Witch of blackbird pond Essay -- essays research papers

The name of the book that I read was â€Å"The Witch of Blackbird Pond† By, Elizabeth George Speare. The book took place in the year of 1687. Some of the book takes place on a boat called the â€Å"Dolphin,† and then the rest of the book in Wethersfield, in the state of Connecticut. The main characters in the book are Katherine Tyler (her nickname was Kit), Nat Eaton, Uncle Matthew, Aunt Rachel, Hannah Tupper, Kit’s cousins Mercy, and Judith, Prudence, Hannah Tupper, John Holbrook, Goodwife Cruff and Goodman Cruff. One of the problems in the beginning of the book is when she goes to her cousin’s house and was adapting to their way of life; for instance when she got there, they all did not have good clothes and she had really fancy clothes that they would have never worn in their life because they were too expensive. Another problem that she encountered was that she met a lady named Hannah Tupper that lived near Blackbird Pond and she was a Quaker. That’s why she was forced to live there, because no one liked her and she was al so accused of being a witch. Kit made friends with her when she bumped into her in the meadow. This jeopardized her life and that was a problem. She helped Prudence read and write and that was a little risky too.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  I mostly identify with the main character kit. I mostly identify with her because she likes to try new things and I like to try new things also. I also identify with her because she likes to explore new places, for instan...

The Blue Hotel Essay -- essays research papers

Stephen Crane is a well-known author of variety of short stories. He was born in Newark, New Jersey, the son of a Methodist minister. After schooling at Lafayette College and Syracuse University, he worked in New York as a freelance journalist. His short stories and experimental poetry, also, anticipate the ironic realism of the decades ahead. In his brief and energetic life, he published fourteen books while acting out, in his personal adventures, the legend of the writer as soldier of fortune (741-743). Among one of his works include "The Blue Hotel." The novel the "Blue Hotel" is a novel themed with death. The moment that the Swede arrives at the "Blue Hotel" it is somehow, in The Swedes mind, transformed into a wild west hotel, by the many dime novels he has read, which made him even more uneasy about staying at the hotel. In one of the initial scenes this fear is evident "The Swede answered him swiftly and eagerly: ‘Th ese men are going to kill me.’†¦. ‘I know I won’t get out of here alive’"(771). The Swede’s fear of dying had made him want to leave the hotel, but Pat Scull, the owner of the Blue Hotel, attempted to get him to stay by showing around the hotel and showing him pictures of his family. Scully shows the Swede some pictures of his children "That’s the pitcher of my of my little girl that died. Her name was Carrie. She had the purtiest hair you ever saw! I was that fond of her, she-&qu...

Essay --

2.1 INTRODUCTION The first chapter of this dissertation has indicated organizational commitment (OC) as the way to improve a wide range of positive organizational outcomes and in curing turnover and absenteeism problems. It is vital to have a thorough understanding of the overall concept of OC. Therefore, the main objective of this chapter is to provide a review on OC based on an extensive search of existing literature. This chapter starts with the theoretical background of OC and its definition in the current world. Different approaches of OC are then discussed and Three-Component Model will be presented in detail. This chapter progresses to evaluate the OC in the construction industry based on the existing literature. Finally, a summary is provided at the end of this chapter. 2.2 BACKGROUND AND DEFINITION OF ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT (OC) Commitment is a multi-foci concept. One may find commitment to the profession associations, the union, the work teams as well as commitment to the family, the state or religion, projects, values or career (Reichers, 1985; Baruch, 1998; Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001; Paillà ©, Fournier & Lamontagne 2011). OC is one of the five forms of work commitment indicated by Morrow (1983) and has been conceptualized in different constructs, definitions and interpretations to better understand the intensity and stability of an employee’s dedication to the organization (Cohen, 2007; Singh & Venugopal, 2008). The earliest attempt of the conceptualization of commitment is by Becker’s (1960) side-bet theory. He argued that an individual is committed in an organization is because of the hidden investments. The threat of losing these investments, along with a perceived lack of alternatives to replace or make up for th... ...onship is essential in undertaking project tasks to attain the goals. To the QS, goal attainment within the work group creates a positive influence to be a member of the group. Hence, QS is likely to gain or maintain their membership in the group (Chiu & Ng, 2013). In order to achieve the desired attitude and behavioural changes among employees, it is essential to understand the objectives, expectations and goals of the organization and the employees (Mohyin, Dainty, & Carrillo, 2009). Failing in understanding what employees require and expect from the employment relationship will often lead to the deterioration in commitment and loyalty and thus increase employee turnover (Loosemore et al., 2003). This reflects a need in studying the antecedents of OC among QS, by looking at QS who work in different consultant and construction firms to fill the gaps in knowledge.

