Free Essays on Old Man In The Sea

The Old Man and the Sea is a novella that was written in 1952 by Ernest Hemingway. It is a story that initially makes you think that the author was drunk while he was writing it. How can a book about a man fishing for Marlin become a Nobel Prize Winner? Meaning. By looking into the book and reading between the lines, we can see that in fact The Old Man and the Sea is a complex story, and is well deserving of such an award. I think the meaning of the book is that of life. If you take all of the objects in the book and relate it to life, it is possible to distinguish a giant metaphor that spans the whole novella. Through the use of symbols and the fact that we know the book is operating on a poetic level, and is not meant to be taken literally, we can determine our own version of what Hemingway intended as the meaning. One of the symbols constantly mentioned in the story is that of the great baseball player JoeDiMaggio. Although it is not apparent without careful study of the text, it can be seen that the â€Å"Great DiMaggio† was a simple fisherman in early life, much like the old man, and achieved stardom despite adversity. The old man has this great battle with an enormous fish, and throughout the whole ordeal, he constantly reassures himself by saying that â€Å"the Great DiMaggio† would have been able to pull through this. Just as DiMaggio managed to struggle through the pain of a bone spur, the old man was able to struggle through the pain of his hands, and his immense adversity in the fish. Referring to the meaning, we can see that this relates to life in that we can always struggle through what is painful, so long as we stick to our principles and our guidances. The other fishermen had called the old man unlucky, because he had not caught a fish for many days. This is reflected in the sail of the boat. The sail was """"patched with flour sacks and, furled, it looked like the flag of permanent defeat"""" (Pg. 5). Yet, when un... Free Essays on Old Man In The Sea Free Essays on Old Man In The Sea The Old Man and the Sea is a novella that was written in 1952 by Ernest Hemingway. It is a story that initially makes you think that the author was drunk while he was writing it. How can a book about a man fishing for Marlin become a Nobel Prize Winner? Meaning. By looking into the book and reading between the lines, we can see that in fact The Old Man and the Sea is a complex story, and is well deserving of such an award. I think the meaning of the book is that of life. If you take all of the objects in the book and relate it to life, it is possible to distinguish a giant metaphor that spans the whole novella. Through the use of symbols and the fact that we know the book is operating on a poetic level, and is not meant to be taken literally, we can determine our own version of what Hemingway intended as the meaning. One of the symbols constantly mentioned in the story is that of the great baseball player JoeDiMaggio. Although it is not apparent without careful study of the text, it can be seen that the â€Å"Great DiMaggio† was a simple fisherman in early life, much like the old man, and achieved stardom despite adversity. The old man has this great battle with an enormous fish, and throughout the whole ordeal, he constantly reassures himself by saying that â€Å"the Great DiMaggio† would have been able to pull through this. Just as DiMaggio managed to struggle through the pain of a bone spur, the old man was able to struggle through the pain of his hands, and his immense adversity in the fish. Referring to the meaning, we can see that this relates to life in that we can always struggle through what is painful, so long as we stick to our principles and our guidances. The other fishermen had called the old man unlucky, because he had not caught a fish for many days. This is reflected in the sail of the boat. The sail was """"patched with flour sacks and, furled, it looked like the flag of permanent defeat"""" (Pg. 5). Yet, when un...

