000): n. p. Reed, Naomi. â€Å"The Specter of Wall Street: Bartleby and the Language of Commodities†. American Literature 76. 4 (2004): n. p. REFERENCES Melville, Herman. â€Å"Bartleby, the Scrivener†. The Story and Its Writer: An Introduction to Short Fiction. Fifth Edition. Ed. Anne Charters. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 1999. 984-1010.

Henry Ford’s Evolution of Automobiles

â€Å"It is doubtful if any mechanical invention in the history of the world has influenced in the same length of time the lives of so many people in an important way as the motor car. † So writes an American historian, thinking of the automobile alone. But it does not stand-alone. It was the automobile factory that introduced mass production, a process that has changed the lineaments of our economic and social life more profoundly than any other single element in the recent history of civilization. Nearly everyone has heard of this process, yet few have any detailed or exact knowledge of its inception and development. Enter Henry Ford. The true answers of what inspired this Michigan farmer to develop a production process that was so simple, effective and efficient it changed the entire course of history. In this report, we will present a brief history of the era in which Henry Ford lived, the background from which he came, and important management trends he followed. It is hard to summarize the era in which Henry Ford lived. Chiefly because he changed the entire tone of the era in which he lived, making his career a transitional period. We will begin with the world before Ford. In the mid-latter part of the eighteen hundreds (c. 860-c. 1895), the United States was still tending its wounds from the aftermath of the civil war. It was a time of rebuilding, reorganizing and a time to accept change. The country†s figureheads were also changing. When the most respected of men were generals, soldiers, presidents, and war painted warriors, combat bravery was a greatly revered trait. However when the dust and smoke of war cleared, the public†s attention naturally shifted back to home life. The transition occurred when the position of bravery in the public eye changed from a warrior†s bravery, to an entrepreneur†s type of bravery. An undeniable part of home life and living is what tools are used to make a home or farm function. This is where the gaze shifted toward men like Edison for inventing the light bulb and standardizing the use of electricity. Well over one hundred years later, what home is complete without electricity? And (back to our focus) what home is complete without an automobile? Naturally many inventors influenced this time in history. Take for example three boys who grew up on several of the farms in Worcester County, Massachusetts. At thirteen, Tom Blanchard invents an apple-parer; at eighteen he works in a tack factory, and is soon inventing a tack-counting machine, then a tack-making machine. Before long he is one of the masters of the Springfield Arsenal. Elias Howe liked to tinker with the grain mill on his father†s farm, an occupation fitting his rural life. At sixteen he became an apprentice in a Lowell factory for making textile machinery – his sewing machine lay just ahead. Eli Whitney combines farm chores and forge work; restlessly ambitious, he saves money to attend Yale – with what result we all know. The farm is a sound teacher of ingenuity and elementary mechanical skills. Before long however its lessons are ended, and the youth whose imagination is fired by railroads, steamboats, cotton mills, machine shops, and gun factories looks to a larger sphere. † 2 Henry Ford was born on July 30, 1863 in the Detroit, Michigan area. He was the oldest of six children born to William and Mary Litogot O†Hern Ford, and the grandson of Irish immigrants who had arrived in America in 1847. The entire family worked on the family farm and Ford was raised with intentions of taking over the family farm when he grew up. He had an intelligent, inquisitive nature and was energized by the huge growth of industry occurring in the Detroit area. † 3He was also an avid experimenter. At age nine, in one of his first experiments, he theorized the power of steam. To prove the nature of this phenomenon, he plugged the spout of one of his mother†s delicate teapots, and set it to a boil. And to the great joy of the young, giggly theorist (and dismay of his mother), the explosion sent pieces of glass and boiling water crashing around the kitchen! Miraculously the young observer was left untouched! This result is eerily reminiscent of the effect Ford would have on the industrial revolution in times to come. As he grew up his father allowed him to â€Å"tinker† with many of the tools on the farm. Ford†s mother called him a â€Å"born mechanic† and provided him with darning needles and corset stays to make into tools for his watch repair work. Probably the most dramatic event in Henry Ford†s life happened in 1876 at age thirteen. While riding with his father in a wagon, they saw a steam engine travelling along the road under its own power. Ford jumped off the wagon and excitedly began to question the driver about this remarkable engine. Used for stationary purposes such as sawing wood, the engine had been mounted on wheels to propel itself. The engineer explained all about the machine and even let Ford fire the engine and run it. â€Å"Ford later said, ‘That showed me that I was by instinct an engineer. â€Å"†4 The seed was planted that there could be a self-propelled vehicle and that thought would haunt his imagination for years. Although he yearned to go to Detroit and work in the machine shops, Ford stayed on the farm helping his family until he was seventeen. Then, with his father†s blessing, he moved to Detroit and started working at the Michigan Car Company for $1. 