Drama Essay Example Symbolism in Tender Offer

Drama: Symbolism in Tender Offer Wendy Wasserstein’s comedy Tender Offer provides a good example of how symbolism can work in a play. The one act play is about the cultural decay of the modern world where there is no meaning for any of the human values and the use of symbols provides the playwright with one of the most effective tools. â€Å"Symbolism is the systematic use of recurrent symbols or images in a work to create an added level of meaning.† (A Literary Lexicon). This literary device suggests another meaning beyond the literal meaning of an object or action. The recurrent use of an object, sign, or image stands for some meaning that is beyond the surface meaning of the image. The play that tells about the relationship between a father and a daughter touches many of the modern themes. The most obvious characteristic feature of the play is its use of extra ordinary symbols that relate to the main theme of the play. Thus, we find a number of symbols such as ‘tender offer,’ ‘leg warmers,’ ‘a bad itch,’ ‘Tiger,’ and many such. In the confines of short, one act play, the author, with the use of symbols, is successful in dealing with themes of great significance. Tender Offer is primarily a play of father-daughter relationship. Here, we find the relationship between Paul and Lisa and the delicate matters in their relation. One of the most obvious symbols in the play is that of ‘tender offer.’ â€Å"PAUL: I’ll make you a tender offer. That’s when a company publishes in the newspaper that they want to buy another company. And the company that publishes is called the Black Knight because they want to gobble up the poor little company. So the poor little company needs to be rescued. And then a White Knight comes along and makes a bigger and better offer so the shareholders won’t have to tender shares to the Big Black Knight.† (Wendy Wasserstein: Reading Tender Offer). The father wants to make a tender offer to his daughter and he wants not to own her but wants the daughter to come out of the chains of that haunts her like a Big Black Knight. The powerful symbolism used here shows how effective the author is in the use of symbols for his purpose. Another example of the great effect created by symbolism is the use of ‘leg warmers.’ It is a symbol that stands for something beyond the ordinary and the apparent. Lisa says that she â€Å"can’t go home till I find my leg warmers.† (Wendy Wasserstein) But she is not looking for them; neither does she remember where she left them. She is not definite about where it is or how she will find them, if at all she finds them. In relation to this comes the other symbols sickness, Hodgkin’s disease, and ‘a bad itch on my leg.’ These symbols come as the thirst of a daughter to find a deep relation and solace in the father. Even a ‘dreamcoat’ is meaningless to Lisa and without anyone to regard for the subtle but important things, Lisa feels, â€Å"It’s stupid. I was second best at the dance recital, so they gave me this thing. It’s stupid.† (Wendy Wasserstein) These are symbols in series all of which denotes the i nner wish of the daughter to find the cares of her father. Once the father is aware of this inner need in his daughter, she says, â€Å"my foot doesn’t itch anymore.† (Wendy Wasserstein) And at the recognition from the father, Lisa says, â€Å"I think I see my leg warmers.† (Wendy Wasserstein) Thus, the powerful use of these symbols proves the role of symbolism and its effect in literature. Obviously, there are many other symbols and images that create in the minds of the readers colorful designs of the theme that the author works out through the play. Ultimately, all these work in the best illustration of the modern situation through the symbols and images. The value-free culture of the modern world and the decline in relation of the modern families is, admittedly, the aim of the playwright in Tender Offer and which better tool other than symbolism could help the author in this effort? Therefore, we can safely conclude that Wendy Wasserstein’s one act play proves the power of symbolism as a literary tool and there would be no doubt about the craftsmanship of the playwright, especially with the use of symbolism. Works Cited Wendy Wasserstein: Reading. Tender Offer. 7 Dec. 2007 http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0073124265/322267/wasserstein_reading.html. A Literary Lexicon. 7 Dec. 2007 http://condor.depaul.edu/~dsimpson/awtech/lexicon.html. We Are Wlling to Help You! Rely on Us Today! There is really no reason you should delay the decision to buy essays papers. You could use the same time to place the order and complete other works. Remember; too much thinking and no action gets you nowhere. Now place the order.

Wolf Predation Essays - Predation, LotkaVolterra Equations, Caribou

Wolf Predation Essays - Predation, LotkaVolterra Equations, Caribou Wolf Predation Effects of Wolf Predation Abstract: This paper discusses four hypotheses to explain the effects of wolf predation on prey populations of large ungulates. The four proposed hypotheses examined are the predation limiting hypothesis, the predation regulating hypothesis, the predator pit hypothesis, and the stable limit cycle hypothesis. There is much research literature that discusses how these hypotheses can be used to interpret various data sets obtained from field studies. It was concluded that the predation limiting hypothesis fit most study cases, but that more research is necessary to account for multiple predator - multiple prey relationships. The effects of predation can have an enormous impact on the ecological organization and structure of communities. The processes of predation affect virtually every species to some degree or another. Predation can be defined as when members of one species eat (and/or kill) those of another species. The specific type of predation between wolves and large ungulates involves carnivores preying on herbivores. Predation can have many possible effects on the interrelations of populations. To draw any correlations between the effects of these predator-prey interactions requires studies of a long duration, and statistical analysis of large data sets representative of the populations as a whole. Predation could limit the prey distribution and decrease abundance. Such limitation may be desirable in the case of pest species, or undesirable to some individuals as with game animals or endangered species. Predation may also act as a major selective force. The effects of predator prey coevolution can explain many evolutionary adaptations in both predator and prey species. The effects of wolf predation on species of large ungulates have proven to be controversial and elusive. There have been many different models proposed to describe the processes operating on populations influenced by wolf predation. Some of the proposed mechanisms include the predation limiting hypothesis, the predation regulating hypothesis, the predator pit hypothesis, and the stable limit cycle hypothesis (Boutin 1992). The purpose of this paper is to assess the empirical data on population dynamics and attempt to determine if one of the four hypotheses is a better model of the effects of wolf predation on ungulate population densities. The predation limiting hypothesis proposes that predation is the primary factor that limits prey density. In this non- equilibrium model recurrent fluctuations occur in the prey population. This implies that the prey population does not return to some particular equilibrium after deviation. The predation limiting hypothesis involves a density independent mechanism. The mechanism might apply to one prey - one predator systems (Boutin 1992). This hypothesis predicts that losses of prey due to predation will be large enough to halt prey population increase. Many studies support the hypothesis that predation limits prey density. Bergerud et al. (1983) concluded from their study of the interrelations of wolves and moose in the Pukaskwa National Park that wolf predation limited, and may have caused a decline in, the moose population, and that if wolves were eliminated, the moose population would increase until limited by some other regulatory factor, such as food availability. However, they go on to point out that this upper limit will not be sustainable, but will eventually lead to resource depletion and population decline. Seip (1992) found that high wolf predation on caribou in the Quesnel Lake area resulted in a decline in the population, while low wolf predation in the Wells Gray Provincial Park resulted in a slowly increasing population. Wolf predation at the Quesnel Lake area remained high despite a fifty percent decline in the caribou population, indicating that mortality due to predation was not density-dependent within this range of population densities. Dale et al. (1994), in their study of wolves and caribou in Gates National Park and Preserve, showed that wolf predation can be an important limiting factor at low caribou population densities, and may have an anti-regulatory effect. They also state that wolf predation may affect the distribution and abundance of caribou populations. Bergerud and Ballard (1988), in their interpretation of the Nelchina caribou herd case history, said that during and immediately following a reduction in the wolf population, calf recruitment increased, which should result in a future caribou population increase. Gasaway et al. (1983) also indicated that wolf predation can sufficiently increase