Ulrich Beck

Sociology http://soc. sagepub. com Beck's Sociology of Risk: A Critical Assessment Anthony Elliott Sociology 2002; 36; 293 DOI: 10. 1177/0038038502036002004 The online version of this article can be found at: http://soc. sagepub. com/cgi/content/abstract/36/2/293 Published by: http://www. sagepublications. com On behalf of: British Sociological Association Additional services and information for Sociology can be found at: Email Alerts: http://soc. sagepub. com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://soc. sagepub. com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www. agepub. com/journalsReprints. nav Permissions: http://www. sagepub. com/journalsPermissions. nav Citations (this article cites 6 articles hosted on the SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms): http://soc. sagepub. com/cgi/content/refs/36/2/293 Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 022761 Elliott 13/5/2002 9:49 am Page 293 Risk Society Sociology Copyright  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd ®Volume 36(2): 293–315 [0038-0385(200205)36:2;293–315;022761] SAGE Publications London,Thousand Oaks, New Delhi Beck’s Sociology of Risk: A Critical Assessment s Anthony Elliott University of the West of England AB ST RAC T The German sociologist Ulrich Beck has elaborated a highly original formulation of the theory of risk and re? exive modernization, a formulation that has had a signi? cant impact upon recent sociological theorizing and research. This article examines Beck’s sociology of risk in the context of his broader social theory of re? xivity, advanced modernization and individualization. The article argues that Beck’s work is constrained by several sociological weaknesses: namely, a dependence upon objectivistic and instrumental models of the social construction of risk and uncertainty in social relations, and a failure to adequately de? ne the relations between institutional dynamism on the one hand and self-referentiality and critical re? ection on the other. As a contribution to the reformulation and further development of Beck’s approach to sociological theory, the article seeks to uggest other ways in which the link between risk and re? exivity might be pursued. These include a focus upon (1) the intermixing of re? exivity and re? ection in social relations; (2) contemporary ideologies of domination and power; and (3) a dialectical notion of modernity and postmodernization. K E Y WORDS domination / modernity / postmodernity / re? exivity / risk / social theory A s competent re? ective agents, we are aware of the many ways in which a generalized ‘climate of risk’ presses in on our daily activities.In our dayto-day lives, we are sensitive to the cluster of risks that affect our relations with the self, with others, and with the broader culture. We are specialists in carving out ways of coping and managing risk, whether this be through active engagement, resigned acceptance or confused denial. From dietary concerns to 293 Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 022761 Elliott 294 13/5/2002 Sociology 9:49 am Volume 36 s Page 294 Number 2 sMay 2002 prospective stock market gains and losses to polluted air, the contemporary risk climate is one of proliferation, multiplication, specialism, counterfactual guesswork, and, above all, anxiety. Adequate consideration and calculation of risktaking, risk-management and risk-detection can never be fully complete, however, since there are always unforeseen and unintended aspects of risk environments. This is especially true at the level of global hazards, where the array of industrial, technological, chemical and nuclear dangers that confront us grows, and at an alarming rate.Indeed the Germa n sociologist, Ulrich Beck (1996a), de? nes the current situation as that of ‘world risk society’. The rise of risk society, Beck argues, is bound up with the new electronic global economy – a world in which we live on the edge of high technological innovation and scienti? c development, but where no one fully understands the possible global risks and dangers we face. My aim in this article is to explore some of the issues that concern the relation between risk and society by focusing on the work of Beck.A profoundly innovative and imaginative social theorist, Beck has developed powerful analyses of the ways in which the rise of the risk society is transforming social reproduction, nature and ecology, intimate relationships, politics and democracy. 1 It is necessary to state at the outset that I am not seeking in this article to provide a general introduction to Beck’s work as a whole. Rather, I shall offer a short exposition of Beck’s risk society thesis, in conjunction with his analysis of re? exivity and its role in social practices and modern institutions. The econd, more extensive half of the article is then critical and reconstructive in character. I try to identify several questionable social-theoretic assumptions contained in Beck’s risk society thesis, as well as limitations concerning his analysis of re? exivity, social reproduction and the dynamics of modernity. In making this critique, I shall try to point, in a limited and provisional manner, to some of the ways in which I believe that the themes of risk and social re? exivity can be reformulated and, in turn, further developed in contemporary sociological analysis.Outline of the Theory Let me begin by outlining the central planks of Beck’s social theory. These can be divided into three major themes: (1) the risk society thesis; (2) re? exive modernization; and (3) individualization. The Risk Society Thesis From his highly in? uential 1986 volume Ris k Society through to Democracy without Enemies (1998) and World Risk Society (1999b), Beck has consistently argued that the notion of risk is becoming increasingly central to our global society. 