Challenges And Frustrations In A Country Doctor English Literature Essay

Challenges And Frustrations In A Country Doctor English Literature Essay Franz Kafka’s, â€Å"A country doctor† is a story that narrates the experiences and challenges a country doctor faces as he tries to carry out his duties as the doctor. He goes through various obstacles which he has no solution to, but has to face them just as they are. He clings to the idea of being a helper, wards of resignation, is ready to sacrifice his private life for his professional ethics and is forced in the cruelest way to recognize the vanity of his effort (Samon 2002). In this essay, am going to identify four challenges and frustrations that accompany each that confront the doctor. I will also explain why the story may be called a nightmare then lastly highlight the themes that revealed from the story. The weather is very unfavourable. It is this period that the doctor struggles to attend to an emergency ten miles away during a snowstorm. It is this bad weather and exhaustion that led to the death of his horse. The death of the horse greatly frustrates the doctor as he is unable to attend to the alarm because of lack of a horse. At the end as he goes back home, he is still greatly affected by the snow. The perspective of the patient about his sickness is also a big challenge to the doctor. The patient has given up on life. When the doctor arrives and looks at the patient, the young man says, â€Å"doctor, let me die!† This is a total loss of hope. The young man knows that the presence of the doctor will not bring any improvement to his health status. The young man later asks, â€Å"Will you save me?† At the end the young man tells the doctor that he had very little confidence in him. This is a major challenge to the doctor as the sick young man has already given up. The doctor is frustrated because he can do nothing to the state of the young man (John stone 2008). The emerging of the groom from the pigsty is one great challenge the doctor faces. The groom is a stranger but very willing to assist by lending his horse. In stead of accompanying the doctor, he refuses to go with him. In fact just the first time he handles Rosa is very suspicious. He scratches her cheek with his teeth. The groom’s actions after the doctor leaves are also mysterious (Cuizon 2008). The torment the doctor feels about Rosa is also a great challenge. Rosa was left with a stranger whom she was not willing to stay with. The doctor had to make a choice between saving Rosa and attending to the patient. He decides to attend to the patient but is frequently disturbed mentally about the state of Rosa and the stranger. The frustrations go further as he has left Rosa in a vulnerable state yet his mission is not successful (Cuizon 2008). The story might be called a nightmare because of the happenings that take place. The emerging of the groom and the horses from the pigsty is frightening. The doctor, who is the owner of the pigsty thinks it is abandoned, in fact Rosa’s comment is satirical; â€Å"one doesn’t know the things one has in one’s own house.† The groom is too willing to help. The description of the horses is not normal; in fact the doctor admits that he had never used such horses. The speed the horses run and the time taken for the ten miles is very short. The way the patient’s family handles the doctor is also frightening. They take off his clothes, and then force him to lie in the same bed with the patient. They then close the door and leave. In addition, the song sung by the school children and the teacher is frightening, â€Å"take his clothes off, then he will heal, and if he does not cure, kill him. It’s only a doctor, it’s only a doctor.†(Cuizon 2008).

Why Change Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Why Change - Article Example uct adaptation refers to process through which a manufacturer makes changes to improve an existing product and make it more appealing to a target market usually in new markets (Byrne, 2010). Products are a result of the underlying socio-cultural phenomenon of a given society. Society’s perception of what the product is and what bundles of benefits it provides according to prevailing socio-cultural needs is the fundamental basis for product differentiation (adaptation). The adjustments in a product’s main components are made in accordance to the particular target market needs and consumption behavior. Research on consuming trends and preferences as well as product class in the market can provide useful insights on how to modify all or some main components of an existing product (Cooper & Edgett, 2009). America’s fast food franchise McDonald’s entry into the Indian market in 1996 is a classic case of how product adaptability can be used to enter international markets that are culturally different. Other fast food chains had largely ignored the Indian market before 1990 and those that did ignored the cultural differences eventually leading to their collapse and withdrawal from the market. There is a highly fragmented food market in India characterized by millions of roadside stalls and carts. This represents a large ‘eating out’ culture. However, the market is also significantly influenced by high pressure groups mainly comprising health and animal welfare activists. McDonald’s strategy included the exclusion of pork and beef items from its menu considering that 40% of Indians are vegetarians. An alternative vegetable, fish and chicken menu was adopted. The menus therefore were color-coded into green for vegetarians and purple for non-vegetarians. The Maharaja Mac replaced the famous ‘big mac’; chicken patty replaced beef and introduction of spicy menus with less garlic in its sauce. This strategy reflected a much higher degree of adaptability

Law Relating to Murder Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Law Relating to Murder - Essay Example The actus reus of Murder therefore requires that the defendant should have caused the death of the victim through an act of his/her own. Death should be caused within the Queen's peace and three years of the act of the defendant. In this question the defendant Zak has killed Julie. Murder is a consequence crime and therefore accordingly requires causation to be proved in order for the actus reus of murder to be proved. It is in essence proving that it was the act of the defendant that caused the death of the victim. Causation is a 2-stage test and requires firstly causation in fact. The test for causation in fact is the 'But for test' (but for the act of the defendant, would the victim still have suffered the consequences and if not then there is causation in fact). The element that has to be proved is that it was the act of the defendant that put the victim in a certain setting; in which he would not have been but for the act of the defendant. In this instance it is not difficult to prove causation in fact, as had it not been the act of Zak, Julie would not have died. Once causation in fact is proved the second test of causation has to be satisfied. The second stage of the causation test is causation in law. ... In this question it seems that in relation to death of Julie there is causation in law as the act of Zak was the operative and substantial cause of Julie's death. Neither had the act of Zak exhausted its effect and further it was also the significant and sole cause of Julie's death. It seems therefore that the actus reus of the offence of murder is proved as Julie dies in the fire and the place of his death is within the Queen's peace. Mens rea for the Murder or the lack thereof This takes us to the next issue in the question, whether Zak had the requisite mens rea for murder. The mens rea for murder is intention to kill (express malice) or cause grievous bodily harm (implied malice). Traditionally the mens rea for murder is called "malice aforethought". In Smith & Hogan Criminal Law 9th Edition malice aforethought has been defined as: 'a mere arbitrary symbol for the 'malice' may have in it nothing really malicious; and need never be really ' aforethought'. Therefore the requirement today is that the defendant should have intended either death or grievous bodily harm as a result of his/her act. Malice aforethought is generally taken to mean that the defendant should have intention to bring about either of those two consequences. Intention can be defined as the either the purpose of the defendant's act or even if it not the purpose of the defendant's act, intention can be inferred from certain subjective foresight on part of the defendant. In other words if the defendant realizes that the consequences are virtually certain as a result of his act then the courts can hold that the defendant intended the consequences as a result of his act. The problem here is that Mens Rea for this murder seems doubtful as it has been stated in the question.