Origins and Causes of the Cold War free essay sample

Harry Truman and Woodrow Wilson came up with the term ‘Cold War’ to describe the breakdown in relations between the two superpowers at the time-the United States of America and the Soviet Union. Historian Walter Lippman, his friend used it in the New York herald Tribune-which marked it’s introduction in popular media. This mutual antagonism between the two nations manifested itself, not in all-out war but in attacks through economic sanctions, proxy wars, the building of alliances propaganda warfare, enmeshed in an overarching principle of non-cooperation. In this context, before delving into the causes, which this essay seeks to do, it is imperative to note that the fact that the two superpowers fought on the same side during World War II was nothing but a ‘marriage of convenience,’ where they were united against the common enemy rather than on grounds of a common cause. The suspicions, ensuing due to the differences in ideology and motives on the global scale had not been occluded by any means, merely erased for the time being. We will write a custom essay sample on Origins and Causes of the Cold War or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page To fully understand the origins of the Cold War and the breakdown in relations,it is necessary for us to consider the Yalta, Potsdam and Tehran conferences that occurred towards the dying stages of the Second World War. The Tehran Conference held in 1943 was attended by Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin and even though, the leaders went to Tehran with different goals in mind, the quintessential objective, which was to open a second front against Germany, was achieved. The ‘big three’ met again in Yalta in February, 1945. Relations again seemed cordial and the three leaders agreed on various key points, such as the formation of the United Nations, punishment of the Nazi war criminals, the division of Germany and Berlin into four zones, the holding of free elections in Eastern Europe. Yet, there were perilous signs foreshadowing the origin of the Cold War as the three disagreed about what was to be done about Poland. Stalin’s demand that the Soviet Union should be given all land east of the Oder-Neisse Line was not taken too favorably by the other two leaders. When they met at Potsdam again in July 1945, relations were not so amicable. Various changes had taken place in the international stage since Yalta. Firstly, the Soviet Union’s Red Army had taken control of the Baltic States under the pretext of liberating them. Secondly, both the United States and Great Britain had different leaders representing them. Attlee replaced Churchill and Truman replaced Roosevelt. Both the new leaders were far more suspicious of Stalin and his ‘red agenda’ than their predecessors had been. Fourthly, the Americans had already tested an atom bomb on July 16, 1945. While Stalin was informed of this development at the conference, the motive behind the Manhatten Project was a manifestation of the suspicion the leaders harbored towards the Communist as they wanted to ensure that Japan was invaded by them and not the Soviet Union. Truman also disagreed with Stalin’s request for a ‘Soviet sphere of influence’ and kept on pressing for free elections in the liberated states of Eastern Europe, which Stalin objected to on grounds of Soviet security. The expansion of the USSR east of the Oder-Neisse line in Poland remained a topic of dispute. This view became more popular during the 1960s and 1970s as the inherent paranoia regarding both the external and internal Communist Threat, better known as ‘The Red Scare,’ propounded by the Senator Joseph McCarthysubsided in the United States and people become exceptionally critical of American foreign policywith the emergence of the Vietnam War. The third view, which is accepted by most historians across the globe, including this author is the post-revisionist view, which says that it would be unfair to blame the origin of the Cold War on any of the sides without placing equal blame on the other. Furthermore, to fully understand, the causes behind the Cold War, we need to consider a multitude of factors. Firstly, the World War II had a detrimental impact on the economies of both Britain and France and neither of them were the superpowers they had once been. Thus, the USA and the USSR were now the remaining superpowers, two superpowers, which had starkly different and almost contradictory ideologies on government and economics. The Soviet system of government was a Communist one based on the Marxist principles of equality and the welfare state, which involved central planning at the expense of individual freedom. On the other hand, the United States was a capitalist democracy, which espouses the ownership of private wealth, embedded in the pursuit of profits, at the expense of economic disparity. This also led to a breakdown in communication. Every act was construed by the other superpower to be a propaganda move to thwart the other. The Truman Doctrine, which vowed to provide military aid to European states from internal or