Midterm part 1

Prior to the sixteenth century, racism – in the modern sense of that term – was practically unknown. Oppression and slavery had existed, of course, but before the beginning of the African slave-trade, these had never been based on skin color. Racism, like all forms of oppression, is ultimately rooted in a capitalistic economic system that relies on heavy-handed control and oppressive authority in order to maintain itself and concentrate the greatest amount of wealth into as few hands as possible. When there â€Å"legal† controls and sheer force begin to fail, it becomes necessary for the â€Å"ruling class† to create a mythology.   In early Virginia, this mythology took the form of what was essentially a â€Å"divide and conquer† strategy. Those Englishmen who came to the Chesapeake region of their own volition in the early 17th century fell into one of two categories; landless gentry, generally the younger sons of aristocrats – and landless peasants who came as indentured servants in hopes of receiving land of their own land once the term of their service contract had expired.   The Portuguese had started the African slave trade over a century earlier. The English had made attempts to enslave the local native Indians, but as the Indians were masters at surviving in their home environment, it was nearly impossible to keep them as slaves. Africans, uprooted and separated from their culture and isolated in a foreign environment seemed an ideal solution (Zinn, 25-27). While Eric Fone argues that white Englishmen in Jamestown and the Chesapeake area had varying degrees of â€Å"liberty,† the fact is that true liberty depended on the ownership of land. In Fone’s â€Å"spectrum,† the freest people were those who of course owned their own land. Indentures were somewhere in the middle of this scale, enjoying a â€Å"partial† freedom. This may have been true, depending on your definition. An indenture agreed to become a virtual â€Å"slave† for a term of seven years – which is what indentured servitude entailed – a peasant could get passage to North America and a land grant of fifty acres once their period of servitude was completed. However in practice, this rarely happened; indentured servitude was so harsh that many died before the terms of their contract was over (Fone). Others ran off to join local Indians (the reverse, significantly, was never true), or gave up their claim to land in exchange for a shorter term. Despite underlying racism on the part of some English gentry (mostly stemming from cultural associations with the color black), the nature of slavery at that time was different from it was later to become. African slaves during the early history of the colony had many legal rights similar to those of indentured servants. The line between indentured servitude and slaver could often become blurred. There was no real reason to separate black and white during the first seventy years or so, nor deny blacks the status that was extended to any other worker. In fact, Africans slaves and English indentures did the same work, often side-by-side. There is documented evidence of fraternization, socializing and even sexual relations across racial lines (Zinn, 31-32) By the time the Virginia colony was viable and indentured servants lived long enough to complete their terms, arable land had become unavailable, due to the increasing number of landless gentry who had managed to acquire large estates – often illegally. This led to serious tensions between the growing numbers of indentures who were unable to claim the land to which the law (in theory) entitled them, and the large estate owners who controlled the best acreage. Eventually, there was an uprising by the landless working class against the landed gentry. After â€Å"Bacon’s Rebellion,† the ruling class, began to understand the precariousness of their position.   One problem was the possibility of further uprisings among disenfranchised Englishmen. The other was that of a slave uprising. The worst case scenario was that in which white indentures and black slaves should join forces.   Since these two groups faced many of the same problems, this was a real possibility. The answer was to pursue a strategy of â€Å"divide and conquer.†   Beginning in the 1660’s, a number of increasingly oppressive â€Å"slave codes† were legislated.   Eventually, this turned Africans into something less than human from a legal standpoint. Masters could literally beat a slave to death without legal repercussions; a slave could be dismembered as a form of punishment; manumission was made far more difficult. Most significantly, a 1670 law specified that African servants were slaves for life, and children born to slave women were automatically slaves as well. Next, the gentry began extending privileges to the landless working class, giving them a greater stake in Virginia society. The vote was extended to more white Protestant males than before, and the House of Burgesses – which represented the lower classes – was granted more power. Further action was taken to make western lands available to settlement. The result was that these token privileges reinforced an idea among poor and working class whites that they were somehow â€Å"better† than the Africans. The irony lies in the fact that if Africans had never been imported to Virginia, indentured white servitude would certainly have become institutionalized. The Virginia colony – and perhaps all of America – may very well have become the feudal society wished for by today’s trans-national corporate capitalists and their neo-conservative lap dogs in the current U.S. Administration and Congress. Works Cited Foner, Eric. Give Me Liberty! An American History.   New York: W.W. Norton,   2006. Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of The United States (3rd ed.) New York: Harper Collins, 2003.

