In the 1980s, Brian Friel, one of Ireland's most successful twentieth century dramatists, authored two plays – Translations and Making History – which were concerned with major events in colonial history. Given the context in which the plays were written – Northern Ireland was in a state of war at the time – the playwright's choice of topics (the introduction of the National Schools and the Ordnance Survey in the nineteenth century and the failed Gaelic revolt against English rule and the Flight of the Earls in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries) was both pointed and politically contentious. Yet, the argument of this essay is that rather than presenting versions of the past which conform to the ideological imperatives of a particular political stance, Friel's plays are much more interesting and significant in that they provoke a whole series of questions around the issue of historical representation. One of the most important of those questions is the applicability of the criteria truth and falsity in historical and other modes of interpretation. The essay concludes with a consideration of the politics of memory and forgetting in contemporary Northern Ireland.
The scientific article presents a study of the ways of expressing manipulation in politics, which is performed in English political discourse by means of language. Carefully selected language units, used by politicians in public speaking, in combination with social factors, can be a powerful instrument for managing public opinion, i.e. manipulation. The authors analyze public speeches delivered by English politicians. Manipulation is an integral part of American political discourse, all speech strategies of which are aimed at one purpose: to influence a recipient, persuade him or her to make a decision that will be beneficial for a politician. The article considers the main strategies, tactics and types of manipulation used in the modern political sphere. An analysis of public speeches of English politicians proves the importance of speech manipulative techniques for successful achievement of political goals.
The major pivot around which the art of literary creativity revolves is life. A work of art can neither exist in a vacuum nor can it be divorced from the myriad of socio-political factors or social realities that negatively or positively influence the worldview of man. These factors can either be political, historical, biographical, or sociological. What this entails is that literature derives its main essence from life, as the creative writer is provoked to present the losses and gains, the ills and virtues, of a society with a view to highlighting or sensitizing the people to the solutions of these problems. A work of art also entertains as it educates. This confers on literature the ability to influence human beings psychologically, spiritually, and physically depending on the sensitivity and/or the world-view of the writer. This paper explores how Femi Osofisan sees politics as a tool of social organization in his dramaturgy with a critical study of six of his plays: A restless Run of Locusts (1975), The Chattering and the Song (1977), Who is Afraid of Solarin (1978), Once Upon Four Robbers (1982), Morountodun and Other Plays (1982) and Mid-Night Hotel (1986).
KANT'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY HAS BEEN NEGLECTED IN THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING WORLD. PERHAPS THIS IS DUE TO OBSTACLES TO UNDERSTANDING IT: THE GRIP FO UTILITORIANISM; ACCEPTANCE OF HEGEL'S UNFAVOURABLE VERDICT; THE MISTAKEN IDEA THAT KANT MERELY REPEATS ROUSSEAU AND OTHERS; AND THE COMPLEXITY OF HAVING TO CONNECT IT WITH ALL THE REST OF KANT'S PHILOSOPHY.
A History of Political Thought in the English Revolution (1954) examines the large range of political doctrines which played their part in the English revolution - a period when modern democratic ideas began. The political literature of the period between 1645, when the Levellers first seized upon the revolution's wider implications, and 1660, when Charles II restored the monarchy to power, is here studied in detail.
In my thesis, I discuss and analyze William Shakespeare's utilization and adaptation of source texts within three of his dramas: Henry IV, Part I, a history; Twelfth Night, a comedy; and Julius Caesar, a tragedy. By comparing Shakespeare's adaption of sources to the contemporary United Kingdom intellectual property policies, it becomes possible for me to determine whether Shakespeare's extensive and popular dramas would violate modern copyright law. The first chapter, "Printing and Writing in the Early Modern Period," discusses the development of proprietary interests among the Elizabethan people. I break down the individual components of the printing process in the early modern period and further consider how its creation affected writers and impacted the world at large. Additionally mentioned within this chapter are the United Kingdom's initial attempts at regulating printed materials among publishers. The availability, pricing, and evolution of printed material is all discussed, as well as the imitative and collaborative writing process among Elizabethan dramatists and poets. The second chapter, "An Introduction and Brief History of Intellectual Property and Copyright," addresses the United Kingdom's current legislation on borrowing and infringing upon creative works. After an introduction to key terms within the intellectual property field, I provide a brief history on the evolution of copyright within the United Kingdom. After a discussion on property protection and rights for literary, dramatic, and artistic works, I cite the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 as the key document from which I draw my conclusions on Shakespeare's infringement of source texts within his plays. Chapters three, four, and five, focus on the individual analyses of source texts used by Shakespeare within each of his selected plays. While Shakespeare did borrow from a multitude of source texts, I strive to analyze his utilization of content within only his most primary source texts. Each chapter begins with a brief synopsis of the play, characters, and major themes. After each introduction, I devote multiple pages of text to comparing and contrasting Shakespeare's imitation and utilization of primary source texts within his own works. At the end of each chapter, I calculate the age of each source text as it relates to the public domain and intellectual property law. Following chapter five, I use the combination of my analyses and personal understanding of copyright to render three separate verdicts on Shakespeare's infringement of source materials within each of his plays. Alongside each verdict, I provide lawful reasoning for the individual outcome of each case. In the final pages, I draw a conclusion concerning Shakespeare's infringement of source texts within his plays. It looks like one play clearly breaks the United Kingdom's copyright laws, one play may or may not depending on further studies, and a third drama clearly does not constitute infringement. Furthermore, I offer a brief commentary on the reigning United Kingdom intellectual property laws based upon my analyses and verdicts.
Joseph Ronsley & Ann Saddlemyer. Selected Plays. M. J. Molloy. Gerrards Cross: Colin Smythe and Washington D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1998. 394 pp.
