The Road Not Taken Poem Explication free essay sample

Robert Frost is an excellent poet and will be remembered for his works for as long as they exist. Personally Robert Frost is one of my favorite poets, so when I saw this poem, I had to use it to write my explication. When I read The Road Not Taken, it really hit close to home to me. I get the sense from Frost that he is implying that he doesn’t want people to conform to society. Basically he does not want us to follow a path just because most others have chosen that path. Most importantly in the poem, Frost leaves us with the theme of having to choose a path in which we have no knowledge of where it will take us. We can all relate to this especially my self because I had the same type of decision to make when it came to picking a college. We will write a custom essay sample on The Road Not Taken Poem Explication or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Frost wants us to be different and to make decision for ourselves in life. I feel he wants us to be independent people who make our own future. Throughout this explication, I am going to explain the themes and meanings of each line of the poem and how those themes contribute to the overall meaning of being different and making your own decisions without the influence of others in which Frost implies to his readers. Robert Frost constructed this poem in four stanzas in which each stanza has five lines. He also uses the rhyme scheme AABBAAB, which you will see expressed throughout the poem and explication. From reading this poem and acknowledging the rhyme, I almost got a disgusting and sad feeling. I think Frost did these just to show how serious that his message in this poem really was. You also get the sense from Frost that he is flashing back to this particular event in his life from reading the poem. Also in my opinion, it feels like there is a somewhat somber mood or tone throughout Frost’s poem. Frost begins the poem with the line â€Å"Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,† which I feel Frost is introducing us to a decision that he must make through imagery and symbolism, which in this case, the two roads are symbols for the decision that we must make as human beings in life. Frost then says â€Å"And sorry I could not travel both. † Frost is saying here that in life we have to make decisions in which we have to make a choice. It is either one or the other, and this really applied to me when it came to college because it was either go off to GCSU or stay home. But that’s just me. It also seems to me that frost wishes and feels disappointed that he could not take both roads because he says â€Å"sorry† at the beginning of the line. In the next line, Frost says, â€Å"And be one traveler, long I stood. What Frost is saying here in my opinion, is basically that he really pondered and thought about his decision for a long time. It is almost like Frost is giving us the idea that we need to take a long time to make and think about major decisions in life, so that we can make the right decision for ourselves. Frost is basically just telling us to be patient when making big decisions in life. Frost in the next line then says, â€Å"And look ed down one as far as I could. † I think here Frost is saying that he is studying one of the choices as best he can and getting as much information about this choice to help him make a decision. The next line then states, â€Å"To where I bent in the undergrowth;† Frost is using imagery here to describe the choice in which he only knows so much about this particular choice. Frost does not have a lot of information about this choice, and he expresses it very clearly in his poem when describing the road bending into the undergrowth. It seems to me that he can not see the future of this path, and that he has to take a major risk when choosing his path. In the next stanza Frost starts with saying, â€Å"Then took the other, as just as fair. Frost is basically saying that he reviewed and thought about this choice equally to the other choice. He uses the word fair to prove that theory, and although he does not go into as much depth as the other choice, he is still implying that the two roads or paths are equal. Thus leading me to believe, that Frost is basically saying that the outcomes of each of the choices are equally fair as well, but that is just my opinion. He then s ays, â€Å"And having perhaps the better claim,† in the next line. This is somewhat symbolic and ironic. This is symbolic in which the road less traveled that has the better claim and less wear is equal to the path in which is not chosen by most in society. It is somewhat ironic because it is not most traveled and successful, and Frost decides to take this road later in the poem. It is ironic because we all would expect somebody to take the most popular road because honestly life has come down to popularity. I hate it, but it is true. He took the road less traveled which was the least popular road, and I really respect him for that, but I’ll get into this more later on. Frost then describes this choice through imagery by saying in the next line, â€Å"Because it was grassy and wanted wear;† He is describing this road in which it is very grassy and there is little to no wear on this road. He makes it very clear through his imagery that this is the road less traveled. Frost again uses imagery to describe each choice when he says, â€Å"Though as for that the passing there, Had worn them really about the same. † He is saying here in my opinion that both paths or choices are almost equal when it comes to outcome and success. He also uses some diction in this instance when describing the similarity of both paths or