COMMERCIAL LAW Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

COMMERCIAL LAW - Essay Example According to sections 171 and 192 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1979, Daniel can claim the identifiable part because it is unsold and is not mixed with any other goods. In Clough Mill v Martin3, the seller had retained the title to the goods and when the buyer became insolvent before paying for the goods, the goods were identifiable. It was held that the seller had the title to the goods and he was also entitled to damages. Therefore, Duncan can claim this part of copper wires because he retains the title to them and this part does not form the assets of Craftit Ltd and would not be appropriated in settlement of its claims. Larry, the liquidator, would not be able to withhold possession of them. The part that has been wound into coils around cardboard spools is not identifiable because it now forms a part of a finished or a semi-finished good. Duncan’s title in respect of this part of copper wires is lost. In Borden (UK) Ltd v Scottish Timber Products Ltd4 and Re Peachdart Ltd5, the buyer had used the resin that he had bought as an ingredient in the manufacture of chipboard. He became insolvent before payment. It was held that the seller had lost the title to the resin as it was mixed with other goods. The wound copper wires cannot be returned to their original form. It may be argued that the parties to the contract had agreed on the terms that the title was to be retained by the seller even if the goods were processed. This term poses a problem in reality. If the supplier of cardboard spools also had supplied them on the retention of title clause, it would be quite a conundrum. Therefore, the courts might apply Re: Bond Worth Ltd6 hence allowing property in the good s to pass to Craftit Ltd and resulting in a charge being granted back to Duncan. However, the courts would first make certain whether such a charge is allowed to exist.

Sexual Sadism And Sex Offenders Psychology Essay

Sexual Sadism And Sex Offenders Psychology Essay Sexual Sadism is a type of paraphilia that may involve making a person suffer in some way that may or may not lead to death. It varies from extreme forms of torture to mild. It can be with a consensual partner who is a masochist and also the injuring of a non consensual person. Sexual sadists usually have mental disorders such as psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder which can explain their level of violence and their lack of empathy for their victims. Many sex offenders are diagnosed with Paraphilias and sexual disorders. Paraphilias are recurrent intense sexual arousing fantasies or urges involving nonhuman objects, suffering, humiliation of oneself or ones partner, children or non consenting persons (APA, 1994). For some people these fantasies are necessary to achieve erotic arousal whereas for others they are episodic and the individual can be stimulated otherwise. This type of behavior, urges and fantasies can cause significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other areas of functioning. It has to last over a period of at least six months (APA, 1994) .One of the most dangerous paraphilias is sexual sadism, which involves violence that may lead to death in which the offender gets sexual pleasure by inflicting pain on the victim. According to the DSM IV, sexual sadism is the act of humiliating, binding, beating, or making another person suffer in some way were sexual excitement is the result of control over the victim. It typically develops in adolescence with interests coming from masochistic masturbatory practices. Autoerotic asphyxia is a practice that constricts the oxygen during masturbation, accomplished with the use of a strangulation device. The purpose is to create a higher level of sexual excitement through the restriction of oxygen in the brain (Terry, 2006). The restriction of oxygen itself its not whats sexual exciting but its the combination of the behavior, lack of oxygen, danger and the fantasy. Sexual sadists are aroused by the torture and pain of the victim which can lead to death, but there offenders do not derive satisfaction from the murder itself. They are likely to mutilate and torture their victims becoming more aroused as there is an increase in the level of agony. Sexual sadism is usually not consensual and involves injury or death to the victim. The element of fear in the victim and complete control of the victim is the major stimuli in sexual sadism. Such as severe beating, torture, burning, cutting, rape and murder. Sexual offenders who are potentially most likely to meet the criteria of sexual sadism are typically those who sexually assault or who molest children. Some of the characteristics for sexual offenders are usually, schizoid, psychopath, antisocial, narcissist, lack or social skills and relationships. Sadists have been found to exhibit a large number of other paraphilias including transvestic fetishism, masochism, voyeurism, and exhibitionism. Some have alcohol and drug