external aggression and the Marshall Plan, largely responsible for the economic rebuilding of Europe were interpreted, perhaps rightly, by the Soviet Union as means of spreading USA’s capitalist agenda. Stalin responded to the ‘capitalist expansionist’ agenda of the Marshall Plan by setting up the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (COMECON) to economically aid the members of the Eastern Block. ‘ACTION AND REACTION:COLD WAR CONFLICTS FROM 1945-1960 Each superpower wanted to spread their specific ideology and contain the other’s, which resulted in a number of propaganda measures, alliancesand proxy wars. The first major cold war conflict was the Berlin blockade and airlift of 1948-49. Stalin cut of all transport links to West Berlin, which was under Allied Control, thus cutting of all food supplies to the city. Truman ordered an airlift with food supplies through B-52 bombers, thus ensuring that the population and autonomy of the zone were kept alive. In 1949, Stalin called of the blockade. The ‘iron curtain’-which was a symbol of both ideological and physical division between Eastern and Western Europe became permanent and the arms race started to pick up pace. The western nations were convinced of what a potential threat the Soviets could be, which prompted the USA to supplement its military deployment with political affiliations by signing the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in April, 1949, emphasizing the principle of collective self-defense. This, along with the rearmament of The Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany, which was in the Allied Zone) was met with the creation of the Warsaw Pact in 1955. The Soviets also set up a Communist Information Bureau (Cominform), which served as a forum that gathered all communist Eastern Bloc nations. Throughout the 1950s, both countries continued to build up their military arsenal- of both conventional and nuclear weapons. This form of action and reaction due to high levels of suspicion and hostility towards the other played a key role in laying the foundations of the Cold War that ensued. The final Cold War Conflict of the 1950s which laid down the foundation for the tension that would exist in a divided Europe for the next forty years was the Berlin Crisis, which ensued from 1958-61. In 1961, The Soviet Union constructed a wall between east and West Germany in the heart of Berlin. Khrushchev claimed that it was an attempt to curb the expansion of western influence of fascist attempting to influence the mindset of the people of East Germany through brainwashing and coercion. However, most historians believe that it was simply an attempt to curb the exodus of many immigrants (a number that has been pegged at 3. 5 million before the construction of The Wall) to West Germany, which was doing much better economically.

Essay Interview - Should You Prepare For This Part?

Essay Interview - Should You Prepare For This Part?When it comes to essay interviews, most schools require a more thorough evaluation of an applicant than those conducted in the high school setting. Writing and revision is required when attending an online degree program.College applicants must demonstrate that they are capable of submitting a well-researched essay. One mistake in grammar can disqualify a candidate and lead to rejection of their application. Plus, the reviewer's final score reflects on the overall level of a student's essay.The writer of the essay question must be prepared with the appropriate words for each section. If a student is too busy or sick to write the actual essay, they must first edit and revise the essay sample so it can be submitted as an alternative essay answer.This review essay sample is the basis for a complete, graded essay. It should include a paragraph on the topic, a paragraph regarding their personality and the area of their interest, a paragra ph describing their history and education, a short paragraph summarizing their major idea, and a closing paragraph for the article. They may also include some thoughts about their experiences and interests.Although essays are a lot of work, the reviewer is more concerned with the writer's delivery than the content. By the time the writer receives the essay review sample, the essay has been edited for grammatical and style errors. The writer will make many revisions to improve the paper, if necessary. They will also make revisions to the review essay sample with a more confident style and format.In addition to the essay review sample, writers should read the actual essay questions carefully. Most times, the question will not ask a direct question about the topic of the essay, but the interviewer will want to know the writer's opinion of the topic. The question may also refer to an issue in the past or present that has some relevance to the topic of the essay.Writing a meaningful essa y is one of the most important skills that a writer must possess. When applying to college, a writer must be prepared to give an essay answer that will be given the highest grade. When preparing for the essay interview, there are many tips to consider.