2 As Beck (1991: 22–3) writes: Downloaded from http://soc. agepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 022761 Elliott 13/5/2002 9:49 am Page 295 Beck’s sociology of risk Elliott [T]he historically unprecedented possibility, brought about by our own decisions, of the destruction of all life on this planet †¦ distinguishes our epoch not only from the early phase of the Industrial Revolution but also from all other cultures and social forms, no matter how diverse and contradictory.If a ? re breaks out, the ? re brigade comes; if a traf? c accident occurs, the insurance pays. This interplay between before and after, between security in the here-and-now and security i n the future because one took precautions even for the worst imaginable case, has been revoked in the age of nuclear, chemical and genetic technology. In their brilliant perfection, nuclear power plants have suspended the principle of insurance not only in the economic but also in the medical, psychological, cultural, and religious sense.The ‘residual risk society’ is an uninsured society, in which protection, paradoxically, decreases as the threat increases. For Beck, modernity is a world that introduces global risk parameters that previous generations have not had to face. Precisely because of the failure of modern social institutions to control the risks they have created, such as the ecological crisis, risk rebounds as a largely defensive attempt to avoid new problems and dangers. Beck contends that it is necessary to separate the notion of risk from hazard or danger.The hazards of pre-industrial society – famines, plagues, natural disasters – may or m ay not come close to the destructive potential of technoscience in the contemporary era. Yet for Beck this really is not a key consideration in any event, since he does not wish to suggest that daily life in today’s risk society is intrinsically more hazardous than in the pre-modern world. What he does suggest, however, is that no notion of risk is to be found in traditional culture: pre-industrial hazards or dangers, no matter how potentially catastrophic, were experienced as pre-given.They came from some ‘other’ – gods, nature or demons. With the beginning of societal attempts to control, and particularly with the idea of steering towards a future of predictable security, the consequences of risk become a political issue. This last point is crucial. It is societal intervention – in the form of decision-making – that transforms incalculable hazards into calculable risks. ‘Risks’, writes Beck (1997: 30), ‘always depend on d ecisions – that is, they presuppose decisions’.The idea of ‘risk society’ is thus bound up with the development of instrumental rational control, which the process of modernization promotes in all spheres of life – from individual risk of accidents and illnesses to export risks and risks of war. In support of the contention that protection from danger decreases as the threat increases in the contemporary era, Beck (1994) discusses, among many other examples, the case of a lead crystal factory in the former Federal Republic of Germany. The factory in question – Altenstadt in the Upper Palatinate – was prosecuted in the 1980s for polluting the atmosphere.Many residents in the area had, for some considerable time, suffered from skin rashes, nausea and headaches, and blame was squarely attributed to the white dust emitted from the factory’s smokestacks. Due to the visibility of the pollution, the case for damages against the factory was imagined, by many people, to be watertight. Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 295 022761 Elliott 296 13/5/2002 Sociology 9:49 am Volume 36 s Page 296Number 2 s May 2002 However, because there were three other glass factories in the area, the presiding judge offered to drop the charges in return for a nominal ? ne, on the grounds that individual liability for emitting dangerous pollutants and toxins could not be established. ‘Welcome to the real-life travesty of the hazard technocracy! ’ writes Beck, underlining the denial of risks within our cultural and political structures. Such denial for Beck is deeply layered within institutions, and he calls this ‘organized irresponsibility’ – a concept to which we will return.The age of nuclear, chemical and genetic technology, according to Beck, unleashes a destruction of the calculus of risks by which modern societies have developed a consensus on progress. Insurance has been the key to sustaining this consensus, functioning as a kind of security pact against industrially produced dangers and hazards. 