abuse, obsession traits, collects pornography, a history of impaired social relationships, physical and sexual abuse in childhood and extensive fantasy lives incorporating detailed sadistic fantasies (Kirch). Sex offenders who are sadistic usually lack empathy and emotion which might be a reason why they commit the most violence to their victims because they detach themselves. Deficits in empathy facilitate offending behavior, suggesting that offenders lack of awareness or sensitivity to other peoples feelings may impair their ability to appreciate the effects of their behavior on others (Kirsch). Emotions such as anger and shame are believed to fuel aggressive and retributive fantasies, and these fantasies are maintained and enhanced through the process of positive and negative emotional reinforcement. Feelings of inferiority are believed to be reduced during fantasy, while feelings of control, power, and dominance are enhanced. Sexual sadism may begin with fantasies and in some cases these may never be acted upon or be acted out in the more mild forms of consensual relationships. Sadistic fantasies and behaviors can include dominance, humiliation, bondage, biting, burning, whipping, penetration with foreign objects, strangulation, and mutilation of the body (Kirsch) Sadistic sexual fantasies are noted in certain adolescents. In some of these the fantasies serves rehearsal for future sadistic sexual acts, especially in adolescents with callous-unemotional personality who often emerge in adult life as psychopaths(Stone, 2010) . There is a difference in practicing sadism with a consenting partner and non consenting partner. In non-consensual cases, the behavior usually continues and often escalates over time as the perpetrator experiences a need for increased violence in order to stimulate the sexual response. The level of sadism varies from being in control, dominant and submissive in which the offender does this to a masochist person to injuring a non consensual partner. Sexual sadism is found predominately in males and usually onsets with puberty although sadistic behavior may be evident earlier in children. In all male cases, it becomes evident by early adulthood. In cases of female sexual sadism, onset is often later and often triggered by relationships with men who want to be d ominated. Kraft-Ebbing suggested that mastering and possessing an absolutely defenceless human object is part of sadism. He sub- classified sexual sadism into several categories including lust murder where there was a connection between sexual arousal and killing which may extend to cannibalism. These men are thought to rarely derive sexual satisfaction from the assault or murder and this distinguishes them from lust murderers for whom aggression and sexuality become fused into a single psychological experience sadism in which aggression is eroticized (Myers, W.C., Burgess, A.W., Burgess, A.G. and Douglas, J.E., 1999. Serial murder and sexual homicide. In: Van Hasselt, V. and Hersen, M., Editors, 1999. Handbook of psychological approaches with violent offenders, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, pp. 153-172.Marshall,2003)Then theres the offender who mutilates the corpses, those who like to injure females, defilement of women, symbolic sadism, ideal sadism or sadistic fantasies alone without acts, sadism with other objects and sadistic acts with animals. MaccCulloch argues that the wish to control that is the primary motivating force in sadism, and because there is a range of degrees and kinds of control which can be applied by one person to another, sadism may manifest itself in a variety of ways. Normal sexual relationships include elements of dominance and submission, and hence control: indeed, modern manuals of sexual behavior often include bondage games as part of a suggested repertoire of sexual activity He defines sadism as the repeated practice of behavior and fantasy which is characterized by a wish to control another person by domination, denigration or inflicting pain, for the purpose of producing mental pleasure and sexual arousal whether or not accompanied by orgasm in the sadist. The range of controlling behavior under consideration forms a continuum from subtle verbal control through various types of psychological control to actual physical intervention such as bondage, imprisonment, hypnosis, anesthesia and even blows to render the victim unconscious or dead. As sadistic behavior gives pleasure to the sadist, and self-pleasuring behavior almost always has to be contrived, it would be expected that sadists devise situations which enable them to practice their sadism. If a central feature of sadism is control, then sadists would be expected to seek out actively and create situations where they have control. The concept that assailants stage-manage their control over others in order to give themselves pleasure provides a new frame of reference (Kuhne, 1962) Among sexual sadists ritualistic behaviors are one of the defining features. Not all the men violate the letter of the law, however