Law of Acceleration Essays

Law of Acceleration Essays Law of Acceleration Essay Law of Acceleration Essay Images are not arguments, rarely even lead to proof, but the mind craves them, and, of late more than ever, the keenest experimenters find twenty images better than one, especially if contradictory; since the human mind has already learned to deal in contradictions. The image needed here is that of a new center, or preponderating mass, artificially introduced on earth in the midst of a system of attractive forces that previously made their own quilibrium, and constantly induced to accelerate its motion till it shall establish a new equilibrium. A dynamic theory would begin by assuming that all history, terrestrial or cosmic, mechanical or intellectual, would be reducible to this formula if we knew the facts. For convenience, the most familiar image should come first; and this is probably that of the comet, or meteoric streams, like the Leonids and Perseids; a complex of minute mechanical agencies, reacting within and without, and guided by the sum of forces at tracting or deflecting it.Nothing forbids one to assume that the man-meteorite might grow, as an acorn does, absorbing light, heat, electricity,or thought; for, in recent times, such transference of energy has become a familiar idea; but the simplest figure, at first, is that of a perfect comet,say that of 1843,which drops from space, in a straight line, at the regular acceleration of speed, directly into the sun, and after wheeling sharply about it, in heat that ought to dissipate any known substance, turns back unharmed, in defiance of law, by the path on which it came.The mind, by analogy, may figure as such a comet, the better because it also defies law. Motion is the ultimate object of science, and measures of motion are many; but with thought as with matter, the true measure is mass in its astronomic sense- the sum or difference of attractive forces. Science has quite enough trouble in measuring its material motions without volunteering help to the historian, but the historian needs not much help to measure some kinds of social movement; and especially in the nineteenth century, society by common accord agreed in measuring its progress by the coal-output.The ratio of increase in the volume of coal-power may serve as dynamometer. The coal-output of the world, speaking roughly, doubled every ten years between 1840 and 1900, in the form of utilized power, for the ton of coal yielded three or four times as much power in 1900 as in 1840. Rapid as this rate of acceleration in volume seems, it may be tested in a thousand ways without greatly reducing it.Perhaps the ocean steamer is nearest unity and easiest to measure, for any one might hire, in 1905, for a small sum of money, the use of 30,000 steam-horse-power to cross the ocean, and by halving this figure every ten years, he got back to 234 horse-power for 1835, which was accuracy enough for his purposes. In truth, his chief trouble came not from the ratio in volume of heat, but from the intensity, since he could get no basis for a ratio there.All ages of history have known high intensities, like the iron-furnace, the burning-glass, the blow-pipe; but no society has ever used high intensities on any large scale till now, nor can a mere bystander decide what range of temperature is now in common use. Loosely guessing that science controls habitually the whole range from absolute zero to 3000 ° Centigrade, one might assume, for convenience, that the ten-year ratio for volume could be used temporarily for intensity; and still there remained a ratio to be guessed for other forces than heat.Since 1800 scores of new forces had been discovered; old forces had been raised to higher powers, as could be measured in the navy-gun; great regions of chemistry had been opened up, and connected with other regions of physics. Within ten years a new universe of force had been revealed in radiation. Complexity had extended itself on immense horizons, and arithmetical ratios were useless for any attempt at accuracy. The force evolved seemed more like explosion than gravitation, and followed closely the curve of steam; but, at all events, the ten-year ratio seemed carefully conservative.Unless the calculator was prepared to be instantly overwhelmed by physical force and mental complexity, he must stop there. Thus, taking the year 1900 as the starting point for carrying back the series, nothing was easier than to assume a ten-year period of retardation as far back as 1820, but beyond that point the statistician failed, and only the mathematician could help. Laplace would have found it child’s-play to fix a ratio of progression in mathematical science between Descartes, Leibnitz, Newton, and himself. Watt could have given in pounds the increase of power between Newcomen’s engines and his own.Volta and Benjamin Franklin would have stated their progress as absolute creation of power. Dalton could have measured minutely his advance on Boerhave. Napoleon I must have had a d istinct