Cuba Speech Essay

This Government, as promised, has maintained the closest surveillance of the Soviet military buildup on the island of Cuba. Within the past week, unmistakable evidence has established the fact that a series of offensive missile sites is now in preparation on that imprisoned island. The purpose of these bases can be none other than to provide a nuclear strike capability against the Western Hemisphere. Upon receiving the first preliminary hard information of this nature last Tuesday morning at 9 A.M., I directed that our surveillance be stepped up. And having now confirmed and completed our evaluation of the evidence and our decision on a course of action, this Government feels obliged to report this new crisis to you in fullest detail. The characteristics of these new missile sites indicate two distinct types of installations. Several of them include medium range ballistic missiles, capable of carrying a nuclear warhead for a distance of more than 1,000 nautical miles. Each of these missiles, in short, is capable of striking Washington, D. C., the Panama Canal, Cape Canaveral, Mexico City, or any other city in the southeastern part of the United States, in Central America, or in the Caribbean area. Click photo for high resolution Additional sites not yet completed appear to be designed for intermediate range ballistic missiles — capable of traveling more than twice as far — and thus capable of striking most of the major cities in the Western Hemisphere, ranging as far north as Hudson Bay, Canada, and as far south as Lima, Peru. In addition, jet bombers, capable of carrying nuclear weapons, are now being uncrated and assembled in Cuba, while the necessary air bases are being prepared. This urgent transformation of Cuba into an important strategic base — by the presence of these large, long-range, and clearly offensive weapons of sudden mass destruction — constitutes an explicit threat to the peace and security of all the Americas, in flagrant and deliberate defiance of the Rio Pact of 1947, the traditions of this nation and hemisphere, the joint resolution of the 87th Congress, the Charter of the United Nations, and my own public warnings to the Soviets on September 4 and 13. This action also contradicts the repeated assurances of Soviet spokesmen, both publicly and privately delivered, that the arms buildup in Cuba would retain its original defensive character, and that the Soviet Union had no need or desire to station strategic missiles. on the territory of any other nation. The size of this undertaking makes clear that it has been planned for some months. Yet, only last month, after I had made clear the distinction between any introduction of ground-to-ground missiles and the existence of defensive antiaircraft missiles, the Soviet Government publicly stated on September 11 that, and I quote, â€Å"the armaments and military equipment sent to Cuba are designed exclusively for defensive purposes,† that there is, and I quote the Soviet Government, â€Å"there is no need for the Soviet Government to shift its weapons for a retaliatory blow to any other country, for instance Cuba,† and that, and I quote their government, â€Å"the Soviet Union has so powerful rockets to carry these nuclear warheads that there is no need to search for sites for them beyond the boundaries of the Soviet Union.† That statement was false. Only last Thursday, as evidence of this rapid offensive buildup was already in my hand, Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko told me in my office that he was instructed to make it clear once again, as he said his government had already done, that Soviet assistance to Cuba, and I quote, â€Å"pursued solely the purpose of contributing to the defense capabilities of Cuba,† that, and I quote him, â€Å"training by Soviet specialists of Cuban nationals in handling defensive armaments was by no means offensive, and if it were otherwise,† Mr. Gromyko went on, â€Å"the Soviet Government would never become involved in rendering such assistance.† That statement also was false. Neither the United States of America nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nation’s security to constitute maximum peril. Nuclear weapons are so destructive and ballistic missiles are so swift, that any substantially increased possibility of their use or any sudden change in their deployment may well be regarded as a definite threat to peace. For many years, both the Soviet Union and the United States, recognizing this fact, have deployed strategic nuclear weapons with great care, never upsetting the precarious status quo which insured that these weapons would not be used in the absence of some vital challenge. Our own strategic missiles have never been transferred to