much they may violate the spirit of the law. Some seek, and manage to achieve, attachment to willing partners (Stone, 2010). Researchers Janet Warren and Roy Hazelwood interviewed female partners of sexual sadists. Seven of the 20 sexual sadists with whom these women had affiliated had also murdered some of their victims .The relationships with these women were consensual, at least in the early phases; women had histories of having gone through physical abuse from a parent, or nine of the women were victims of incest by a father, brother, or even a female relative. These experiences these women experienced at an early age from their care takers allowed them to somehow expect, tolerate, and in some instances, even desire sadistic treatment at the hands of their sexual partners. The sexual sadists themselves initiated their partners into sadistic practices through a series of stages. In the candy and flowers stage, the man would win a woman with gifts, be a gentle man and be tender towards her, but then progress to a stage in which he expanded her sexual repertoire well beyond, and alien to, her prior experience. This might take such forms as forced anal sex, bondage, urinating on the woman, measured choking with release before unconsciousness occurred, etc. The mans quest for domination and total control might proceed to cutting the woman off from relatives and friends, such that she were now his sexual slave. If she were lucky, the pattern would progress no further. But in some cases, the drama would end in her death. Those sexual sadists who maintained ongoing relationships with a wife or girlfriend might lead a kind of double life, in which they exacted pain and suffering of a controlled sort with their partners, but also had a secret life in which they trolled for other women whom they tortured and murdered. In a number of examp les, the female partners were forced into becoming the inadvertent accomplices of sexually sadistic torture murder of other women. Some of these women, having been compliant in the beginning, desperately wanted out of the relationship toward the end but they were routinely threatened with torture and death themselves if they dared to exercise that option. Robert Anderson is an example of a sexual sadist who abducted Piper Streyle and ended up killing her. Her husband Vance Streyle remembered him coming to their trailer days before his wifes abduction to inquire about enrolling his kids into bible camp for the children. Several witnesses had seen Robert parked around the Streyles trailer in his black truck. When interviewed by the investigators he denied knowing anything about Pipers abduction or her whereabouts. It wasnt until the investigators got a search warrant to search his car and home. When investigators searched his car they found a wooden platform that had holes drilled into it. It was believed that it was made as a restraining device in which a persons ankles and hands could be tied to metal hoops that were strategically inserted into the board. The investigative team also found hairs attached to the wooden platform, which genetically matched pipers. More gruesome physical evidence was discovered around the river, which included several lengths of rope and chains, eyebolts, a vibrator and a half burned candle. It was believed that these items were used to torture Piper. According to investigators Hazelwood and Michaud, there was sufficient proof that Anderson was a sexual sadist who was excited by the physical and psychological suffering and helplessness of his victim. Their opinion was based on four factors one of them being that Anderson displayed an obvious interest in sexual bondage, a hallmark of the sexual sadist, which was represented by the restraints, d ildo, partially burnt candle, eyebolts, handcuff , keys, duct tape and plywood platform. The evidence found by investigators clearly indicated physical torture. It was surmised that after Piper was abducted, Anderson drove her to a wooded area near Baltic. While there he may have bound her to the platform, gagged her with duct tape, sheared her shirt off and then methodically tortured her with the dildo and candle before raping her. It is believed that he then murdered Piper and disposed of her body. Anderson admitted to police and friends that he liked anal sex, a preference his wife did not share. Research conducted by Hazelwood and Michaud found that sexual sadists prefer this form of sex. They believed that the dildo was used by Anderson to act out his fantasy. Conclusion Reference Page Stone ,M.H.(2010). Sexual Sadism: A portrait of Evil. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis Dynamic Psychiatry, Vol 38, 133-157 Kirsch,L.G, Becker,J.V .(2007). Emotional Deficits in psychopathy and sexual sadism: Implications for violent and sadistic behavior. Clinical psychology review. Vol 27, 904-922 Marshall,W.L, Kennedy,P.(2003).Sexual sadism in sexual offenders: An illusive diagnosis. Agression and violent behavior, Vol 8, 1-22 MacCulloch,M.J et al (1983). Sadistic Fantasy, Sadistic Behavior and Offending. Brit . J. Psychiat, 143, 20-29 Rachel,B .(2003) Robert Anderson: Awakening The Devil.Retrieved May 2,2010 from trutv website: http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/predators/robert_anderson/8.html Terry, K.J. (2006) Sexual Offenses and Offenders: Theory, Practice, and Policy. Pgs 84-91