notion of his own numerical relation to Louis XIV. No one in 1789 doubted the progress of force, least of all those who were to lose their heads by it. Pending agreement between these authorities, theory may assume what it likes- say a fifty, or even a five-and-twenty-year period of reduplication for the eighteenth century, for the period matters little until the acceleration itself is admitted.The subject is even more amusing in the seventeenth than in the eighteenth century, because Galileo and Kepler, Descartes, Huygens, and Isaac Newton took vast pains to fix the laws of acceleration for moving bodies, while Lord Bacon and William Harvey were content with showing experimentally the fact of acceleration in knowledge; but from their combined results a historian might be tempted to maintain a similar rate of movement back to 1600, subject to correction from the historians of mathematics. The mathematicians might carry their calculations back as far as the fourteenth century when algebra seems to have become for the first time the tandard measure of mechanical progress in western Europe; for not only Copernicus and Tycho Brahe, but even artists like Leonardo, Michael Angelo, and Albert Durer worked by mathematical processes, and their testimony would probably give results more exact than that of Montaigne or Shakespeare; but, to save trouble, one might tentatively carry back the same ratio of acceleration, or retardation, to the year 1400, with the help of Columbus and Gutenberg, so taking a uniform rate during the whole four centuries (1400–1800), and leaving to statisticians the task of correcting it.Or better, one might, for convenience, use the formula of squares to serve for a law of mind. Any other formula would do as well, either of chemical explosion, or electrolysis, or vegetable growth, or of expansion or contraction in innumerable forms; but this happens to be simple and convenient. Its force increases in the direct ratio of its squar es. As the human meteoroid approached the sun or center of attractive force, the attraction of one century squared itself to give the measure of attraction in the next.Behind the year 1400, the process certainly went on, but the progress became so slight as to be hardly measurable. What was gained in the east or elsewhere, cannot be known; but forces, called loosely Greek fire and gunpowder, came into use in the west in the thirteenth century, as well as instruments like the compass, the blow-pipe, clocks and spectacles, and materials like paper; Arabic notation and algebra were introduced, while metaphysics and theology acted as violent stimulants to mind. An architect might detect a sequence between the Church of St.Peter’s at Rome, the Amiens Cathedral, the Duomo at Pisa, San Marco at Venice, Sancta Sofia at Constantinople and the churches at Ravenna. All the historian dares affirm is that a sequence is manifestly there, and he has a right to carry back his ratio, to repre sent the fact, without assuming its numerical correctness. On the human mind as a moving body, the break in acceleration in the middle-ages is only apparent; the attraction worked through shifting forms of force, as the sun works by light or heat, electricity, gravitation, or what not, on different organs with different sensibilities, but with invariable law.The science of prehistoric man has no value except to prove that the law went back into indefinite antiquity. A stone arrowhead is as convincing as a steam-engine. The values were as clear a hundred thousand years ago as now, and extended equally over the whole world. The motion at last became infinitely slight, but cannot be proved to have stopped. The motion of Newton’s comet at aphelion may be equally slight. To evolutionists may be left the processes of evolution; to historians the single interest is the law of reaction between force and force,between mind and nature,the law of progress.The great division of history i nto phases by Turgot and Comte first affirmed this law in its outlines by asserting the unity of progress, for a mere phase interrupts no growth, and nature shows innumerable such phases. The development of coal-power in the nineteenth century furnished the first means of assigning closer values to the elements; and the appearance of supersensual forces towards 1900 made this calculation a pressing necessity; since the next step became infinitely serious.A law of acceleration, definite and constant as any law of mechanics, cannot be supposed to relax its energy to suit the convenience of man. No one is likely to suggest a theory that man’s convenience had been consulted by Nature at any time, or that Nature has consulted the convenience of any of her creations, except perhaps the Terebratula. In every age man has bitterly and justly complained that Nature hurried and hustled him, for inertia almost invariably has ended in tragedy. Resistance is its law, and resistance to supe rior mass is futile and fatal.Fifty years ago, science took for granted that the rate of acceleration could