3 In particular, two kinds of insurance are associated with modernization: the private insurance company and public insurance, linked above all with the welfare state.Yet the changing nature of risk in an age of globalization, argues Beck, fractures the calculating of risks for purposes of insurance. Individually and collectively, we do not fully know or understand many of the risks that we currently face, let alone can we attempt to calculate them accurately in terms of probability, compensation and accountability. In this connection, Beck emphasizes the following: s s s s risks today threaten irreparable global damage which cannot be limited, and hus the notion of monetary compensation is rendered obsolescent; in the case of the wors t possible nuclear or chemical accident, any security monitoring of damages fails; accidents, now reconstituted as ‘events’ without beginning or end, break apart delimitations in space and time; notions of accountability collapse. Re? exive Modernization Beck develops his critique of modernity through an examination of the presuppositions of the sociology of modernization. Many mainstream sociological theories remain marked, in his view, by a confusion of modernity with industrial society – seen in either positive or negative terms.This is true for functionalists and Marxists alike, especially in terms of their preoccupation with industrial achievement, adaptation, differentiation and rationalization. Indeed, Beck ? nds an ideology of progress concealed within dominant social theories that equate modernization with linear rationalization. From Marx through Parsons to Luhmann, modern society is constantly changing, expanding and transforming itself; it is clear th at industrialism results in the using up of resources that are essential to the reproduction of society.But the most striking limitation of social theories that equate modernity with industrial society, according to Beck, lies in their lack of comprehension of the manner in which dangers to societal preservation and renewal in? ltrate the institutions, organizations and subsystems of modern society itself. Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 022761 Elliott 13/5/2002 :49 am Page 297 Beck’s sociology of risk Elliott In contrast to this grand consensus on modernization, Beck argues that we are between industrial society and advanced modernity, between simple modernization and re? exive modernization. As Beck (1996b: 28) develops these distinctions: In view of these two stages and their sequence, the concept of ‘re? exive moder nization’ may be introduced. This precisely does not mean re? ection (as the adjective ‘re? exive’ seems to suggest), but above all self-confrontation.The transition from the industrial to the risk epoch of modernity occurs unintentionally, unseen, compulsively, in the course of a dynamic of modernization which has made itself autonomous, on the pattern of latent side-effects. One can almost say that the constellations of risk society are created because the self-evident truths of industrial society (the consensus on progress, the abstraction from ecological consequences and hazards) dominate the thinking and behaviour of human beings and institutions. Risk society is not an option which could be chosen or rejected in the course of political debate.It arises through the automatic operation of autonomous modernization processes which are blind and deaf to consequences and dangers. In total, and latently, these produce hazards which call into question – inde ed abolish – the basis of industrial society. It is the autonomous, compulsive dynamic of advanced or re? exive modernization that, according to Beck, propels modern men and women into ‘self-confrontation’ with the consequences of risk that cannot adequately be addressed, measured, controlled or overcome, at least according to the standards of industrial society.Modernity’s blindness to the risks and dangers produced by modernization – all of which happens automatically and unre? ectingly, according to Beck – leads to societal self-confrontation: that is, the questioning of divisions between centres of political activity and the decision-making capacity of society itself. Society, in effect, seeks to reclaim ‘the political’ from its modernist relegation to the institutional sphere, and this, says Beck, is achieved primarily through sub-political means – that is, locating the politics of risk at the heart of forms of social and cultural life. Within the horizon of the opposition between old routine and new awareness of consequences and dangers’, writes Beck, ‘society becomes self-critical’ (1999b: 81). The prospects for arresting the dark sides of industrial progress and advanced modernization through re? exivity are routinely short-circuited, according to Beck, by the insidious in? uence of ‘organized irresponsibility’. Irresponsibility, as Beck uses the term, refers to a political contradiction of the self-jeopardization and self-endangerment of risk society.This is a contradiction between an emerging public awareness of risks produced by and within the social-institutional system on the one hand, and the lack of attribution of systemic risks to this system on the other. There is, in Beck’s reckoning, a constant denial of the suicidal tendency of risk society – ‘the system of organized irresponsibility’ – which manifests itself in, s ay, technically orientated legal procedures designed to satisfy rigorous causal proof of individual liability and guilt. This self-created dead end, in which culpability is passed off on to individualsDownloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 297 022761 Elliott 298 13/5/2002 Sociology 9:49 am Volume 36 s Page 298 Number 2 s May 2002 and thus collectively denied, is maintained through political ideologies of industrial fatalism: faith in progress, dependence on rationality and the rule of expert opinion. Individualization The arrival of advanced modernization is not wholly about risk; it is also about an expansion of choice.For if risks are an attempt to make the incalculable calculable, then risk-monitoring presupposes agency, choice, calculation and responsibility. In the process of re? exive modernization, Beck argues, more and more areas o f life are released or disembedded from the hold of tradition. That