Electronic Music :: Art

Electronic Music Lets go back to 1916 where Hugo Balle, Tristan Tzara, Marcel Janco, and Richard Hue- Isenbeck are finding the Dada artistic movement. These guys are a bunch of anarchists living in Zurich, Switzerland. The Dada movement preaches the â€Å"essence of spirit† the freedom of expression, hatred to â€Å"the great war† (or what we later called World War 1) , with a want to preserve the middle class, while humankind was degrading morally, with little or no hopes for a bright future. This goes in context with this CS3 course in how before world war 1, man thought so much was to come. The Dada movement expressed the deterioration or our civilizations due to wars through sound and not words. They thought sound was more sincere and liberal. These guys noticed that music doesn’t have a specific language, so more people can relate to it. They would rebel against what was happening in the world by creating music based on industrial noises. You have to think that back then everyone listened to polka, piano, and Stravinsky. When all of a sudden this â€Å"Dada† movement started using tools to bang on pots and pans to create music. It was not in any way popular, but these guys contributed the base for â€Å"Electronic Music†. Electronic Music is basically making noises into music not by instruments, but rather through alternative sources. The Dada Movement didn’t use electricity to make their music mainly because it’s the early 20th century and electricity was somewhat a luxury. So to be honest it was in the 1920’s that the worlds first synthesizer was born officially launching an era still very active today in all of our lives, yes, called electronic music. The first instrument was made by a Russian electronics genius named Leon Theremin and he called his synthesizer a â€Å"Theremin†. The cool thing about this synth is that it didn’t have a keyboard like synths do now; it was simply a device that senses changes in electromagnetic waves. Basically you stand in front of it and wave your hands back in fourth and it will make noises and tones out of that. So as everyone else go into Hollywood and Rock N Roll, the world was still not speaking the same language of music. People in the Middle East listened to Um-Kilthoum at the same time Elvis was dancing to the Jail House Rock.

Analysis of Hamlet Act II.2 Essay

Act 2, Scene 2 is an important scene for the audience’s impressions of Hamlet, as it is the first time we can see the â€Å"antic disposition† of which he has previously spoken. He enters the scene on page 50, and immediately enters into conversation with Polonius. We can see that the act of his madness relies upon rhetoric devices such as puns and double meanings, which are deliberately intended to confuse. On page 51, for example, when Polonius asks him what matter he reads, he replies: HAMLET: Between who? In this, Hamlet is playing on the double meaning of the word â€Å"matter†- although Polonius intends it to mean his reading matter, Hamlet knows it could also mean personal matters, and picks the wrong interpretation, intending Polonius to think that his mental instability is such that he cannot follow the conversation. Although there are these occasions upon which Hamlet seems to be truly mad, the audience can see that he is being rather clever in constructing his act. When Polonius clarifies the meaning of the word â€Å"matter† which he intended, Hamlet responds with a thinly veiled attack on him: HAMLET: The satirical rogue says here that old men have grey beards, (†¦ ) and that they have a plentiful lack of wit. Here, Hamlet pretends to discuss the â€Å"slanders† of which he reads, but the audience can see that he is commenting on Polonius as an old man. By mentioning the â€Å"plentiful lack of wit†, he recognises how obvious Polonius’ motives are in conversing with him, and attacking his methods. Although Polonius does not pick up on this, he does see that there is more to the â€Å"madness† of Hamlet than is seen, commenting â€Å"there is method in’t. † While Hamlet’s act here seems rather convincing, as soon as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern enter his madness begins to slip. His conversation with the two is coherent, as he directly questions them to see how honest they are. For example, on pages 53-54: HAMLET:Were you not sent for? Is it your own inclining? Is it a free visitation? This short, direct questioning shows his cynicism of the two- he knows that they did not come of their own free will, and is simply testing them to prove their honesty. When they are hesitant to answer, he decides they have not passed his test, and afterwards treats them with a contempt or disregard. This wariness in his personality will become