not last. The world forgets quickly, but even today the habit remains of founding statistics on the faith that consumption will continue nearly stationary. Two generations, with John Stuart Mill, talked of this stationary period, which was to follow the explosion of new power. All the men who were elderly in the forties died in this faith, and other men grew old nursing the same conviction, and happy in it; while science, for fifty ears, permitted, or encouraged, society to think that force would prove to be limited in supply. This mental inertia of science lasted through the eighties before showing signs of breaking up; and nothing short of radium fairly wakened men to the fact, long since evident, that force was inexhaustible. Even then the scientific authorities vehemently resisted. Nothing so revolutionary had happened since the year 300. Thought had more than once been up set, but never caught and whirled about in the vortex of infinite forces.Power leaped from every atom, and enough of it to supply the stellar universe showed itself running to waste at every pore of matter. Man could no longer hold it off. Forces grasped his wrists and flung him about as though he had hold of a live wire or a runaway automobile; which was very nearly the exact truth for the purposes of an elderly and timid single gentleman in Paris, who never drove down the Champs Elysees without expecting an accident, and commonly witnessing one; or found himself in the neighborhood of an official without calculating the chances of a bomb.So long as the rates of progress held good, these bombs would double in force and number every ten years. Impossibilities no longer stood in the way. One’s life had fattened on impossibilities. Before the boy was six years old, he had seen four impossibilities made actual,the ocean-steamer, the railway, the electric telegraph, and the Dague rreotype; nor could he ever learn which of the four had most hurried others to come. He had seen the coal-output of the United States grow from nothing to three hundred million tons or more.What was far more serious, he had seen the number of minds, engaged in pursuing forcethe truest measure of its attractionincrease from a few scores or hundreds, in 1838, to many thousands in 1905, trained to sharpness never before reached, and armed with instruments amounting to new senses of indefinite power and accuracy, while they chased force into hiding-places where Nature herself had never known it to be, making analyses that contradicted being, and syntheses that endangered the elements.No one could say that the social mind now failed to respond to new force, even when the new force annoyed it horribly. Every day Nature violently revolted, causing so-called accidents with enormous destruction of property and life, while plainly laughing at man, who helplessly groaned and shrieked and shudd ered, but never for a single instant could stop. The railways alone approached the carnage of war; automobiles and fire-arms ravaged society, until an earthquake became almost a nervous relaxation.An immense volume of force had detached itself from the unknown universe of energy, while still vaster reservoirs, supposed to be infinite, steadily revealed themselves, attracting mankind with more compulsive course than all the Pontic Seas or Gods or Gold that ever existed, and feeling still less of retiring ebb. In 1850, science would have smiled at such a romance as this, but, in 1900, as far as history could learn, few men of science thought it a laughing matter. If a perplexed but laborious follower could venture to guess their drift, it seemed in their minds a toss-up between anarchy and order.Unless they should be more honest with themselves in the future than ever they were in the past, they would be more astonished than their followers when they reached the end. If Karl Pearsonâ €™s notions of the universe were sound, men like Galileo, Descartes, Leibnitz, and Newton should have stopped the progress of science before 1700, supposing them to have been honest in the religious convictions they expressed. In 1900 they were plainly forced back on faith in a unity unproved and an order they had themselves disproved.They had reduced their universe to a series of relations to themselves. They had reduced themselves to motion in a universe of motions, with an acceleration, in their own case of vertiginous violence. With the correctness of their science, history had no right to meddle, since their science now lay in a plane where scarcely one or two hundred minds in the world could follow its mathematical processes; but bombs educate vigorously, and even wireless telegraphy or airships might require the reconstruction of society.If any analogy whatever existed between the human mind, on one side, and the laws of motion, on the other, the mind had already entered a field of attraction so violent that it must immediately pass beyond, into new equilibrium, like the Comet of Newton, to suffer dissipation altogether, like meteoroids in the earth’s atmosphere. If