is to say, people living in the modernized societies of today develop an increasing engagement with both the intimate and more public aspects of their lives, aspects that were previously governed by tradition or taken-forgranted norms.This set of developments is what Beck calls ‘individualization’, and its operation is governed by a dialectic of disintegration and reinvention. For example, the disappearance of tradition and the disintegration of previously existing social forms – ? xed gender roles, in? exible class locations, masculinist work models – forces people into making decisions about their own lives and future courses of action.As traditional ways of doing things become problematic, people must choose paths for a more rewarding life – all of which requires planning and rationalization, deliberation and engagement. An active engagement with the self, with the body, with rel ationships and marriage, with gender norms, and with work: this is the subjective backdrop of the risk society. The idea of individualization is the basis upon which Beck constructs his vision of a ‘new modernity’, of novel personal experimentation and cultural innovation against a social backdrop of risks, dangers, hazards, re? xivity, globalization. Yet the unleashing of experimentation and choice which individualization brings is certainly not without its problems. According to Beck, there are progressive and regressive elements to individualization; although, in analytical terms, these are extremely hard to disentangle. In personal terms, the gains of today’s individualization might be tomorrow’s limitation, as advantage and progress turn into their opposite. A signal example of this is offered in The Normal Chaos of Love (1995), where Beck and Beck-Gernsheim re? ct on the role of technological innovation in medicine, and of how this impacts upon conte mporary family life. Technological advancements in diagnostic and genetic testing on the unborn, they argue, create new parental possibilities, primarily in the realm of health monitoring. However, the very capacity for medical intervention is one that quickly turns into an obligation on parents to use such technologies in order to secure a sound genetic starting point for their offspring.Individualization is seen here as a paradoxical compulsion, at once leading people into a much more engaged relationship with science and technology than used to be the case, and enforcing a set of obligations and responsibilities that few in society have thought through in terms of broad Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 022761 Elliott 13/5/2002 9:49 am Page 299 Beck’s sociology of risk Elliott moral and ethical implications.It is perhaps lit tle wonder therefore that Beck (1997: 96), echoing Sartre, contends that ‘people are condemned to individualization’. Critique Beck has elaborated a highly original formulation of the theory of risk, a formulation which links with, but in many ways is more sophisticated in its detail and application than, other sociological approaches to the analysis of risk environments in contemporary society (among other contributions, see Douglas and Wildavsky (1982), Castell (1991), Giddens (1990, 1991), Luhmann (1993) and Adam (1998)).Beck’s sociology of risk has clearly been of increasing interest to sociologists concerned with understanding the complex temporal and spatial ? gurations of invisible hazards and dangers including global warming, chemical and petrochemical pollution, the effects of genetically modi? ed organisms and culturally induced diseases such as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) (see Lash et al. , 1996; Adam, 1998). In what follows, there are three core areas around which I shall develop a critique of the work of Beck: (1) risk, re? xivity, re? ection; (2) power and domination; and (3) tradition, modernity and postmodernization. Risk, Re? exivity, Re? ection Let me begin with Beck’s discussion of the ‘risk society’, which, according to him, currently dominates socio-political frames thanks to the twin forces of re? exivity and globalization. There are, I believe, many respects in which Beck’s vision of Risikogesellschaft, especially its rebounding in personal experience as risk-laden discourses and practices, is to be welcomed.In the wake of the Chernobyl disaster and widespread environmental pollution, and with ever more destructive weapons as well as human-made biological, chemical and technological hazards, it is surely the case that thinking in terms of risk has become central to the way in which human agents and modern institutions organize the social world. Indeed, in a world that could litera lly destroy itself, risk-managing and risk-monitoring increasingly in? uences both the constitution and calculation of social action.As mentioned previously, it is this focus on the concrete, objective physical-biological-technical risk settings of modernity which recommends Beck’s analysis as a useful corrective to the often obsessive abstraction and textual deconstruction that characterizes much recent social theory. However, one still might wonder whether Beck’s theory does not overemphasize, in a certain sense, the phenomena and relevance of risk. From a social-historical perspective it is plausible to ask, for instance, whether life in society has become more risky? In ‘From Regulation to Risk’, Bryan S. Turner (1994: 180–1) captures the problem well:Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 299 022761 E lliott 300 13/5/2002 Sociology 9:49 am Volume 36 s Page 300 Number 2 s May 2002 [A] serious criticism of