important later in the scene when he contrives a means of testing Claudius. Furthermore, the coherency with which he asks these questions show the sanity underlying his act of madness. Hamlet himself recognises this, when on page 57 he comments â€Å"I am but mad north-north-west. â€Å", implying that although there are times when he acts with seeming insanity, he is also capable of coherent conversation. This also emphasises to the audience that what they see is simply an act, and underneath the madness there is a young man obsessed with avenging the death of his father. Although his mood during this first part of the conversation is that of anger and mistrust towards his two friends, there is an abrupt change in his speech and actions when the players are mentioned to him. In fact, his speech becomes uplifted and he appears to be genuinely excited about the upcoming play. For example, on page 55: HAMLET: He that plays the king shall be welcome- his majesty shall have tribute of me. This is rather ironic- while he shall welcome the actor who plays the king, in reality it is a king who is the source of all his problems. This shows Hamlet’s love for actors in that while very few people in his life are trustworthy and it is hard to distinguish their actions from the meanings behind them, one can be certain that the actors will be acting. After this, he then goes on to list the many characters who appear in a play, explaining what they shall do and how he shall enjoy it- â€Å"the lover shall not sigh gratis†. This also shows that he is knowledgable on the matter of the theatre, as he is acquainted with the many parts which are played. It also shows his excitement, as he speaks more a long time on the matter. His speech is not organised into short, direct questioning as before, but instead he speaks in longer, freer sentences. This change in syntax clearly shows his mood- whereas before his short sentences showed doubt and mistrustfulness, these longer sentences show that he is what he is saying is exactly what he thinks- in contrast to the earlier part of the conversation, he now clearly seems to be relishing and enjoying the words as he says them. This is the first time that the audience is made aware of Hamlet’s love of drama, which is an important part of his personality and will become vital later on in the scene, when the audience is made aware of his plans. It also explains how, when faced with the dilemma of how he should react to the news of the ghost, his immediate reaction is to put on an act. At the end of the scene, Hamlet is left alone and speaks his second soliloquy of the play. As is typical of Shakespearean dramas, soliloquies are used to give the audience an insight into the character’s innermost thoughts and feelings without worrying about the opinions and reactions of other characters towards them. The speech is organised into three main parts: the first, a comment on the player he has just seen perform, followed by a self-critical analysis, before he goes on to explain his plan of action. He begins by speaking about the player, who has put such great emotion into his performances that he weeps during them. Hamlet contrasts this with the state of emotional turmoil in which he resides, although he is not allowed to show it externally. During the soloiloquy, Shakepeare uses several rhetoric devices to communicate this distress to the audience- for example, the frequent use of exclamation marks, which suggest a passion behind his speech. By line 568, he uses a great deal of rhetorical questions: HAMLET: Am I a coward? Who calls me villain? Breaks my pate across? These questions serve to increase his anger, and as he says them his speech becomes increasingly passionate. At this point, he is talking about himself- by saying â€Å"Who calls me villain? † he is opening up to criticism from others, but then swiftly moves on to speak about himself. HAMLET: But I am pigeon-livered and lack gall During this section of the soliloquy, Hamlet reveals his attitude to the revenge which he has sworn to take. He shows the audience his conflicting feelings- on one hand, we can see that he feels he is cowardly for not having acted sooner. This shows a contrast between what he feels he should be and what he actually is, which is further reinforced when he explains â€Å"ere this/I should ha’ fatted all the region kites/ With this slave’s offal. † This shows that he feels that he should have taken revenge by now in order to remain true to his dead father, and yet he is reluctant to act too quickly. To add to this feeling, he has just ben watching the players speak of Pyrrhus, who was a man of revenge and action- what Hamlet feels he should be. He is also clearly filled with loathing towards his uncle- at one point referring to him as: HAMLET: Remorseless, treacherous, lecherous, kindless villain! This list of negative adjectives very clearly show the audience how passionate he is upon this issue. By this point, his extreme hatred of Claudius is obvious, and by describing him in this way Hamlet is only working