it behaved like an explosive, it must rapidly recover equilibrium; if it behaved like a vegetable, it must reach its limits of growth; and even if it acted like the earlier creations of energy,the Saurians and Sharks,it must have nearly reached the limits of its expansion.If science were to go on doubling or quadrupling its complexities every ten years, even mathematics would soon succumb. An average mind had succumbed already in 1850; it could no longer understand the problem in 1900. Fortunately, a student of history had no responsibility for the problem; he took it as science gave it, and waited only to be taught. With science or with society, he had no quarrel and claimed no share of authority. He had never been able to acquire knowledge, still less to impart it; and if he had , at times, felt serious differences with the American of the nineteenth century, he felt none with the American of the twentieth.For this new creation, born since 1900, a historian asked no longer to be teacher or even friend; he asked only to be a pupil, and promised to be docile, for once, even though trodden under foot; for he could see that the new American,the child of incalculable coal-power, chemical power, electric power, and radiating energy, as well as of new forces yet undetermined,must be a sort of God compared with any former creation of nature. At the rate of progress since 1800, every American who lived into the year 2000 would know how to control unlimited power.He would think in complexities unimaginable to an earlier mind. He would deal with problems altogether beyond the range of earlier society. To him the nineteenth century would stand on the same plane with the fourth,equally childlike,and he would only wonder how both of them, knowing so little, and so weak i n force, should have done so much. Perhaps even he might go back, in 1964, to sit with Gibbon on the steps of Ara Coeli. Meanwhile he was getting education. With that, a teacher who had failed to educate even the generation of 1870, dared not interfere.The new forces would educate. History saw few lessons in the past that would be useful in the future; but one, at least, it did see. The attempt of the American of 1800 to educate the American of 1900 had not often been surpassed for folly; and since 1800 the forces and their complications had increased a thousand times or more. The attempt of the American of 1900 to educate the American of 2000, must be even blinder than that of the Congressman of 1800, except so far as he had learned his ignorance. During a million or two of years, very generation in turn had toiled with endless agony to attain and apply power, all the while betraying the deepest alarm and horror at the power they created. The teacher of 1900, if foolhardy, might st imulate; if foolish, might resist; if intelligent, might balance, as wise and foolish have often tried to do from the beginning; but the forces would continue to educate, and the mind would continue to react. All the teacher could hope was to teach it reaction. Even there his difficulty was extreme. The most elementary books of science betrayed the inadequacy of old implements of thought.Chapter after chapter closed with phrases such as one never met in older literature:The cause of this phenomenon is not understood; science no longer ventures to explain causes; the first step towards a causal explanation still remains to be taken; opinions are very much divided; in spite of the contradictions involved; science gets on only by adopting different theories, sometimes contradictory. Evidently the new American would need to think in contradictions, and instead of Kant’s famous four antinomies, the new universe would know no law that could not be proved by its anti-law.To educate oneself to begin withhad been the effort of one’s life for sixty years; and the difficulties of education had gone on doubling with the coal output, until the prospect of waiting another ten years, in order to face a seventh doubling of complexities, allured one’s imagination but slightly. The law of acceleration was definite, and did not require ten years more study except to show whether it held good. No scheme could be suggested to the new American, and no fault needed to be found, or complaint made; but the next great influx of new forces seemed near at hand, and its style of education promised to be violently coercive.The movement from unity into multiplicity, between 1200 and 1900, was unbroken in sequence, and rapid in acceleration. Prolonged one generation longer, it would require a new social mind. As though thought were common salt in indefinite solution it must enter a new phase subject to new laws. Thus far, since five or ten thousand years, the mind had su ccessfully reacted, and nothing yet proved that it would fail to react,but it would need to jump. The Education of Henry Adams  was published in 1907. A Centennial Version, edited by Edward Chalfant and Conrad Edick Wright, was published by the Massachusetts Historical Society in January 2007.

