Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
What is the importance of character development in literature
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Evolution of the Character Jim in Stevenson's Treasure Island
Everyone has two sides to their personality. Sometimes one side is displayed and other times the opposite side is displayed. In 1883, Robert Louis Stevenson created, Treasure Island. While some of the characters in this novel are extremely witty, and courageous; others are full of animosity, deceit, and greed. In this novel the main character shows all of these characteristics.
Jim Hawkins is introduced from the opening of the novel. Jim, who helps his mother at the Admiral Benbow Inn, finds a much-wanted treasure map. Telling only a selected few Jim, Dr. Livesey, Captain Smollett, Long John Silver, and the rest of the crew set off for Treasure Island. Once on the island all of the crew except Jim, Livesey, Smollett and three others turn to mutiny. The mutineers are lead by Long John Silver. After capsizing the ship, a small war, and many deaths Jim and several others escape the island quite a bit richer, leaving the remaining mutineers behind. Jim is a dynamic character who in the beginning is a hard working, pas...
However, with the sighting of land, new worries and troubles are in the air. The pirates are not content with their leadership—a doctor, a wealthy man, and a weak captain. With land and mutiny in view, most of the crew heads to shore and lines are drawn for the standoff that is to come; Jim sided with the “leadership” and a few other faithful crew members, and the other side was the rest of the crew led by Long John Silver (an infamous pirate and the antagonist of the novel). With drawn lines and already many deaths, the first days were eventful and full of excitement. On Treasure Island, tensions were high as were the death rate and the number of those wounded.
Jim is treated as property at many points during the beginning of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, which makes for an effective viewpoint of slaves being treated as property on a micro level. Jim is introduced into the story as a household slave of Miss Watson's. Later on...
All the legal transformations identified in this paper, I argue, point into one direction: a less salient principle of sovereign equality and ever-increasing important transnational regimes. Today, the absolute authority of a state over its territory and population is under more limitations than it was seventy years ago.
In his important article, “Abiding Sovereignty” Krasner attempts to throw light on the changing global scenarios and institutions and its effect on sovereignty and the international state system. Krasner says that the sovereign states are the building blocks of the modern state system which has territorial, judicial and economical autonomy and control within
Villareal, Angeles. “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America: An Overview and Selected Issues.” CRS Report for Congress. U.S. Government. 29 Jan. 2008. Print/Web. 8 Mar. 2011. < http://fpc.state.gov>.
Money, money, money, and the love of money is the root of all evil. Money, has led the characters of Treasure Island to kill, lie, cheat, and put themselves in great peril to acquire it. The Squire Trelawney, the good Doctor, and Jim really have no cause to go in the search of the fortune that they did not earn or place where it rest. Wealth, whether found, earned, or inherited does not automatically speak well of the owner. The test of one’s character should be more than economical success.
First, the search for freedom had a major impact on Jim throughout the story. At the beginning of the story, Jim was living his life as a slave. Jim was content with his life until his owner; Ms. Watson was talking about selling him to New Orleans. That is when Jim’s search for freedom actually began. Jim ran in terror, becoming a runaway slave. That is where Jim and Huck met. Jim, like Huck, was also trying to escape from civilization. Jim had been treated poorly the w...
All children and teenagers will discover character traits and qualities that they want to possess from the adults they come into contact with. Jim Hawkins is no different. He uses the attributes he learns from Ben Gunn, Dr. Livesey, and John Silver to help mold him into the man he is becoming.
There have been assertions amongst some that the Westphalian nation-state system is dead. The truth of this statement is somewhat obscure and may be a bit extreme to what we are seeing in the international arena today. The fall of the bipolar world of the Cold War and the now diminishing power of the United States which is coinciding with the rise of smaller powers have many questioning what the world system is going to look like. Add to this the rise of the non-state actors that are having more and more influence in the international arena. Increasingly major policy areas are being influenced by international forces. The question posed here and which this paper endeavours to answer is, are we entering an era of post-Westphalian governance? The hypothesis put forward in this paper is two prong in nature as the answer to the question is yes, we are moving towards an era of post-Westphalian governance. However this answer is with slight hesitation as the shift towards it is happening slowly. The analysis is based on the idea of diffusion, which “refers to the processes where national policy makers voluntarily, that is without being formally obligated by international agreements or forced by external actors to adopt a certain policy innovation...” expressed by Per Olof Busch and Helge Jörgends. That is to say that in investigating post-Westphalian governance we will first examine the increasing trend of policy shifting towards certain global governors that takes away from the traditional role of the state that evolve out of the Treaty of Westphalia. This will be done by exploring the rise of the transnational networks, international organizations and supranational entities, and then rise of non state actors and the roles they have...