the territory of any other nation under a cloak of secrecy and deception; and our history — unlike that of the Soviets since the end of World War II — demonstrates that we have no desire to dominate or conquer any other nation or impose our system upon its people. Nevertheless, American citizens have become adjusted to living daily on the bull’s-eye of Soviet missiles located inside the U.S.S.R. or in submarines. In that sense, missiles in Cuba add to an already clear and present danger — although it should be noted the nations of Latin America have never previously been subjected to a potential nuclear threat. But this secret, swift, extraordinary buildup of Communist missiles — in an area well known to have a special and historical relationship to the United States and the nations of the Western Hemisphere, in violation of Soviet assurances, and in defiance of American and hemispheric policy — this sudden, clandestine decision to station strategic weapons for the first time outside of Soviet soil — is a deliberately provocative and unjustified change in the status quo which cannot be accepted by this country, if our courage and our commitments are ever to be trusted again by either friend or foe. The 1930’s taught us a clear lesson: aggressive conduct, if allowed to go unchecked and unchallenged, ultimately leads to war. This nation is opposed to war. We are also true to our word. Our unswerving objective, therefore, must be to prevent the use of these missiles against this or any other country, and to secure their withdrawal or elimination from the Western Hemisphere. Our policy has been one of patience and restraint, as befits a peaceful and powerful nation which leads a worldwide alliance. We have been determined not to be diverted from our central concerns by mere irritants and fanatics. But now further action is required, and it is under way; and these actions may only be the beginning. We will not prematurely or unnecessarily risk the costs of worldwide nuclear war in which even the fruits of victory would be ashes in our mouth; but neither will we shrink from that risk at any time it must be faced. Acting, therefore, in the defense of our own security and of the entire Western Hemisphere, and under the authority entrusted to me by the Constitution as endorsed by the Resolution of the Congress, I have directed that the following initial steps be taken immediately: First: To halt this offensive buildup a strict quarantine on all offensive military equipment under shipment to Cuba is being initiated. All ships of any kind bound for Cuba from whatever nation or port will, if found to contain cargoes of offensive weapons, be turned back. This quarantine will be extended, if needed, to other types of cargo and carriers. We are not at this time, however, denying the necessities of life as the Soviets attempted to do in their Berlin blockade of 1948. Second: I have directed the continued and increased close surveillance of Cuba and its military buildup. The foreign ministers of the OAS [Organization of American States], in their communiquà ©Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ of October 6, rejected secrecy on such matters in this hemisphere. Should these offensive military preparations continue, thus increasing the threat to the hemisphere, further action will be justified. I have directed the Armed Forces to prepare for any eventualities; and I trust that in the interest of both the Cuban people and the Soviet technicians at the sites, the hazards to all concerned of continuing this threat will be recognized. Third: It shall be the policy of this nation to regard any nuclear missile launched from Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an attack by the Soviet Union on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union. Fourth: As a necessary military precaution, I have reinforced our base at Guantanamo, evacuated today the dependents of our personnel there, and ordered additional military units to be on a standby ale rt basis. Fifth: We are calling tonight for an immediate meeting of the Organ[ization] of Consultation under the Organization of American States, to consider this threat to hemispheric security and to invoke articles 6 and 8 of the Rio Treaty in support of all necessary action. The United Nations Charter allows for regional security arrangements, and the nations of this hemisphere decided long ago against the military presence of outside powers. Our other allies around the world have also been alerted. Sixth: Under the Charter of the United Nations, we are asking tonight that an emergency meeting of the Security Council be convoked without delay to take action against this latest Soviet threat to world peace. Our resolution will call