Conditions Endured by the French Working Classes Essay

Conditions Endured by the French Working Classes - Essay Example Related to the plight of the French working class throughout time, from Sands fictional portrayal of the life of the working class person to the concept of the Paris Commune of 1871 as espoused by Bakunin, and the account of the Paris Workers’ Revolution as given by Marx. Each has a different perception, and likely none contributed to garnering tremendous sympathy for the very French individuals they were designed to invoke as such. The Paris Commune is predicated on the premise that the Church and the State are primarily responsible for the plight of the working class in French. As such, they should be abolished, as a society would be better off without these institutions. Take from the perspective of an Anarchist, Bakunin makes the effective argument that government exists for the elite and, apart from its complete abolition, the French people would continue to suffer under a sort of tyrannical rule. Sands’ notion of the Black City is reflective of this reality as well, as she paints a picture of French society as being largely reprehensible towards the common man. At the same time, the working class seems to have a misplaced ambition that precludes them advancing in society, held back by Marxist teaching and tendencies1. Her ambition was to support the poor and working class, and she used much of her writings to support this important objective. The Black City itself was a precursor to the newspaper that she started shortly after the 1848 Revolution. Through this fictional account, Sands presented the reality that the French Working Class have no escape from the life that they find themselves in. They have become complacent and accepting of this fact, lending to the reality that a true worker’s revolution would be the only way out of the strife and difficult that the church and state had placed them in.

Jasper Conran Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Jasper Conran - Coursework Example Jasper Conran is considered to be amongst the greatest contemporary artists and in recognition of his contribution to the fashion industry was honored with the Order of the British Crown in 2008. After Jasper Conran became associated with the Debenhams Store that stocked and marketed his J Line women’s wear that was launched in 1996, several of his other range of products began to be accepted through the store. In fact, his most successful venture has been his association with Debenhams, after which the sale of his line of accessories, men’s wear, women’s wear, hosiery, children wear and homeware grew exponentially. Jasper Conran has the distinction of being recognized with credibility in the world of costume designing. He has designed dresses for more than 15 theatre, opera and ballet productions (Ewing and Mackrell, 2006). Presently, his line of products has vastly expanded and includes lingerie, children’s wear, bridal wear, home wear, hosiery, jeans an d men’s wear. In 1999, Jasper Conran had started designing his signature brands of crystal following his partnership with Waterfold. This effort led to the introduction of four exclusive lines for Waterford and other table ware collections of bone china, which were also supplied to Wedgewood. The Wedgewood Collection by Jasper Conran is now the top selling porcelain table ware in the U.K. Jasper Conran launched his signature fragrance in 2003 and in 2005 he launched his most successful colorful fragrances; Jasper Conran II Man and Woman. In 2004, Jasper Conran designed a series of wallpapers and fabrics for the Designers’ Guild in London. At this time, Jasper Conran also designed an exclusive collection of fashionable fire places for Chesney’s in London. Jasper Conran is credited with having a unique British receptivity and his signature is exclusive because of his cuts and ensuing silhouette that remain unparalleled by other designers. Jasper Conran has often b een said to be the Calvin Klein of London. He created collections for men and women that represented sophisticated and classic lines. In 1986, he was declared as the Fashion Designer of the Year by the British Fashion Council, after which he struck a balance between British culture and international fashion. Jasper Conran was inspired by earlier Coco Chanel designs and American looks of Claire McCardell. His designs have been applauded for his outcomes generated from his retro styles and modern sophistication that were brought forth with pop over and monastic dresses. He is well recognized for his elegant adaptations of conventional British tweed formals. Conran’s ability and recognition was given a boost primarily because of his use of color combinations that were introduced in his 1992 collection. His evening wear is characteristic of a clean line in each garment that is brightened with cobalt and fuchsia. Founder’s Philosophy Capture any statements made by the desig ner or brand company about their philosophy e.g. attitudes to the environment. Jasper Conran is recognized as an authority in British styles, tailoring and designs that are characterized by a simple philosophy. His pieces are created so that they are used and enjoyed and are a pleasure to hold and to watch. Conran was much impacted by Jean Muir and still considers him as his mentor in fashion styles.

