The Many Personalities of Lolita and Humbert in Nabokov’s Lolita Essay

The Many Personalities of Lolita and Humbert in Nabokov’s Lolita Although they are intimately involved, the title character of Nabokov's Lolita never fully reveals her true self to Humbert. Likewise, Humbert pours his physical love into Lolita, but he never reveals to his stepdaughter a self that is separate from his obsession with her. These two characters mask large parts of their personalities from each other and the rest of the world, creating different images and personas in regard to different people and situations. One assumption of post-structuralism holds that â€Å"persons are culturally and discursively structured, created in interaction as situated, symbolic beings.† In accordance with this idea that people are created by their culture and in their interactions, both Lolita and Humbert have different personalities in different situations and circumstances. However, they ultimately show a more continuous and profound self-existence than just as faces created in their various interactions. Post-structuralism is a theory containing a wide array of ideas concerning meaning, reality, and identity. Post-structuralism believes that the mind receives â€Å"impressions from without which it sifts and organizes into a knowledge of the world† which is expressed in language, or symbols (Selden, Widdowson 128). The â€Å"subject,† or person, â€Å"grasps the object and puts it into words†(128). Knowledge is formed from various types of communication which â€Å"pre-exist the subject’s experiences,† the subject existing as a being that is â€Å"not an autonomous or unified identity, but is always ‘in process’†(129). There are many assumptions of post-structuralism, but only one will be focused on here, in terms of Lolita and Humbert. This assumpti... ...s of Lolita and Humbert to show the isolation and loneliness they feel, and to show just how different and immoral the situation is. By stressing the dissonance between one persona to the next, he portrays a view of his characters that is sad and shocking, for the public seen is also the reader; the unaware, innocent, â€Å"moral† group. By letting us into the different faces of Lolita and Humbert, Nabokov reveals the tragedy in the novel, and allows the reader to vividly feel what is morally right and wrong with Humbert, Lolita, and ourselves. Works Cited Lye, John. Some Post-Structural Assumptions. 1997. 5-2001. http://www.brocku.ca/english/courses/4F70/poststruct.html. Nabokov, Vladimir. Lolita. New York: Random, 1997. Selden, Raman, and Peter Widdowson. A Reader’s Guide To Contemporary Literary Theory. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1993.

The Fundamentals of Entrepreneurship: The American Dream

I have always been fascinated by the concept of the â€Å"American Dream†. Even if, nowadays, this concept is more and more criticize because some people believe that the structure of American society doesn’t follow anymore the idealistic goal of the â€Å"American Dream†, providing example such as inequality in class or race which suggest that the â€Å"American Dream† is not attainable for all. But to me the term â€Å"American Dream† stays unchanged: all people can succeed through hard work, and all people have the potential to live happy and successful lives. And in my mind, the entrepreneurship is one of the most famous way to achieve this â€Å"American Dream†. Steven BUYERS who is the founder and owner of EnergyLogic –a fast-growing company in Northern Colorado, appears to me as a very good example of this â€Å"American Dream† which is about hope and the potential for change. In fact, I feel this at the same time through the very innovative and sustainable development oriented concept of his company, and the take of initiative he seems able to show without having a precise idea of where it will lead him. In this paper, I’m going to discuss two major topics which seems relevant to me given Steven BUYERS’ experience, they are: the self-made man and the capacity to see opportunity. Self-made man The first thing I would like to precise is about the vision I have of a self-made man. Obviously when I use this term I’m not saying that Steven BUYERS is the only one responsible of the success of his company, because it would mean that nobody have accompanied him in this project and it wouldn’t be fair not to think about his employees or his wife who has apparently plays a huge role in his success. But I rather mean that he had managed to create and manage a success business starting from like nothing. The concept of the self-made man is necessarily connected with the â€Å"American dream† that I have mentioned before. The self-made man comes from unpromising circumstances, is not born into privilege and wealth, and manages to become a great success in life by his own efforts. The story of the self-made man embodies the goal of every man: â€Å"to become the captain of his own destiny. Actually this is really close to the reasons that people become entrepreneurs and starts their own firms, that is to say: â€Å"be their own boss, pursue their own ideas and pursue financial rewards. † A self-made man is anyone who attains far greater success which was not predictable. The background that Steven BUYERS told us about isn’t exactly what we can call a â€Å"predestinated background†. Indeed, he went through many different jobs and life’s experiences (from the army to a bookstore) before he found his way which tends to prove us that he is one of whose are able to create their own greatness. Finally I would say that being a self-made man, as being an entrepreneurship, is the result of a difference in your character and a willingness to do whatever it takes to be the best and achieve your dreams, just as the concessions made by Steven BUYERS at the beginning of his project. Capacity to see opportunity â€Å"An opportunity is a favorable set of circumstances that creates a need for a new product, service or business. † When we know that homes represent 20% of the energy use in USA –whereas transport â€Å"only† represents 27%, it appears logical to focus on this problem. But at the time that Steven BUYERS started his business, that is to say in 1998, nobody cared about saving energy. He came with this really simple question: â€Å"How to be more efficient with houses’ energy? †, and his project was to provide people with a solution. As far as the opportunity recognition is concerned, Steven BUYERS has done a really good job. Indeed, he identified a product/service that people need and are willing to buy. Everybody isn’t able to see opportunity, because opportunity isn’t just an idea you come with thinking it could work. And this is a crucial point which will determine if the business is going to work, or not. An opportunity has to perform four essential qualities: attractive, durable, timely and anchored to a product. That was the case for Steven’s idea. It was attractive because it allows people to save money; it was durable because it lasts a life-time; it was timely because sustainable development was beginning to develop; and finally it was anchored to a product because it deals with houses and isolation. What is even more impressive in this recognition of opportunity is that Steven BUYERS hasn’t done any real market study or business plan before launching his company. To me the way to identify an opportunity which fit the best to Steven BUYERS is the personal characteristics of entrepreneur. This capacity to see opportunity is an essential trait in my mind which is related to creativity. To conclude I would cite the philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson: â€Å"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail. † Being an entrepreneur means being able to go where nobody else went before you, being able to take risks, being able to see opportunities where nobody has looked before you†¦ In my mind there is different ways to succeed in your job. Steven BUYERS succeed by seeing opportunities and managing his own success story as many self-made men have done before him. But no matter what is your background as far as you take your chance to develop successfully your business idea. Unfortunately, nowadays, entrepreneurs are more and more assimilated to capitalism and all the unfairness it can raise. As a result, famous self-made men such as Rockefeller are not as well-recognized as they were in the past –and sometimes even criticized. So we can wonder if the â€Å"American Dream† is still an example to follow or a goal to reach for the majority of American people.