Beck’s arguments would be to suggest that risk has not changed so profoundly and signi? cantly over the last three centuries. For example, were the epidemics of syphilis and bubonic plague in earlier periods any different from the modern environment illnesses to which Beck draws our attention?That is, do Beck’s criteria of risk, such as their impersonal and unobservable nature, really stand up to historical scrutiny? The devastating plagues of earlier centuries were certainly global, democratic and general. Peasants and aristocrats died equally horrible deaths. In addition, with the spread of capitalist colonialism, it is clearly the case that in previous centuries many aboriginal peoples such as those of North America and Australia were engulfed by environmental, medical and political catastrophes which wiped out entire populations.If we take a broader view of the notion of risk as entailing at least a strong cultural element whereby risk is seen to be a necessary part of the human condition, then we could argue that the profound uncertainties about life, which occasionally overwhelmed earlier civilizations, were not unlike the anxieties of our own ? n-de-siecle civilizations. Extending Turner’s critique, it might also be asked whether risk assessment is the ultimate worry in the plight of individuals in contemporary culture?Is it right to see the means-ended rationality of risk, and thus the economistic language of preference, assessment and choice, as spreading into personal and intimate spheres of life (such as marriage, friendship and child-rearing) in such a determinate and uni? ed way? And does the concept of risk actually capture what is new and different in the contemporary social condition? I shall not pursue these general questions, important though they are, here. Instead, the issue I want to raise concerns the multiple ways in which risk is perceived, approached, engaged with or disengaged from, in contemporary culture.Beck’s approach, however suggestive it may be, is at best a signpost which points to speci? c kinds of probabilities, avoidances and unanticipated consequences, but which is limited in its grasp of the social structuring of the perception of risk. The American social theorist Jeffrey C. Alexander (1996: 135) has argued that Beck’s ‘unproblematic understanding of the perception of risk is utilitarian and objectivist’. Alexander takes Beck to task for adopting a rationalistic and instrumental-calculative model of risk in microsocial and macrosocial worlds; to which it can be added that such a model has deep af? ities with neo-classical economics and rational-choice theory, and thus necessarily shares the conceptual and political limitations of these standpoints also. Beck has also been criticized by others for his cognitive realism, moral proceduralism and lack of attention to aesthetic and hermeneutical subjectivity (Lash and Urry, 1994); failure to acknowledge the embodied nature of the self (Turner, 1994; Petersen, 1996); and neglect of the psychodynamic and affective dimensions of subjectivity and intersubjective relations (Elliott, 1996; Hollway and Jefferson, 1997).In a social-theoretical frame of reference, what these criticisms imply is that Beck’s theory cannot grasp the hermeneutical, aesthetic, psychological and culturally bounded forms of subjectivity and intersubjectivity in and through Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 022761 Elliott 13/5/2002 9:50 am Page 301 Beck’s sociology of risk Elliott which risk is constructed and perceived.To study risk-management and riskavoidance strategies, in the light of these criticisms, requires attention to forms of meaning-making within socio-symbolically inscribed institutional ? elds, a problem to which I return in a subsequent section when looking at Beck’s analysis of tradition, modernity and postmodernity. In raising the issue of the construction and reconstruction of risk – in particular, its active interpretation and reconstruction – one might reference numerous studies of socio-political attitudes relating to the conceptualization and confrontation of risk, danger and hazard.The anthropologist Mary Douglas (1986, 1992), for example, argues that advanced industrial risks are primarily constructed through the rhetoric of purity and pollution. For Douglas, what is most pressing in the social-theoretic analysis of risk is an understanding of how human agents ignore many of the potential threats of daily life and instead concentrate only on selected aspects. Interestingly, Beck fails to discuss in any detail Douglas’s anthropology of risk. This would seem peculiar not only sin ce Douglas’s path-breaking analyses of risk appear to have laid much of the thematic groundwork for Beck’s sociological theory, but also because her work is highly relevant to the critique of contemporary ideologies of risk – that is, the social forms in which risk and uncertainty are differentiated across and within social formations, as well as peculiarly individuated. My purpose in underscoring these various limitations of Beck’s theory is not to engage in some exercise of conceptual clari? cation.My concern rather is to stress the sociologically questionable assumptions concerning risk in Beck’s work, and to tease out the more complex, nuanced forms of risk perception that might fall within the scope of such an approach. To call into question Beck’s notion of risk is, of course, also to raise important issues about the location of re? exivity between self and societal reproduction. Now it is the failure of simple, industrial society to c ontrol the