for the prompt dismantling and withdrawal of all offensive weapons in Cuba, under the supervision of U.N. observers, before the quarantine can be lifted. Seventh and finally: I call upon Chairman Khrushchev to halt and eliminate this clandestine, reckless, and provocative threat to world peace and to stable relations between our two nations. I call upon him further to abandon this course of world domination, and to join in an historic effort to end the perilous arms race and to transform the history of man. He has an opportunity now to move the world back from the abyss of destruction by returning to his government’s own words that it had no need to station missiles outside its own territory, and withdrawing these weapons from Cuba by refraining from any action which will widen or deepen the present crisis, and then by participating in a search for peaceful and permanent solutions. This nation is prepared to present its case against the Soviet threat to peace, and our own proposals for a peaceful world, at any time and in any forum — in the OAS, in the United Nations, or in any other meeting that could be useful — without limiting our freedom of action. We have in the past made strenuous efforts to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. We have proposed the elimination of all arms and military bases in a fair and effective disarmament treaty. We are prepared to discuss new proposals for the removal of tensions on both sides, including the possibilities of a genuinely independent Cuba, free to determine its own destiny. We have no wish to war with the Soviet Union — for we are a peaceful people who desire to live in peace with all other peoples. But it is difficult to settle or even discuss these problems in an atmosphere of intimidation. That is why this latest Soviet threat — or any other threat which is made either independently or in response to our actions this week– must and will be met with determination. Any hostile move anywhere in the world against the safety and freedom of peoples to whom we are committed, including in particular the brave people of West Berlin, will be met by whatever action is needed. Finally, I want to say a few words to the captive people of Cuba, to whom this speech is being directly carried by special radio facilities. I speak to you as a friend, as one who knows of your deep attachment to your fatherland, as one who shares your aspirations for liberty and justice for all. And I have watched and the American people have watched with deep sorrow how your nationalist revolution was betrayed — and how your fatherland fell under foreign domination. Now your leaders are no longer Cuban leaders inspired by Cuban ideals. They are puppets and agents of an international conspiracy which has turned Cuba against your friends and neighbors in the Americas, and turned it into the first Latin American country to become a target for nuclear war — the first Latin American country to have these weapons on its soil. These new weapons are not in your interest. They contribute nothing to your peace and well-being. They can only undermine it. But this country has no wish to cause you to suffer or to impose any system upon you. We know that your lives and land are being used as pawns by those who deny your freedom. Many times in the past, the Cuban people have risen to throw out tyrants who destroyed their liberty. And I have no doubt that most Cubans today look forward to the time when they will be truly free — free from foreign domination, free to choose their own leaders, free to select their own system, free to own their own land, free to speak and write and worship without fear or degradation. And then shall Cuba be welcomed back to the society of free nations and to the associations of this hemisphere. My fellow citizens, let no one doubt that this is a difficult and dangerous effort on which we have set out. No one can foresee precisely what course it will take or what costs or casualties will be incurred. Many months of sacrifice and self-discipline lie ahead — months in which both our patience and our will will be tested, months in which many threats and denunciations will keep us aware of our dangers. But the greatest danger of all would be to do nothing. The path we have chosen for the present is full of hazards, as all paths are; but it is the one most consistent with our character and courage as a nation and our commitments around the world. The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender or submission. Our goal is not the victory of might, but the vindication of right; not peace at the expense of freedom, but both peace and freedom, here in this hemisphere, and, we hope, around the world. God willing, that goal will be achieved.