History of the US Congressional Gag Rule

History of the US Congressional Gag Rule The gag rule was a legislative tactic employed by southern members of Congress beginning in the 1830s to prevent any discussion of slavery in the House of Representatives. The silencing of slavery opponents was accomplished by a resolution first passed in 1836 and renewed repeatedly for eight years. The suppression of free speech in the House was naturally deemed offensive to northern members of Congress and their constituents. What came to be widely known as the gag rule faced opposition for years, most notably from former president John Quincy Adams. Adams, who had been elected to Congress following one frustrating and unpleasant presidential term in the 1820s, became the champion of anti-slavery sentiment on Capitol Hill. And his stubborn opposition to the gag rule became a rallying point for the growing abolitionist movement in America. The gag rule was finally rescinded in December 1844. The tactic had been successful in its immediate goal, the silencing of any debate about slavery in Congress. But in the long term, the gag rule was counterproductive... The tactic came to be viewed as patently unfair and undemocratic Attacks upon Adams, which ranged from attempts to censure him in Congress to a constant stream of death threats, eventually made his opposition to slavery a more popular cause. The heavy-handed suppression of debate over slavery heightened  the deepening divide in the country in the decades before the Civil War. And the battles against the gag rule worked to bring abolitionist sentiment, which had been considered a fringe belief, closer to the mainstream of American public opinion. Background to the Gag Rule Compromises over slavery had made the ratification of the United States Constitution possible. And in the early years of the country, the issue of slavery was generally absent in Congressional debates. One time it arose was in 1820 when the Missouri Compromise set a precedent about the addition of new states. Slavery was being made illegal in the northern states in the early 1800s. In the South, thanks to the growth of the cotton industry, the institution of slavery were only getting stronger. And there seemed to be no hope of abolishing it through legislative means.   The U.S. Congress, including nearly all members from the North, accepted that slavery was legal under the Constitution, and it was an issue for the individual states. However, in one particular instance, Congress did have a role to play in slavery, and that was in the District of Columbia. The district was ruled by Congress, and slavery was legal in the district. That would become an occasional point of debate, as congressmen from the North would periodically urge that slavery in the District of Columbia be outlawed. Until the 1830s, slavery, as abhorrent as it may have been to many Americans, was simply not discussed much in the government. A provocation by abolitionists in the 1830s, the pamphlet campaign, in which anti-slavery pamphlets were mailed to the South, changed that for a time. The issue of what could be sent through the federal mails suddenly made anti-slavery literature a highly controversial federal issue. But the pamphlet campaign fizzled out, as mailing pamphlets which would be seized and burned in southern streets were seen as simply impractical. And anti-slavery campaigners began to rely more on a new tactic, petitions sent to Congress. The right of petition was enshrined in the First Amendment. Though often overlooked in the modern world, the right to petition the government was held in very high regard in the early 1800s. When citizens began sending anti-slavery petitions to Congress, the House of Representatives would be confronted with the increasingly contentious debate about slavery. And, on Capitol Hill, it meant pro-slavery legislators began to seek a way to avoid dealing with the anti-slavery petitions entirely. John Quincy Adams in Congress The issue of petitions against slavery, and the efforts by southern legislators to suppress them did not begin with John Quincy Adams. But it was the former president who brought great attention to the issue and who persistently kept the matter controversial. Adams occupied a unique place in early America. His father, John Adams, had been a founder of the nation, the first vice president, and the country’s second president. His mother, Abigail Adams, was, like her husband, a dedicated opponent of slavery. In November 1800 John and Abigail Adams became the original inhabitants of the White House, which was still unfinished. They had previously lived in places where slavery was legal, though waning in actual practice. But they found it particularly offensive to look from the windows of the president’s mansion and see groups of slaves working to build the new federal city. Their son, John Quincy Adams, inherited their abhorrence of slavery. But during his public career, as a senator, diplomat, secretary of state, and president, there hadn’t been much he could do about it. The position of the federal government was that slavery was legal under the Constitution. And even an anti-slavery president, in the early 1800s, was essentially forced to accept it. Adams lost his bid for a second presidential term when he lost the very bitter election of 1828 to Andrew Jackson. And he returned to Massachusetts in 1829, finding himself, for the first time in decades, with no public duty to perform. Some local citizens where he lived encouraged him to run for Congress. In the style of the time, he professed to have little interest in the job but said if the voters chose him, he would serve. Adams was overwhelmingly elected to represent his district in the U.S. House of Representatives. For the first and only time, an American president would serve in Congress after leaving the White House. After moving back to Washington, in 1831, Adams spent time becoming familiar with the rules of Congress. And when the Congress went into session, Adams began what would turn into a lengthy battle against southern pro-slavery politicians. A newspaper, the New York Mercury, published, in the issue of December 21, 1831, a dispatch about events in Congress on December 12, 1831: Numerous petitions and memorials were presented in the House of Representatives. Among them were 15 from the citizens of the Society of Friends in Pennsylvania, praying for the consideration of the question of slavery, with a view to its abolition, and for the abolition of the