risks it has created, which, for Beck, generates a more intensive and extensive sense of risk in re? xive, advanced modernity. In this sense, the rise of objective, physical, global risks propels social re? exivity. But again one might wish to question the generalizations Beck makes about human agents, modern institutions and culture becoming more re? exive or self-confronting. Much of Beck’s work has been concerned to emphasize the degree of re? exive institutional dynamism involved in the restructuring of personal, social and political life, from the reforging of intimate relationships to the reinvention of politics.But there are disturbing dimensions here as well, which the spread of cultural, ethnic, racial and gendered con? ict has shown only too well, and often in ways in which one would be hard pressed to ? nd forms of personal or social re? exive activity. No doubt Beck would deny – as he has done in his more recent writings – that the renewal of traditions and the rise of cultural con? icts are counterexamples to the thesis of re? exive modernization. For we need to be particularly careful, Beck contends, not to confuse re? exivity (self-dissolution) with re? ction (knowledge). As Beck (1994b: 176–7) develops this distinction: Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 301 022761 Elliott 302 13/5/2002 Sociology 9:50 am Volume 36 s Page 302 Number 2 s May 2002 †¦ the ‘re? exivity’ of modernity and modernization in my sense does not mean re? ection on modernity, self-relatedness, the self-referentiality of modernity, nor does it mean the self-justi? ation or self-criticism of modernity in the sense of classical sociology; rather (? rst of all), modernization undercuts modernization, unintended and unseen, and therefore also re? ection-free, with the force of autonomized modernization. †¦ [R]e? exivity of modernity can lead to re? ection on the self-dissolution and self-endangerment of industrial society, but it need not do so. Thus, re? exivity does not imply a kind of hyper-Enlightenment culture, where agents and institutions re? ect on modernity, but rather an unintended self-modi? ation of forms of life driven by the impact of autonomized processes of modernization. Re? exivity, on this account, is de? ned as much by ‘re? ex’ as it is by ‘re? ection’. ‘It is possible to detect’, write Lash et al. (1996) of Beck’s recent sociology, ‘a move towards seeing re? exive modernization as in most part propelled by blind social processes – a shift, crudely, from where risk society produces re? ection which in turn produces re? exivity and critique, to one where risk society automatically produces re? exivity, and then – perhaps – re? ection’.Without wishing t o deny the interest of this radical conception of re? exivity as self-dissolution, it still seems to me that Beck’s contention that contemporary societies are propelled toward self-confrontation, split between re? ex and re? ection, remains dubious. In what sense, for instance, can one claim that re? ection-free forms of societal self-dissolution exist independently of the re? ective capacities of human agents? For what, exactly, is being dissolved, if not the forms of life and social practices through which institutions are structured?How might the analytical terms of re? exivity, that is social re? exes (nonknowledge) and re? ection (knowledge), be reconciled? It may be thought that these dif? culties can be overcome by insisting, along with Beck, on re? exivity in the strong sense – as the unseen, the unwilled, the unintended; in short, institutional dynamism. But such an account of blind social processes is surely incompatible with, and in fact renders incoherent, concepts of re? ection, referentiality, re? exivity.Alternatively, a weaker version of the argument might be developed, one that sees only partial and contextual interactions of selfdissolution and re? ection. Yet such an account, again, would seem to cut the analytical ground from under itself, since there is no adequate basis for showing how practices of re? exivity vary in their complex articulations of re? ex and re? ection or repetition and creativity. Power and Domination I now want to consider Beck’s theory in relation to sociological understandings of power and domination. According to Beck, re? xive modernization combats many of the distinctive characteristics of power, turning set social divisions into active negotiated relationships. Traditional political con? icts, centred around class, race and gender, are increasingly superseded by new, globalized risk con? icts. ‘Risks’, writes Beck (1992: 35), ‘display an equalizing effect’. Everyone Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 022761 Elliott 13/5/2002 9:50 am Page 303 Beck’s sociology of risk Elliott ow is threatened by risk of global proportions and repercussions; not even the rich and powerful can escape the new dangers and hazards of, say, global warming or nuclear war. And it is from this universalized perspective that Beck argues political power and domination is shedding the skin of its classical forms and reinventing itself in a new global idiom. The problematic nature of Beck’s writings on this reinvention of political power and its role in social life, however, becomes increasingly evident when considering his analysis of social inequalities and cultural divisions.Take, for example, his re? ections on class. Re? exive modernization, says Beck, does not result in the self-destruction of class antagonis ms, but rather in selfmodi? cation. He writes (1997: 26): Re? exive modernization disembeds and re-embeds the