Research paper on the author Dylan Thomas Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

On the author Dylan Thomas - Research Paper Example J.M. Kertzer has already noted that Thomas’ critics have made two conflicting claims: â€Å"some insist that he is "the least intellectual poet of the century" because his poetry does not appeal to or depend on reason; others hold that his work displays "rigorous intellectual organization" which provokes a subtle play of thought† (295). While the first assertion implied that the wild poet has created his poems spontaneously without resorting to logic; the second claim employed that Thomas had a rigorous intellectual control over his creations, although he was inspired by â€Å"the cult of irrationality†. Dylan Thomas, paradoxically, acknowledged both views and tried to reconcile them. On the one he asserted that his poems’ â€Å"form was consistently emotional† and â€Å"illogical naturally† (cited by Kertzer 295). On the other hand, he defined himself as a "painstaking, conscientious, involved and devious craftsman in words† (295). He advocated â€Å"passionate ideas† in order to reconcile both views. For him those â€Å"‘passionate ideas’ come to life ‘out of the red heart through the brain’ (EPW, p. 165). Both thought and feeling must be engaged in ‘the antagonistic interplay of emotions and ideas ... brain chords and nerve chords’† (295). Thus, he focused on mind-body relationship while he tried to synthesize rational thoughts with emotions as they are engaged in a battle. Furthermore, for him, a poem must be both intellectual and emotional â€Å"adventure† for the reader. Dylan Thomas’ notion of â€Å"adventure† must be examined more closely in order to have a better understanding of his poetics. According to Thomas, adventure is movement and â€Å"all poetical impulses are towards the creation of adventure† (296). For him, a poem does not reflect life; but itself must be part of life, as he described a poem in terms of action, and

Do judges in the Uk made political decisions Outline

Do judges in the Uk made political decisions - Outline Example In the part of the Judiciary, however, its intervention in the legislative is controversial. The participation of the Judiciary branch in political decision-making applies only to the making of a common law, but their primary duty is to interpret the law and make sure that anyone who goes against it will be punished. Separation of Powers The major institutions of the British state would include the executive, the parliament and the judiciary. Each branch works "in the name of the Crown" which is the ruling monarch. Much like the roles of other government types, the branches have the roles of law making, implementation, and evaluation, respectively. However, the influence of a monarch would be the difference. In the Constitutional Fundamentals, the executive "comprises the Crown and the Government, including the Prime Minister and the government" (Anon., n.d). Its duties are to formulate and implement policies that the state and the government itself should abide. The Parliament compr ises of the House of Commons and the House of Lords. The members of the House of Lords were unelected and were only appointed by the Crown. The Judiciary, as the term suggests, enacts the law and makes sure that it is properly exercised by every citizen of the nation. The Judiciary is an independent body. The legislature and the parliament should not influence the decisions of the judges and in the same way that the judges are not ought to make political decisions except for common laws. A common law, as the term suggests, comprises of general beliefs of people inspired by tradition, custom, and precedent (Anon., 2008). The status of the U.K. judges nowadays has been vague in terms of enactment of specified roles. As reported by Press Association (2011), former home secretary Lord Michael Howard said that the judges have "too much power" over the ruling of the state. This friction began when the High Court intervened with the Government's plan to pursue the "multibillion-pound secon dary school rebuilding programme." Lord Howard said that the judges are expected to stick to their responsibilities as law interpreters and leave the policy making to the executive (Press Association, 2011). This is the same to what Stevens (2005, p.55) stated that since the judges have taken a "more central role in political decision-making," their role as an independent body which exercises "impartiality" is already unreliable. In this note, the roles of the judges should be clarified. However, Peretti (1999) points out three things about judges and their roles in politics (cited in Cross, 2000, p.18). Peretti (1998) argues that "1) judge makes decisions based on their politics and not on some neutral principles of law; 2) that judges are not particularly independent of the influence of legislatures and hence must tailor their decisions to congressional politics; and 3) that this situation is a very good thing† (cited in Cross, 2000, p.18). Clearly, Peretti (1999) discloses that there should be a point in which the law-making body and the Judiciary could merge. The law states that there is a definite separation of power in all three branches, where the Judiciary acts as an interpreter of the law. Because of this, â€Å"Judges are independent from the police and the government, and cannot be told what to do, or have their decisions changed by ministers† (Directgov, n.d.). In reality, the opposite of expected outcomes persists. The manner of being one of the