The Iconoclastic Controversy Essay Example for Free

The Iconoclastic Controversy Essay The paper is devoted to the study of the Iconoclastic Controversy that had a profound effect on the development of church and theology in 8-9th century AD. For the better understanding of the problem, the notion of icons is explained with their seeming simplicity and spiritual meaning. Then, the definition of iconoclasm is given and the substance of the controversy is described. The paper reviews a brief historical development of the issue and examines two iconoclastic periods, of 730-787 and 814-843, with their respective characteristics and results. The study also reviews the major argumentation of both sides of the conflict, the iconoclasts and the iconodules. Having viewed the historical development and the positions of the opponents, the paper analyzes the outcomes of the iconoclastic controversy that are dual: on the one side, the use of icons is restored and theologically justified, and on the other side, the question is not resolved completely and allows further disputes within the Western church.

The Rate of Reaction Of Metals with Acids :: GCSE Chemistry Coursework Investigation

The Rate of Reaction Of Metals with Acids Introduction In this investigation I will be looking at the rate of reaction between a metal, which will be magnesium ribbon, and an acid. The acids will either be hydrochloric, ethanoic, sulphuric or phosphoric acid. I will be finding out if the activation energy changes depending on whether a strong or weak acid is used. I will also be investigating whether or not there is a change in the order of reaction if a dibasic acid is used instead of a monobasic acid. Planning This investigation is therefore split up into separate experiments. Experiment 1 is to find the activation energy for the reactions between hydrochloric acid and magnesium ribbon, then ethanoic acid and magnesium ribbon. The only way to find the activation energy is to time how long it takes for the reaction to complete at different temperatures. Experiment 2 is to find the order of reaction between magnesium ribbon and hydrochloric acid, then sulphuric acid. There are several methods that can be used to find the order of reaction:  · I could use an excess of magnesium ribbon and note down how much gas has evolved every 10 seconds until the reaction has finished.  · I could repeat the same procedure as above, but with an excess of acid instead of magnesium ribbon.  · I could use an excess of acid and change the concentration, this would not require the reaction to be completed so I would have to time how long it takes for a set amount of hydrogen gas to form. There are several chemical equations that are relevant to this investigation:- Mg(s) + 2HCl(aq) MgCl2(aq) + H2(g) Mg(s) + H2SO4(aq) MgSO4 + H2(g) Mg(s) + 2CH3CO2H(aq) Mg(CH3CO2)2(aq) + H2(g) 3Mg(s) + 2H3PO4(aq) Mg3(PO4)2(aq) + 3H2(g) In my experiments I will not be using phosphoric acid due to time restrictions and it is not relevant to the problems I am discussing, because it is a tribasic acid and I am comparing monobasic and dibasic acids. The equation needed to find the activation energy in a reaction is called the Arrhenius equation. In k = constant – EA/R (1/T) Where k = rate constant EA = activation energy (J mol ¹) R = gas constant, 8.31 J K ¹ mol ¹ T = temperature in Kelvin Initial Problems - The time restriction makes it extremely hard to find the order of reaction by timing how long it takes for all the magnesium to disappear. - I do not want to directly heat acid as this is dangerous when only