cultural prerequisites of social classes with forms of individualization of social inequality. That means †¦ that the disappearance of social classes and the abolition of social inequality no longer coincide. Instead, the blurring of social classes (in perception) runs in tandem with an exacerbation of social inequality, which now does not follow large identi? ble groups in the lifeworld, but is instead fragmented across (life) phases, space and time. The present-day individualizing forces of social inequality, according to Beck, erode class-consciousness (personal dif? culties and grievances no longer culminate into group or collective causes) and also, to some considerable degree, class-in-itself (contemporary social problems are increasingly suffered alone). In short, class as a community of fate or destiny declines steeply. With class solidarities replaced by brittl e and uncertain forms of individual self-management, Beck ? ds evidence for a ‘rule-altering rationalization’ of class relationships in new business and management practices, as well as industrial relations reforms. He contends that new blendings of economics and democracy are discernible in the rise of political civil rights within the workplace, a blend which opens the possibility of a post-capitalistic world – a ‘classless capitalism of capital’, in which ‘the antagonism between labour and capital will collapse’. There is considerable plausibility in the suggestion that class patterns and divisions have been altered by rapid social and political changes in recent years.These include changes in employment and the occupational structure, the expansion of the service industries, rising unemployment, lower retirement ages, as well as a growing individualization in the West together with an accompanying stress upon lifestyle, consumption a nd choice. However, while it might be the case that developments associated with re? exive modernization and the risk society are affecting social inequalities, it is surely implausible to suggest, as Beck does, that this involves the trans? guration of class as such. Why, as Scott Lash (Beck et al. , 1994: 211) asks, do we ? nd re? xivity in some sectors of socio-economic life and not others? Against the backdrop of new communication technologies and advances in knowledge transfer, vast gaps in the sociocultural conditions of the wealthy and the poor drastically affect the ways in which individuals are drawn into the project of re? exive modernization. These Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 303 022761 Elliott 304 13/5/2002 Sociology 9:50 am Volume 36 s Page 304 Number 2 s May 2002 ensions are especially evident today in new social d ivisions between the ‘information rich’ and ‘information poor’, and of the forces and demands of such symbolic participation within the public sphere. What Beck fails to adequately consider is that individualization (while undoubtedly facilitating unprecedented forms of personal and social experimentation) may directly contribute to, and advance the proliferation of, class inequalities and economic exclusions. That is to say, Beck fails to give suf? cient sociological weight to the possibility that individualization may actually embody systematically asymmetrical relations of class power.Taken from a broader view of the ideals of equal opportunity and social progress, Beck’s arguments about the relationship between advanced levels of re? exivity and the emergence of a new sub-politics do not adequately stand up to scrutiny. The general, tendential assertions he advances about business and organizational restructuring assume what needs to be demonstra ted – namely, that these new organizational forms spell the demise of social class, as well as the viability of class analysis. Moreover, it seems implausible to point to ‘subpolitics’, de? ned by Beck only in very general terms, as symptomatic of a new socio-political agenda.When, for example, have the shifting boundaries between the political and economic spheres not played a primary role in the unfolding of relations between labour and capital? Is decision-making and consciousness really focused on a post-capitalistic rationalization of rights, duties, interests and decisions? A good deal of recent research shows, on the contrary, that income inequality between and within nations continues to escalate (Braun, 1991; Lemert, 1997); that class (together with structures of power and domination) continues to profoundly shape possible life chances and material nterests (Westergaard, 1995); and that the many different de? nitions of class as a concept, encompassing t he marginal, the excluded as well as the new underclass or new poor, are important in social analysis for comprehending the persistence of patterns of social inequality (Crompton, 1996). These dif? culties would suggest that Beck’s theory of risk requires reformulation in various ways.Without wishing to deny that the risk-generating propensity of the social system has rapidly increased in recent years due to the impact of globalization and techno-science, it seems to me misleading to contend that social division in multinational capitalist societies is fully trans? gured into a new logic of risk, as if the latter disconnects the former from its institutionalized biases and processes. The more urgent theoretical task, I suggest, is to develop methods of analysis for explicating how patterns of power and domination feed into, and are reconstituted by, the socio-symbolic structuring of risk.Here I shall restrict myself to noting three interrelated forces, which indicate, in