choices. Robert Frost begins the next stanza leading up to his decision by saying, â€Å"And both that morning equally lay, In leaves no step had trodden black. † To me he is saying that in the day he made the decision both choices and paths were almost identical and that this decision could not be made primarily off of the look of both paths or choices. Also he uses what appears to be a sad, dark word choice or diction when he uses the word â€Å"black. It also could fall under the use of dark imagery because as a reader it really put me in a quiet, somber mood. In the next line, Frost says, â€Å"Oh, I kept the first for another day! † In my opinion, Frost is saying here that he took the second road with the better claim, and the road that was less traveled with the least wear. I also get the sense in this line that if his first decision does not work out for him, that he can always change paths if he fails. The next line says, â€Å"Yet knowing how way leads to way, I doubted if I should ever come back. Frost is saying here that by taking this path, other opportunities and decisions will come up, and take him to different places and times in life. I feel that Frost is using repetition by saying, â€Å"way leads to way,† because he is putting an emphasis on the fact that more opportunities are going to come up that will distance him from where he began. Because of that he feels that like he may not be able to come ba ck to the other choice and that this decision he is making is truly life altering and life changing. It is almost like he feels that there is no turning back for him. Frost begins the last stanza by saying â€Å"I shall be telling this with a sigh, Somewhere ages and ages hence: Two roads diverged in a wood,† Frost uses repetition and symbolism here when saying, â€Å"ages and ages hence,† to warn the upcoming generations that they will one day encounter tough decisions that are life changing, and that they will have to make difficult decisions in life and in the future. Frost uses symbolism in which he is comparing ages to ages to the upcoming generations. He puts a huge emphasis foreboding that we are going to have to make decisions in life. He also has a very soberest tone and mood in these lines. It is almost like he feels bad that everyone in their lives must make decisions like this. It almost seems to me like he feels he made the wrong choice himself, but that is not the case because Frost then says in the next line, â€Å"and I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference. † What I get from this line is that the line is almost symbolizing how not following the crowd really makes a difference in life, and it appears that being yourself and doing what you want to do is what really makes you happy and successful in life. This poem really hit home to me because in my opinion we must all face choices and decisions in our lives. We are all going to come upon these roads that Frost talks about. It is inevitable, and through tone, imagery, and word choices. His poem was almost spot with the decision I had to make on college. I definitely approached those two paths, and I just like Frost, took the road less traveled. In the case of my family, that would be leaving home and going off to school, but I think I made the right decision. Either choice I made, I am almost certain that my life would end up just the same as it is now. With that knowledge it was a risk I was willing to take. So with analyzing and thoroughly reading Frost’s poem, I have really learned a lot and been able to apply the situations in the poem to instances in my life. This is definitely one of my favorite poems, and I Frost’s opinion of not conforming to society and making our own choices. I love it, and I honestly feel that we are better off doing what we want to do. To me that is the only way in which we can truly be happy without any doubts.

Understanding the Bush Doctrine

Understanding the Bush Doctrine The term Bush Doctrine applies to the foreign policy approach that President  George W. Bush practiced during this two terms, January 2001 to January 2009. It was the basis for the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. Neoconservative Framework The Bush Doctrine grew out of  neoconservative dissatisfaction with President Bill Clintons handling of the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein in the 1990s. The U.S. had beaten Iraq in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. That wars goals, however, were limited to forcing Iraq to abandon its occupation of Kuwait and did not include toppling Saddam. Many neoconservatives  voiced concern that the U.S. did not depose Saddam. Post-war peace terms also dictated that Saddam  allow United Nations inspectors to periodically search Iraq for evidence of programs to build weapons of mass destruction, which could include chemical or nuclear weapons. Saddam repeatedly angered neo-cons as he stalled or prohibited U.N. inspections. Neoconservatives Letter to Clinton In January 1998, a group of neoconservative hawks, who advocated warfare, if necessary, to achieve their goals, sent a letter to Clinton calling for the removal of Saddam. They said that Saddams interference with U.N. weapons inspectors made it impossible to gain any concrete intelligence about Iraqi weapons. For the neo-cons, Saddams firing of SCUD missiles at Israel during the Gulf War and his use of chemical weapons against Iran in the 1980s erased any doubt about whether he would use any WMD he obtained. The group stressed its view that containment of Saddams Iraq had failed. As the main point of their letter, they said: Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy. Signers of the letter