When thinking of books that seem to be written specifically for young boys, Treasure Island is a book that comes to many minds. Treasure Island is the epic tale of thrill seeking and adventure. Stevenson’s main character is a small boy, Jim, who gets to go away from his mother and embark on a trip across the ocean. There are sea fearing pirates, sword fight, and bloody killings. These are typically things that interest boys. Stevenson also follows the literary pattern described by Perry Nodelman in his book, The Pleasures of Children’s Literature. He describes that many novels written by men follow a pattern when it comes to the plot of their stories. “There is an unified action that rises toward a climax and then quickly comes to an end” (Nodelman 124). Treasure Island follows this pattern. The novel moves towards the climax of finding the treasure and then ends quickly without too great of detail with how the treasure money is spent or what happens in the character’s lives. In many ways, Treasure Island exemplifies the narrative patterns of a “boy book.”
Deeply entrenched Westphalian notion of sovereignty has watered down in regards to international criminal justice. The positivist notions based on binding reciprocity and respect towards sovereignty inevitably take neo-liberal twist. Recently developed legal tools have power to challenge and even ostracize certain stat...
There have been numerous authors who argued in favour of states having moral agency and the ability or potential to hold moral duties (Erskine 2001, Hoover 2012, Schwenkenbecher 2011). The notion provided is that the state possesses a distinct identity – independent of the respective identities of citizens and collectives. States play central roles in the international relation arena, and in such they have appeared to qualify as an institutional moral agent (Erskine, 2001). Erskine proposes three criteria in determining the status of states as moral agents, that ...
ABSTRACT: National sovereignty presents a puzzle. On the one hand, this notion continues to figure importantly in our descriptions of global political change. On the other hand, factors such as the accelerating pace of international economic integration seem to have made the notion anachronistic. This paper is an attempt to resolve this puzzle. Distinguishing between internal sovereignty or supremacy and external sovereignty or independence, I investigate whether some insights from the discussion of the former can be applied to our puzzle concerning the latter. One response to the objection that the notion of internal sovereignty is inapplicable because no group in society holds unlimited political power is to distinguish between different types of internal sovereignty, such as legal and electoral sovereignty. The resolution of the puzzle lies in applying this response strategy to the objection that the notion of external sovereignty is inapplicable because no state is completely independent.
However, as the nature of conflict changes and the international system edges towards a global society based on interdependence, some argue that this traditional notion must be updated. Tony Blair, for example, called for sovereignty to be “reconceptualised” (Bellamy, 2009; p.25). This is most likely due to the rise of humanitarian crises and the UN’s growing role in intervention. With global media coverage, it is harder for governments to ignore the will of the people, and public pressure to intervene in said crises. Therefore, humanitarian intervention is being viewed more as a responsibility than an option. The current system cannot effectively deal with this, as the debates over the violation of traditional sovereignty slow the process. As Lu says (2006; p. 81) “Critical opportunities to engage in preventive and non military actions, before a crisis explodes or escalates to the level of mass atrocity, are missed when the concepts of intervention and the use of force are conflated”. The problem of sovereignty blocks the UN from completing its mandate of “maintaining international peace and security”. Moreover, Kofi Annan points out that state sovereignty must not replace human rights: “the Charter protects the sovereignty of peoples… Sovereignty implies responsibility, not just power.” (Bellamy 2009; p. 28) Again we are reminded that governments should be
Sovereignty is a legal concept distinct from independence or from political and economic power. Sovereignty does not mean that the State is not bound by international law or that the States have the right to determine freely their own jurisdiction and competences. It simply means that the State is at the top of the pyramid of human groups. From this idea, it follows that all States must be equal, the principle of equal sovereignty of the States being indissolubly linked to the respect of the inherent rights of sovereignty. Sovereignty applies to all States from the moment they reach that status, regardless of their territory and population size, the form and nature of their government or their autonomy or economic or political dependence on