Flowers for Algernon :: Free Essay Writer

Flowers for Algernon "Hurting Charlie" When was the last time you wanted something so much, you would sacrifice your life to have it; even if just for a moment? Charlie Gordon, a 37 year old man with a learning disability, did just that. In the story "Flowers for Algernon", by Daniel Keyes, Charlie gets a chance to alter his I.Q. substantially through operation. The only drawback to this is, the long-term outcomes of the operation are unknown. The operation does succeed, but later Charlie is sent on a riveting downward spiral into the life he tried to run away from. The operation hurt Charlie in every imaginable way; and did nothing to help him. Is it not better to do your best than to be the best? Charlie Gordon was a motivated man who always put forth as much effort as he could! He struggled for independence and freedom in a world he desperately wanted to be a part of. A statement such as, "Im gonna try awful hard" is often heard spoken by Charlie. Everybody notices how hard Charlie tries to be what he considers normal. Dr. Strauss described Charlie best when he said, "But most people of his low mentality are hostile and uncooperative. They are usually dull, apathetic, and hard to reach. He has a good nature. He’s interested and eager to please". If a person is doing the best they can for the circumstances, isn’t that the best? Why should a person feel pressured to be what he isn’t capable of being? After the operation, Charlie first doesn’t even want to try, then can’t remember what it means to try, and finally, doesn’t have hope enough to try. His statement changes from, "Im gonn a try awful hard" to, "maybe its just easier not to do what I say Im going to do"! the thought to try his best never even occurs. He lost one of his most valuable qualities due to his need to conform. If a man does not know of hurt and suffering, he should not have to know. Before Charlie knew the truth of his life and was able to look back on it, he didn’t know of some horrible feelings. He never had to feel ugly, unwanted, alone, and most of all, ashamed. After finding out how all of the men he thought were his friends only used him for free laughs, Charlie feels so humiliated.

Alexander the Great Essay 9

Alexander the Great Alexander the Great was a king and conqueror. He is commonly referred to as â€Å"the most powerful leader of all time. † What is it that makes him such a powerful leader? What has he accomplished that has made him so significant? Were his accomplishments positive or negative? These are all questions that when combined as one create a debate that has been going on for decades. There are those who admire Alexander’s military achievements and ability to carve out the largest empire the world has seen. Then there are those who perceive him as a selfish, cruel madman with drinking problems. This paper will outline the different sides taken on Alexander and the question as to what his significance/influence was and whether it was good or bad. Alexander the Great was the son of Phillip II, king of Macedonia. Phillip had always done much to prepare him for a military and political future (Lewis 48). Alexander served as a regent for his father at the young age of 16 for the start of his military career. After the assassination of his father he obtained the throne in 336 B. C. E. and leader of the League of Corinth. In 335 B. C. E he crushed Macedonia’s borders and destroyed the city of Thebes. This caused Athens to join the league with no fight. 334 B. C. E. was the year of his first great victory, which opened Asia Minor to conquest. He then, in 333, met the Persian King for the first time and caused him to flee by charging even though Alexander was outnumbered. This was the beginning of the end for Persia. Alexander went on and in his 13 year reign was conquering the Mediterranean, forming new cities, and producing an empire touching on 3 continents and encompassing 2 million sq miles (O’Brien 44). Such work is something one should be proud of and many agree that conquering all of Persia in such a short amount of time is Alexander the Greats biggest accomplishment. Balcer obviously agrees with that stating that Alexander succeeded in forming the largest western empire of the ancient world and removing Persian intervention in Greek affairs (Balcer 121-122). Sacks obviously agrees as well saying that his â€Å"principal achievement was the conquest of the empire of Persia,†(14). The perspective of many scholars is that Alexander really was â€Å"the greatest leader† and through the conquering he undertook he achieved many great things. This is the side of the debate in which scholars find Alexander’s significance to be a positive thing. It is argued he was a â€Å"military genius with iron will and boundless ambition,† (O’Brien 45). Scholar Edmund Burke clearly supports this idea in saying that in his accession to the Macedonian throne his foundation of Alexandria, conquest of the Persian Empire and his strategic and tactical genius makes him a â€Å"legend† (Burke 67). He was not the only scholar to refer to him as a legend for a professor at Boise State notes that Alexander exhibited tremendous bravery, didn’t let a wound stop him, never lost a battle, had those around him believe he was invincible, and knew and loved his men. Combining all these factors created an army that could not be stopped and its accomplishments outdid anything that had been seen yet. Alexander and his troops had become a â€Å"legend,† (Knox). Alexander had also been seen as the reason for successfully spreading Greek culture that still exists today. Oriental and Greek cultures blended and flourished as a result of the Empire, making Greek culture his true legacy (Balcer 124). The Hellenistic Era took place right after Alexander’s death and he is said to be the one who ushered this fascinating era. (O’Brien 46). The scholars are right, Alexander truly is a legend for he was the finest battlefield commander of the ancient world and remade the map of the ancient world (Sacks 14). Not just anyone can achieve such success, there seems to be something extraordinary about this man. Yet, not everyone agrees that he was so extraordinary. Yes, he did carve out the largest empire and at an amazingly rapid pace but his aims and ambitions were different than spreading Hellenism throughout the western Mediterranean and near the east. He was a self-confident man who only wanted to conquer for self-pleasure. Alexander is the reason that corruption and peculation were treated with casualness during this time. His pleasure was when his peoples were loyal to him and that was all that was necessary for his approval. It was because of him that Macedonia lost its manpower through the strenuous battles he continuously fought. He left it as a weakened kingdom. His empire is given so much credit but it was only based on rapid military conquest and died right after his death (Stoneman 92-94). It is believed that Alexander conquered to rule, not to blend cultures. Heavy drinking led to disastrous incidents and hastened his death. An example of such a disaster was the burning down of Persepolis in a drunken revel. This is not an attribute of a good leader. He also lacked long-range planning and neglected his kingdoms future by exhausting himself in warfare while he delayed fathering a royal successor. His selfishness is proved by his act of casually killing any threats to the throne at the beginning of his reign (Sacks 15). Those who see Alexander in a negative manner obviously have quite strong opinions about it. They see him as more of a madman than the most powerful leader. It is easy to see where they get their assumptions from for they look at the bloodshed part of Alexander’s reign. Instead of focusing on the rare ability he had to conquer so successfully the use the old journals and other texts used to learn about Alexander and don’t see past the drunken stories and jump to the negative side of his actions to make them cruel. Those who make assumptions about him being the greatest military leader of all time look at the historical records we have of them and analyze his tactics realizing they really are extraordinary. No other person has conquered so much, so fast and left such a legacy. I agree with those who see him as a significantly positive influence so its easier to see where they are coming from. I look at the whole picture; his achievements were unlike anyone else’s in history and as a King he was only trying to do the better for his country. He deserves the credit he has received for spreading Greek culture; there is no other way it would have happened. Scholar Burke put it perfectly when in his article he states, â€Å"when mention is made of a man of action and genius, there is perhaps no one of the ancients who so quickly comes to mind as Alexander the Great† (Burke 67).