Macbeth: Post Traumatic Essay

Throughout the story, Macbeth seems to show symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Post traumatic Stress Disorder is an emotional illness that usually develops as a result of a terribly frightening, life-threatening, or otherwise highly unsafe experience. He starts experiencing terrifying events after he became a murder. Macbeth’s problem of experiencing symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, when first killed the traitor in the beginning of the Act 1, Scene 2. Macbeth does suffer from PTSD and throughout the story, Macbeth show more symptoms of PTSD, dealing with the death of the traitor, Death of Duncan, and Banquo. In the first act, Macbeth is a soldier in the army. In the Act 1, Scene 2, the captain explains to the king, that Macbeth has killed the traitor. â€Å"Which smoked with bloody execution, like valor’s minion carved out his passage till he faced the slave; which nevr shook hands, nor bade farewell to him, till he unseamed him from the nave to the chops† (Act 1 Scene 2: 18-22). The killing of the traitor was the start of Macbeth’s killing spree, also the start of the post traumatic stress disorder. The way Macbeth killed the soldier, was very gruesome. The gory, intense event shocked Macbeth and left a horrible image in his head. Dr. Roxanne Dryden Edwards says â€Å"People who are exposed to war combat have been diagnosed with PTSD†. After that death, Macbeth’s next victim was King Duncan, so Macbeth could become king. Macbeth kills King Duncan, so he could become king. After the death of King Duncan, Macbeth enters the room, where Lady Macbeth is. His hands covered in blood, meaning that he has completed the deed of killing Duncan. â€Å"I have done the deed. Didst thou not hear a noise? † Dr. Roxanne Dryden Edwards, a person who has PTSD, will experience hallucination. † (Act 2, Scene 2). After the death of Duncan, Macbeth is unable to sleep. In the story, Since Macbeth killed Duncan in his sleep; it also means that Macbeth can’t sleep neither. â€Å"Since it cried â€Å"Sleep no more! † to all the house: â€Å"Glamis hath murdered sleep, and therefore Cawdor shall sleep no more: Macbeth shall sleep no more. † (Act 2, Scene 2: 40- 42). The symptom of PTSD is that after a terrifying event, the person will not be able to sleep. Dr. Roxanne Dryden Edwards says PTSD symptoms are chronic physical signs of hyper arousal, including sleep problems, trouble concentrating, irritability, anger, poor concentration. After the death of Duncan, Banquo was next line for death row, for knowing who killed Duncan. During Act 3 Scene 1, Macbeth talks to two murderers about killing Banquo. Banquo knows that Duncan’s murderer was Macbeth. Macbeth hired two murderers to kill Banquo, so Banquo would not tell anyone. † Have you considered of my speeches? Know that it was he in the times past, which held you so under fortune, which you thought had been our innocent self: this I made good to you in our last conference ;†( Act 3, Scene 1) The two murderers agree to kill Banquo, because if they didn’t follow Macbeth’s order, they would be killed themselves. Macbeth is being manipulative the reason why is that Dr. Roxanne Dryden Edwards says â€Å" PTSD causes a person to paranoid and not want to be around anyone. † After the death of Banquo, Macbeth started hallucinating as if he was seeing Banquo’s ghost. â€Å" Avaunt! And quit my sight! Let the earth hide thee! Thy bones are marrowless, thy blood is cold; thou hast no speculation in those eyes, which thou dost glare with. † Hallucinating is a symptom of PSTD, usually recurrent re-experiencing of the trauma, for example, troublesome memories, flashbacks that are usually caused by reminders of the traumatic events, recurring day mares about the trauma. Macbeth does suffer from PTSD and throughout the story; Macbeth shows more symptoms of PTSD, dealing with the death of the traitor, death of Duncan, and Banquo. Macbeth did have PSTD. Proving that all of the events that Macbeth was involved in all of the tragic. For the death of the traitor, that was the spark of Macbeth’s major killing spree. Next was the King Duncan’s death and finally was Banquo’s death. Each of these tragic events was the cause of Macbeth having PTSD. Every one of those deaths, increase the killing and made Macbeth go insane leading to his death. Isn’t better to show your true colors, than be black and white?