himself into greater fits of passion and determination to act upon the situation. However, Hamlet is not, like his father, a man of war and fighting, but instead rather more cunning in his revenge- in this respect, he could almost be described as like Claudius. He realises that passion is not the way to solve his problems, saying on page 63: HAMLET: About, my brains. This signifies a change in his thoughts- whereas before he was speaking with passion and anger, he has now regained some control over his emotions and can speak with a greater coherency. It shows his belief that, in order to exact his vengance most effectively, he will need to remain calm and collected while thinking about it. As revenge is clearly the most urgent matter on his mind at this tiime, then, there is a need for him to think carefully, and by saying â€Å"About, my brains. † he is recognising this. It is at this point in the scene that the cynical facet of Hamlet’s personality comes back into importance- we can see that he needs evidence before he acts, as he declares towards the end of page 63: HAMLET: I’ll have grounds more relative than this. To the audience, this is further reinforcement of his suspicious nature- rather than simply take revenge without thought, he must first devise a plan to test the truth of the ghost’s words. This in in keeping with what we have been told of his past- namely, that he is a scholar from Wittenberg, which at the time was one of the most prestigious universities in Europe. Therefore, his questioning nature is in keeping with this- for, being educated, he is less likely simply to accept what others tell him wthout proof. We see this during his â€Å"testing† of the motives of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern earlier on in the scene, but only now does it begin to relate directly to the central plot. This concludes Act 2:2, during which Hamlet as a character has greatly developed. We see his plans begin to come together, as he feigns the â€Å"antic disposition† which was spoken of in previous scenes. The audience also begins to see his character develop, as we are introduced to such elements of his personality as his love for drama and his cynicism, all of which fashion the style which revenge will take, and ultimately guide the play to its inevitable ending.

Discuss the theme of the Dream in the book Of Mice and Men Essay

None of the people on the ranch have freedom, and freedom was what George and Lennie wanted. Crooks, Candy and Lennie are victims, Crooks because of his back, where a horse had kicked him, Candy because of his hand, which he lost on the ranch, although he got two hundred and fifty bucks in compensation and Lennie is a victim because of his lack of knowledge. The main dream in the book â€Å"Of Mice and Men† is George and Lennie’s dream. Their dream is to have their own land where they will grow whatever they like, and to have a variety of animals, and Lennie will get to look after the rabbits, if he behaves well. The rabbits are all he talks and thinks about – the perfect land and the rabbits that he will look after if he behaves himself. â€Å"Don’t you think of nothing but rabbits?† The land will be ten acres, have a windmill, a little shack and chicken run. It will have a kitchen and plenty of food and water. They will build a smoke house where they will smoke the bacon, the ham, and the sausages. They’ll kill a pig or rabbit each Sunday. They’ll can fruits. They’ll also sell eggs and milk. They want to be answerable to nobody, to have freedom and be independent. Also, like Lennie says with a lot of enthusiasm, â€Å"An` live off the fatta the lan`† This is a dream that George believes will not come true, (but he continues as though the dream will come true to lure Lennie to behave himself.) because they don’t have the money and Lennie is always getting in some sort of trouble and then, they have to run away. He doesn’t mean to do any harm. â€Å"All the time he done bad things but he never done one of ’em mean† Soon Candy gets to know about their dream, and this is the only part of the book where it seems that the dream is only around the corner. With Candy’s three hundred and fifty bucks and George’s and Lennie’s fifty bucks each coming at the end of the month, which makes a total of four hundred and fifty bucks, George says he could swing the owners for that as the lady needs an operation. George has a dream of his own which is a life without Lennie. If he didn’t have Lennie with him all the time, â€Å"When I think of the swell time I could have without you, I go nuts. I never get no peace.