included Donald Rumsfeld, who would become Bushs first secretary of defense, and Paul Wolfowitz, who would become undersecretary of defense. America First Unilateralism The Bush Doctrine has an element of America first unilateralism that revealed itself well before the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, the so-called War on Terror or the Iraq War. That revelation came in March 2001, just two months into Bushs presidency, when he withdrew the United States from the U.N.s Kyoto Protocol  to reduce worldwide greenhouse gasses. Bush reasoned that transitioning American industry from coal to cleaner electricity or natural gas would drive up energy costs and force rebuilding of manufacturing infrastructures. The decision made the United States one of two developed nations not subscribing to the Kyoto Protocol. The other was Australia, which has since made plans to join protocol nations. As of January 2017, the U.S. still had not ratified the Kyoto Protocol. With Us or With the Terrorists After the al-Qaida terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush Doctrine took on a new dimension. That night, Bush told Americans that, in fighting terrorism, the U.S. would not distinguish between terrorists and nations that harbor terrorists. Bush expanded on that when he addressed a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. He said: We will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime. In October 2001, U.S. and allied troops invaded Afghanistan, where intelligence indicated the Taliban-held government was harboring al-Qaida. Preventive War In January 2002, Bushs foreign policy headed toward one of preventive war. Bush described Iraq, Iran and North Korea as an axis of evil that supported terrorism and sought weapons of mass destruction. Well be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events while dangers gather. I will not stand by as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the worlds most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the worlds most destructive weapons, Bush said. As Washington Post columnist Dan Froomkin commented, Bush was putting a new spin on traditional war policy. Pre-emption has in fact been a staple of our foreign policy for ages and other countries as well, Froomkin wrote. The twist Bush put on it was embracing preventive war: Taking action well before an attack was imminent invading a country that was simply perceived as threatening. By the end of 2002, the Bush administration was talking openly about the possibility of Iraq possessing WMD and reiterating that it harbored and supported terrorists. That rhetoric indicated that the hawks who had written Clinton in 1998 now held sway in the Bush Cabinet. A U.S.-led coalition invaded Iraq in March 2003, quickly toppling Saddams regime in a shock and awe campaign. Legacy A bloody insurgency against the  American occupation of Iraq and the U.S. inability to quickly prop up a working democratic government damaged the credibility of the Bush Doctrine. Most damaging was the absence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Any preventive war doctrine relies on the support of good intelligence, but the absence of WMD highlighted a problem of faulty intelligence. The Bush Doctrine essentially died in 2006. By then the military force in Iraq was focusing on damage repair and pacification, and the militarys preoccupation with and focus on Iraq had enabled the Taliban in Afghanistan to reverse American successes there. In November 2006, public dissatisfaction with the wars enabled Democrats to reclaim control of Congress. It also forced Bush to usher the hawk most notably Rumsfeld out of his Cabinet.

Rawls thinking Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Rawls thinking - Essay Example This kind of utopianism is not especially useful in the international scheme. Utopianism is unrealistic. It supposes that a perfect world can be created by men and that is one of our goals on Earth. E. H. Carr, for example, is a realist: he believes the world is not perfectible and that efforts to do so will end in failure and sometime calamity (Copleston, 99). The political system contains too many variables for any person or group to control. The League of Nations is a good example of this. The problems of the world are not the creation of any one person or group and so they cannot be tackled head on. Utopianism is a dead end and Rawls version of it is also a dead end. In a sense Rawls opinion of international relations is a continuation of Rousseaus (Rawls, 224). To fully understand this with must go back more than 200 years into the past. The Enlightenment was a remarkable time in human history. For many years, humans had lived in an intellectual or cultural â€Å"dark ages† where very little changed and people were wedded to their superstitions. Centuries went by and nothing really progressed. Instead of testing the world around them they simply accepted what clergymen or monarchs told them was true and left it at that. They didn’t test their limits; they just read old books and believed the facts in them. But this state of affairs could not last forever. There is an impulse, a curiosity, in humans that seeks sensible explanations. In the 17th century the Enlightenment began. Motivated by trade, the printing press, and a number of very significant intellectual leaders, this period of history saw a lot of the superstitions that gui ded people’s lives beaten back. Thinkers like Diderot, Voltaire, Adam Smith, and Thomas Jefferson revolutionized the way we think about the world and our place in it (Sahakian, 87). Scientific innovation was also telling us more and more about our world, was