Bob Ewell Essay Essay

Bob Ewell is a character in Harper Lee’s novel To Kill a Mockingbird. Bob Ewell is the head of the Ewell family, a poor family who lives in the town dump. Bob Ewell has many children, but his wife is deceased. Bob Ewell’s racist attitude, fecklessness and vengefulness make him one of the most hated and wicked characters in the book. Bob Ewell is thought of as the most despicable man in all of Maycomb, except for its black residents, who the racists of the town think are worse than anyone else. Bob Ewell is one of these racists, and throughout the novel he shows that he thinks himself better than any black man. He shows his racist attitude many times at his trial. For example Bob Ewell does not refer to Tom Robinson by his name, instead he states â€Å"I seen that black nigger yonder ruttin’ on my Mayella!†. In addition to not calling him by name; he also uses language associated with animals, â€Å"ruttin† as well as later saying â€Å"I’ve asked this county for fifteen years to clean out that nest down yon- der, they’re dangerous to live around ‘sides devaluin’ my property-â€Å". In the previous quote Bob Ewell also shows he believes in the stereotype that all black men are criminals, and states his belief that they are devaluing his property more than the nearby dump. Finally, he tells Atticus â€Å" I’m real sorry they picked you to defend that nigger that raped my Mayella. I don’t know why I didn’t kill him myself instead of goin’ to the sheriff. That would have saved you and the sheriff and the taxpayers lots of trouble.†. He shows his racism here in that he believes that the law would be on his side against a black man no matter what happend, even if he had killed Tom. While it is clear that Bob Ewell was born into a poor and troubled family, he shows no ambition to improve his state of being. He is so lazy that he is known for being the only man to be fired from the WPA for laziness. Moreover, Ewell does not give his children an education, nor does he have one himself. He squanders all his government money buying alcohol, instead of using it to support his children. His fecklessness isn’t just laziness; he doesn’t like things being his problem. He blames beating his daughter on Tom Robinson, and he blames Atticus for taking advantage of him. Not only does he not like taking blame, but he also never confronts his problems head on. He would rather harass poor a woman than confront Atticus. In addition to being racist and feckless, Bob Ewell is a very vengeful person. There are many examples of him taking needless revenge on various other people. The first is Tom Robinson, If Ewell had come home to see his daughter seducing a black man, he could have let Tom go. However Bob Ewell accused Tom of raping her for revenge. Other examples of his vengefulness are his attempts to take revenge on those who took part in his trial. This starts with his confrontation with Atticus when he curses, spits on and threatens to him. While is his only confrontation his Atticus,. his vengeful nature is further shown by his willingness to harass a poor black woman (Helen Robinson), and to rob an old man (Judge Tailor). His final attempt at revenge is not against Atticus, but against his children. Bob Ewell decides to, instead of confronting Atticus directly, go after his children in an attempt to hurt Atticus emotionally. While Ewell does not succeed, it shows his willingness to do something as terrible and cowardly as to go after innocent children for petty revenge. If To Kill a Mockingbird had definite villains, Bob Ewell would be the main antagonist. His constant racism, helps to demonstrate and illustrate his other traits, as it allows him to have someone he is â€Å"better than† and someone to blame. His fecklessness is demonstrated by the fact that he makes no attempt to improve his life, or the lives of his children but instead forces his family to work hard while he drinks. In the end, it is shown that he is cowardly, vile and drunk enough to go after innocents to get revenge on a man for trying to give a fair trial to a black man.