† If he also didn’t have Lennie ‘on his tail’ all the time, he could maybe even have a girl. This dream does come true at the end, but George had to kill Lennie or otherwise Curley would have come and killed Lennie himself. George learnt from Candy’s mistake of letting someone else kill his dog, so he killed Lennie himself making sure that the gunshot would not give Lennie any pain. Lennie’s life is ended, also with the dream as Lennie and George are talking about the dream – until Lennie is killed like an animal. Candy’s dream was to be happy. The only time he was really happy was when he was a child. Candy has no other relatives, so he thought he’d be happy living with George and Lennie. Candy is heartbroken when he finds out that Lennie has killed Curley’s wife. Candy knows that their dream cannot come true now, because Lennie was part of the dream and now he is dead. Also, when Candy’s dog was shot, Candy covered his eyes with his arm. â€Å"Old Candy lay down in the hay and covered his eyes with his arm.† And this was what he did when his dream was shattered. We do not know what happened to Candy or George after Lennie was killed, as the story ended there, so the death of Curley’s wife ended two dreams, but the death of Lennie made George’s second dream come true. Even though he didn’t like killing Lennie, he didn’t want to let someone else kill him. I suppose George thought it was the last straw – if he is killing unknowingly, he could kill again. They could not keep running from everything he did wrong. He would get caught one day, and be killed. Curley’s dream was to be big like Lennie and this is why Curley picked a fight with Lennie and he lost. He didn’t give Lennie a chance to show him that he was not against him, but straight away headed for Lennie and started asking him questions. George had told him not to speak, so he didn’t answer. Curley really got angry. George answered for him and he answered, ‘An’ you won’t let the big guy talk, is that it?’ He wants to be big and tall. He picks fights with anybody that is larger, in a way superior to him. He only has respect for Slim; we know this because he listened to Slim. â€Å"I think you got your han’ caught in a machine.† He knows what really happened. He didn’t want to get laughed at either, so he listened and obeyed Slim’s instruction. â€Å"But you jus’ tell an’ try to get this guy canned and we’ll tell ever’ body, an’ then will you get the laugh.† Curley agreed to this statement, otherwise he will be laughed at for starting the fight and then losing it. Even though Curley’s hand was totally ruined, and Lennie got a couple of bruises and cuts nobody got in any more trouble. When his wife was killed he was really mad. Not mad for losing a loved one. He was mad at Lennie for killing her, and instead of staying with his wife, he hurried off to find Lennie and to kill him. We notice that although Curley was very protective over his wife, he didn’t show any interest in her, and showed no signs of love. Nobody liked Curley, not even his wife. Curley’s wife was an outcast, because she is the only female on the ranch and wore a lot of red. We can sense she is heading for trouble, because of the way she flirted with all the men on the ranch. Red lipstick and red finger nails shows a sign of danger. Curley’s wife’s dream was to become a movie star, and have nice clothes. This dream only came about because; some guy had said that she was a natural. â€Å"this guy says I was a natural† Her dream was shattered because she didn’t receive a letter, this guy had promised to send to her. According to her, she thought her mother had thrown it away. We get the feeling that he didn’t actually send the letter. She really thought that her mother had thrown it away and only for revenge, she got married to Curley. She didn’t love Curley, nor even liked him. She’s not interested in Curley and Curley has no interest in her, but she is always looking for him, as an excuse, to talk to other guys. The other guys think she’s a tart, and is ‘jail bait’. Crooks has a dream, which is when he was a little child he remembered he had two brothers and they used to do everything together. His dream is to be back with his family. â€Å"I remember when I was a little kid on my old man’s chicken ranch.† He became negatively cynical. He doesn’t believe life will get any better and he thinks that people always behave selfishly or dishonestly. Crooks is lonely and the only one who has respect for him is Slim. When he was small he used to play with people that weren’t black and this would upset his father. He didn’t understand why until he was older. People called him a nigger and he is the only black person on the ranch. When he was a child, his family was the only black family for miles. Crooks had no other dreams; he just wanted friends that won’t criticize him, because of his colour. None of the dreams came true, and are all crushed and shattered, because George’s dream didn’t mean that he didn’t want Lennie at all, he wanted him, but not all the time. Lennie had to be killed and that ends another two dreams. Candy’s dream was to be a part of George and Lennie’s dream, but as Lennie was killed, his dream also vanished. Curley’s dream was to be big and as he’s a grown man he won’t grow any more. Crook’s dream is to be back with his family, but it is impossible to go back in time. Curley’s wife is dead which ends another dream. We see that John Steinbeck didn’t make anybody’s dream come true. Anjana Patel English coursework 2nd January 2001