Dr. Francis Townsend, Old Age Public Pension Organizer

Dr. Francis Everitt Townsend, born into a poor farm family, worked as a physician and health provider. During the  Great Depression, when Townsend himself was in retirement age, he became interested in how the federal government could provide old age pensions. His project inspired the 1935 Social Security Act, which he found inadequate. Life and Profession Francis Townsend was born on January 13, 1867, on a farm in Illinois. When he was an adolescent his family moved to Nebraska, where he was educated through two years of high school. In 1887, he left school and moved to California with his brother, hoping to strike it rich in the Los Angeles land boom. Instead, he lost almost everything. Dejected, he returned  to Nebraska and finished high school, then began to farm in Kansas. Later, he started medical school in Omaha, funding his education while working as a salesman. After he graduated, Townsend went to work in South Dakota in the Black Hills region, then part of the frontier. He married a widow, Minnie Brogue, who worked as  a nurse. They had three children and adopted a daughter. In 1917, when World War I began, Townsend enlisted as a medical officer in the army.  He returned to South Dakota after the war, but ill health aggravated by the harsh winter led him to move to southern California. He found himself, in his medical practice, competing with older established physicians and younger modern physicians, and he did not do well financially. The arrival of the Great Depression wiped out his remaining savings. He was able to obtain an appointment as a health officer in Long Beach, where he observed the effects of the Depression, especially on older Americans. When a change in local politics led to the loss of his job, he found himself broke once again. Townsend’s Old Age Revolving Pension Plan The Progressive Era had seen several moves to establish old-age pensions and national health insurance, but with the Depression, many reformers focused on unemployment insurance. In his late 60s, Townsend decided to do something about the financial devastation of the elderly poor. He envisioned a program where the federal government would provide a $200 per month pension to every American over the age of 60, and saw this financed through a 2% tax on all business transactions. The total cost would be greater than $20 billion a year, but he saw the pensions as a solution to the Depression. If the recipients were required to spend their $200 within thirty days, he reasoned, this would significantly stimulate the economy, and create a â€Å"velocity effect,† ending the Depression. The plan was criticized by many economists. Essentially, half the national income would be directed to the eight percent of the population over the age of 60. But it was still a very attractive plan, especially to the older people who would benefit. Townsend began to organize around his Old Age Revolving Pension Plan (Townsend Plan) in September 1933 and had created a movement within months. Local groups organized Townsend Clubs to support the idea, and by January 1934, Townsend said 3,000 groups had begun. He sold pamphlets, badges, and other items, and financed a national weekly mailing. In mid-1935, Townsend said that there were 7,000 clubs with 2.25 million members, most of them older people. A petition drive brought 20 million signatures to Congress. Buoyed by the immense support, Townsend spoke to cheering crowds as he traveled, including to two national conventions organized around the Townsend Plan. In 1935, encouraged by the massive support for the Townsend idea, Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal  passed the Social Security Act.  Many in Congress, pressured to support the Townsend Plan, preferred being able to support the Social Security Act, which for the first time provided a safety net for Americans too old to work. Townsend considered this an inadequate substitute and began angrily attacking the Roosevelt administration.  He joined with such populists as the Rev. Gerald L. K. Smith and Huey Long’s Share Our Wealth Society, and with the Rev. Charles Coughlin’s National Union for Social Justice and Union Party. Townsend invested much energy in the Union Party and organizing voters to vote for candidates who supported the Townsend Plan. He estimated that the Union Party would get 9 million votes in 1936, and when the actual votes were less than a million, and Roosevelt was reelected in a landslide, Townsend abandoned party politics. His political activity led to conflict within the ranks of his supporters, including the filing of some lawsuits. In 1937, Townsend was asked to testify before the Senate on allegations of corruption in the Townsend Plan movement. When he refused to answer questions, he was convicted of contempt of Congress.  Roosevelt, despite Townsend’s opposition to the New Deal and Roosevelt, commuted Townsend’s 30-day sentence. Townsend continued to work for his plan, making changes to try to make it less simplistic and more acceptable to economic analysts. His newspaper and national headquarters continued. He met with presidents Truman and Eisenhower. He was still making speeches supporting reform of old age security programs, with audiences mostly of the elderly, shortly before he died on September 1, 1960, in Los Angeles. In later years, during a time of  relative prosperity, the expansion of federal, state, and private pensions took much of the energy out of his movement. Sources Richard L. Neuberger and Kelley Loe, An Army of the Aged. 1936.David H. Bennett. Demagogues in the Depression: American Radicals and the Union Party, 1932-1936. 1969.Abraham Holtzman. The Townsend Movement: A Political Study. 1963.