0 a day. He was fired shortly thereafter after angering the older employees by making repairs in a ? hour instead of the usual five hours. By 1882 Ford had left Detroit and used the family farm as his address as he traveled around from job to job. In 1885, at a party, he met Clara Jane Bryant. They married April 11, 1888 and their only child, Edsel, named after his boyhood friend Edsel Ruddiman, was born November 6, 1893. Ford had never given up his dream of a â€Å"horseless carriage. † Whenever he had a spare moment he read about gas engines and experimented in his own workshop. By 1891 he and Clara had moved back to Detroit and Ford began working for Detroit Edison Illuminating Company. Ford†s Quadricycle (his first automobile) was ready for a try-out in 1896. It frightened the horses and caused many a protest, but it ran. It was through working at the Detroit Edison Illuminating Company that Ford met Thomas Edison. â€Å"At a convention Ford was introduced to Edison as ‘The young fellow who†s made a gas car. â€Å"†5 After discussing his ideas with the great inventor, Ford was glad to hear that Edison thought his ideas had merit. Edison told him, ‘Young man, you have it, a self-contained unit carrying its own fuel. Keep at it! â€Å"†6 The meeting with Thomas Edison gave Henry Ford fresh inspiration and his spirit was renewed by the famous inventor†s words of encouragement. By 1899 Ford had produced an operable car that was written up in the Detroit Journals. Ford was described as a â€Å"mechanical engineer. † Eventually his work developing automobiles conflicted with his position at the Detroit Edison Illuminating Company. Even though the company was well pleased with his work and offered him the General Superintendent position, they asked him to make a choice. Could he give up his â€Å"hobby† of automobile building and devote himself to the company? Ford made the decision. He wanted to make automobiles. After some false starts, on June 16, 1903, with ten investors plus Ford†s patents, knowledge and engine, Henry Ford incorporated the Ford Motor Company. After years of hard, pioneering work, Ford Motor Company produced its ninth and most successful-thus-far automobile, the world famous Model T. It was first marketed in October 1908 and the company dominated sales for the next eighteen years. Because of his development of the assembly line used to mass-produce automobiles, Ford sold more than one half of the cars in the industry in 1918-1919 and 1921-1925. The Model T, or Tin Lizzie, was a hard working, sturdy, commonplace car. Ford†s dream had come true. â€Å"I will build a motor car for the great multitude†¦ constructed of the best materials, by the best men to be hired, after the simplest designs that modern engineering can devise†¦ so low in price that no man making a good salary will be unable to own one and enjoy with his family the blessing of hours of pleasure in God†s great open spaces. Henry Ford and Thomas Edison had become the best of friends. They admired and respected each other. In 1916 Henry Ford purchased Mangoes, the home next door to his friend Edison†s Seminole Lodge, so that he and Clara could vacation there while the Edisons were down. The two families enjoyed their time away from it all in the tropical serenity of Fort Myers, Florida. Camping expeditions into the Everglades, with Harvey Firestone and his family, plus naturalist John Burroughs, became a special treat. Henry Ford died April 7, 1947. Editorial tributes were favorable to Henry Ford. He was praised as a patriot, philanthropist, philosopher, reformer, economist, and teacher and depicted as a symbol of individualism and productive genius. â€Å"8 During his career, particularly in the early 1900†³s, Ford methods of management were seen as being very innovative. â€Å"He was a student of the modern management methods that were emerging at the time. For example, he was familiar with the work of Frederick Taylor, the driving force behind the new principles of scientific management and the use of time and motion studies to increase job efficiency. † 9Frederick Taylor truly used a scientific approach to management. He took each element of management and production and examined it under great scrutiny. He also observed how each portion of the entire production process worked together as a team. His purpose was to refine each element and bring them together under the least amount of functional friction. â€Å"For example, Taylor took aside the worker element and discovered that most of them were soldiering. Soldiering is deliberately working at less than full capacity. â€Å"10 Upon resolving this problem, the worker element now has less functional friction will perform better for the team. More relevant to Ford†s case was Taylor†s time-and-motion study. This study sharply examined how a worker performed a task. It followed each motion that the worker went through to accomplish a task and then tried to simplify each task by removing steps and/or refining them so that the job could be done faster and with less effort. This proved to be the most revealing of Frederick†s studies as it allowed work to be done at a much faster rate and in some cases quadrupled production! Ford strongly believed in Taylor†s scientific approach and custom fit his production team to perform at the greatest capacity. Having taken influence from Taylor†s time-and-motion study, Ford devised his true masterpiece, the assembly line. This, being the most vital part of production for any mass-produced product, could more than quadruple output with far less labor, and much less skill required for each job. Ford immediately recognized the potential for output of his new company, and upon the earnings its first profits, the company began to expand. This expansion of the Ford Motor Company, accredited to Ford†s innovative management approach, would set a trend that swept the world for many years to come. Being the first company to adopt the method of mass production gave Ford Motor Company such a powerful head start that it dominated the automobile industry for the next twenty years. As far as Henry Ford†s role in his company he was both a figurehead and a liaison. Following his massive success in the auto-industry, Henry Ford began to take part in politics. He also began to donate money to charitable organizations and became a familiar face at important dedication ceremonies around the country. His 1918 run for senate and his dedication ceremonies, i. . (1929 Edison Institute of Technology) identify him as a figurehead for the Ford Motor Company. However, Ford always kept an eye and an ear on other rising companies and other changing trends in industry. This greatly aided him in staying on top of the automobile industry for so long. This would make Ford also a liaison in his company. Ford however did not deal with his workforce directly. â€Å"He hired Harry Bennett as head of the infamous Ford Service Department to maintain control over his rapidly expanding following of workers. 11 Ford†s indirect management of his workers would therefore disqualify him from the leader role in his company, making him a figurehead/liaison type manager. Henry Ford†s life falls into a very small category of lives known as revolutionaries. He was not simply and inevitable product of his time. He was original and revolutionary. He defied precedent and never once allowed the impossibilities of the past to limit the possibilities of the future. And above all he was a true patriot to the growth of the human race.