How to Conjugate Décider, to Decide, in French

You may be able to guess that the French verb  dà ©cider  means to decide. French students will be delighted to know that conjugating it to mean decided or deciding is almost as easy as remembering the word itself. A quick lesson will show you exactly how its done. Conjugating the French Verb  Dà ©cider French verb conjugations can be a headache at times. Thats because we must change the infinitive verb ending for every subject pronoun as well as the present, future, or imperfect past tense. While there are more words that you need to memorize, each new one becomes a little easier. This is particularly true with a verb such as  dà ©cider. It is a regular -er verb  and it follows the most common verb conjugation pattern found in the French language. To conjugate it, we simply add a variety of endings to the verb stem of  dà ©cid-. For instance, I decide is je dà ©cide and we will decide is nous dà ©ciderons. Subject Present Future Imperfect je dcide dciderai dcidais tu dcides dcideras dcidais il dcide dcidera dcidait nous dcidons dciderons dcidions vous dcidez dciderez dcidiez ils dcident dcideront dcidaient The Present Participle The  present participle  of dà ©cider  is  dà ©cidant. This is as simple as adding -ant  to the verb stem. It can be used as an adjective, gerund, or noun,   as well as a verb. The Past Participle for Dà ©cider  and Passà © Composà © The  past participle  of dà ©cider  is  dà ©cidà ©. This is used to form the  passà © composà ©, a common way to say the past tense decided in French. In order to use it, you will also need the subject pronoun and the matching conjugate of  avoir  (an  auxiliary, or helping, verb). For example, I decided becomes jai dà ©cidà © and we decided is nous avons dà ©cidà ©. Note how  ai  and  avons  are conjugates of  avoir  and that the past participle does not change. More Simple  Conjugations Practice those forms of  dà ©cider  in context as they are used most often. As your French improves, consider learning the following forms as they can be useful as well. For instance, the subjunctive and the conditional forms are both verb moods and they imply some degree of uncertainty to the act of deciding. In literature and formal French writing, you will also find the passà © simple or the imperfect subjunctive in use. Subject Subjunctive Conditional Pass Simple Imperfect Subjunctive je dcide dciderais dcidai dcidasse tu dcides dciderais dcidas dcidasses il dcide dciderait dcida dcidt nous dcidions dciderions dcidmes dcidassions vous dcidiez dcideriez dcidtes dcidassiez ils dcident dcideraient dcidrent dcidassent The imperative verb form is also quite useful, particularly if you want to use  dà ©cider  in quick statements that demand or request a decision. When using it, the subject pronoun is not required, so tu dà ©cide becomes dà ©cide. Imperative (tu) dcide (nous) dcidons (vous) dcidez