traffic of slaves within the District of Columbia. The petitions were presented by John Quincy Adams, and referred to the Committee on the District. By introducing the anti-slavery petitions from Pennsylvania Quakers, Adams had acted audaciously. However, the petitions, once they were sent to the House committee which administered the District of Columbia, were tabled and forgotten. For the next few years, Adams periodically presented similar petitions. And the anti-slavery petitions were always sent into procedural oblivion. In late 1835 southern members of Congress began to get more aggressive about the issue of anti-slavery petitions. Debates about how to suppress them occurred in Congress and Adams became energized to fight the efforts to stifle free speech. On January 4, 1836, a day on which members could present petitions to the House, John Quincy Adams introduced an innocuous petition related to foreign affairs. He then introduced another petition, sent to him by citizens of Massachusetts, calling for the abolition of slavery. That created a stir in the House chamber. The speaker of the house, future president and Tennessee congressman James K. Polk, invoked complicated parliamentary rules to prevent Adams from presenting the petition. Throughout January 1836 Adams continued to try to introduce anti-slavery petitions, which were met with an endless invocation of various rules to ensure they wouldn’t be considered. The House of Representatives bogged down completely. And a committee was formed to come up with procedures to handle the petition situation. Introduction of the Gag Rule The committee met for several months to come up with a way to suppress the petitions. In May 1836 the committee produced the following resolution, which served to completely silence any discussion of slavery: â€Å"All petitions, memorials, resolutions, propositions, or papers, relating in any way, or to any extent whatsoever, to the subject of slavery or the abolition of slavery, shall, without being either printed or referred, be laid on the table and that no further action whatever shall be had thereon.† On May 25, 1836, during a heated Congressional debate on the proposal to silence any talk of slavery, Congressman John Quincy Adams tried to take the floor. Speaker James K. Polk refused to recognize him and called on other members instead. Adams eventually got a chance to speak but was quickly challenged and told the points he wished to make were not debatable. As Adams tried to speak, he was interrupted by Speaker Polk. A newspaper in Amherst, Massachusetts, The Farmer’s Cabinet, on June 3, 1836 issue, reported on the anger shown by Adams in the May 25, 1836 debate: â€Å"At another stage of the debate, he appealed again from a decision of the Speaker, and cried out, ‘I am aware there is a slave-holding Speaker in the Chair.’ The confusion which ensued was immense.â€Å"Affairs having gone against Mr. Adams, he exclaimed Mr. Speaker, am I gagged or not? â€Å" That question posed by Adams would become famous. And when the resolution to suppress talk of slavery passed the House, Adams received his answer. He was indeed gagged. And no talk of slavery would be allowed on the floor of the House of Representatives. Continuous Battles Under the rules of the House of Representatives, the gag rule had to be renewed at the outset of each new session of Congress. So over the course of four Congresses, a span of eight years, the southern members of Congress, along with willing northerners, were able to pass the rule anew. Opponents of the gag rule, most notably John Quincy Adams, continued to battle against it whenever they could. Adams, who had acquired the nickname â€Å"Old Man Eloquent,† frequently sparred with southern congressmen as he would try to bring the subject of slavery into House debates. As Adams became the face of opposition to the gag rule, and to slavery itself, he began to receive death threats. And at times resolutions were introduced in Congress to censure him. In early 1842, a debate over whether to censure Adams essentially amounted to a trial. Accusations against Adams and his fiery defenses appeared in newspapers for weeks. The controversy served to make Adams, at least in the North, a heroic figure battling for the principle of free speech and open debate. Adams was never formally censured, as his reputation probably prevented his opponents from ever gathering the necessary votes. And in his old age, he continued to engage in blistering rhetoric. At times he baited southern congressmen, taunting them over their ownership of slaves. The End of the Gag Rule The gag rule persisted  for eight years. But over time the measure was seen by more and more Americans as essentially anti-democratic. Northern members of Congress who had gone along with it in the late 1830s, in the interest of compromise, or simply as a surrender to the power of the slave states, began to turn against it. In the nation at large, the abolitionist movement had been seen, in the early decades of the 19th century, as a small band on the outer fringe of society. Abolitionist editor  William Lloyd Garrison had even been attacked on the streets of Boston. And the Tappan Brothers, New York merchants who often financed abolitionist activities, were routinely threatened. Yet, if the abolitionists were widely viewed as a fanatical fringe, tactics like the gag rule made the pro-slavery factions appear just as extreme. The suppression of free speech in the halls of Congress became untenable to northern members of Congress. On December 3, 1844, John Quincy Adams put forth a motion to rescind the gag rule. The motion passed,  by a vote in the House of Representatives of 108 to 80. And the rule which had prevented debate over slavery was no longer in force. Slavery, of course, was not ended in America until the Civil War. So being able to debate the issue in Congress did not bring an end to slavery. Yet, by opening up a debate, changes in thinking were made possible. And the national attitude toward slavery was no doubt affected. John Quincy Adams served in Congress for four years after the gag rule was rescinded. His opposition to slavery inspired younger politicians who could carry on his fight. Adams collapsed at his desk in the House chamber on February 21, 1848. He was carried to the speakers office and died there the following day. A young Whig congressman who had been present when Adams collapsed, Abraham Lincoln, was a member of the delegation which traveled to Massachusetts for the funeral of Adams.