a ge neral way, the contours of how a politics of risk is undergoing transformation. The ? rst development is that of the privatization of risk. Underpinned by new trans-national spatializations of economic relations as well as the deregulation of the government of political life (Giddens, 1990; Hirst and Thompson, 1996; Bauman, 1998), the individual is increasingly viewed today as an active Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. om by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 022761 Elliott 13/5/2002 9:50 am Page 305 Beck’s sociology of risk Elliott agent in the risk-monitoring of collectively produced dangers; risk-information, risk-detection and risk-management is more and more constructed and designed as a matter of private responsibility and personal security. By and large, human agents confront socially produced risks individually.Risk is desocialized; risk-exposure and risk-avoi dance is a matter of individual responsibility and navigation. This is, of course, partly what Beck means by the individualization of risk. However, the relations between individualized or privatized risk, material inequalities and the development of global poverty are more systematic and complex than Beck’s theory seems to recognize. In the post-war period, the shift from Keynesian to monetarist economic policies has been a key factor in the erosion of the management of risk through welfare security.The impact of globalization, transnational corporations and governmental deregulation is vital to the social production of the privatization of risk, all of which undoubtedly has a polarizing effect on distributions of wealth and income. It has also become evident – and this is crucial – that one must be able to deploy certain educational resources, symbolic goods, cultural and media capabilities, as well as cognitive and affective aptitudes, in order to count as a ‘player’ in the privatization of risk-detection and risk-management.People who cannot deploy such resources and capabilities, often the result of various material and class inequalities, are likely to ? nd themselves further disadvantaged and marginalized in a new world order of re? exive modernization. The second, related development concerns the commodi? cation of risk. Millions of dollars are made through product development, advertising, and market research in the new industries of risk, which construct new problems and market new solutions for risk-? ghting individual agents. As risk is simultaneously proliferated and rendered potentially manageable’, writes Nikolas Rose (1996: 342), ‘the private market for â€Å"security† extends: not merely personal pension schemes and private health insurance, but burglar alarms, devices that monitor sleeping children, home testing kits for cholesterol levels and much more. Protection against risk through an investment in security becomes part of the responsibilities of each active individual, if they are not to feel guilt at failing to protect themselves and their loved ones against future misfortunes’.In other words, the typical means for insuring against risk today is through market-promoted processes. However the fundamental point here, and this is something that Beck fails to develop in a systematic manner, is that such ‘insurance’ is of a radically imaginary kind (with all the misrecognition and illusion that the Lacanian-Althusserian theorization of the duplicate mirror-structure of ideology implies), given that one cannot really buy one’s way out of the collective dangers that confront us as individuals and societies. How does one, for example, buy a way out from the dangers of global warming?The commodi? cation of risk has become a kind of safe house for myths, fantasies, ? ction and lies. The third development concerns the instrumentalization of iden tities in terms of lifestyle, consumption and choice. Beck touches on this issue through the individualization strand of his argument. Yet because he sees individualiza- Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 305 022761 Elliott 306 13/5/2002 Sociology 9:50 am Volume 36 s Page 306 Number 2 s May 2002 ion as an active process transforming risk society, he pays almost no attention to the kinds of affective ‘investments’, often destructive and pathological, unleashed by an instrumentalization of identities and social relations. Of core importance here is the ‘culture of narcissism’ (Lasch, 1980) which pervades contemporary Western life, and plays a powerful role in the instrumental affective investments in individuals which a risk society unleashes. Joel Kovel (1988) writes of ‘the de-sociation of the narcissist ic character’, a character lacking in depth of emotional attachment to others and communities.Unable to sustain a sense of personal purpose or social project, the narcissistic character, writes Kovel, rarely moves beyond instrumentality in dealing with other people. Such instrumental emotional investments may well be increasingly central to the management of many risk codes in contemporary culture. Consider the ways in which some parents fashion a narcissistic relation with their own children as a kind of imaginary risk-insurance (involving anxieties and insecurities over old age, mortality and the like), rather than relating to their offspring as independent individuals in their own right.Also in risks relating to the home, personal comfort as well as safety, hygiene, health and domesticity, the veneer-like quality of pathological narcissism can be found. Some analytical caution is, of course, necessary here, primarily because the work on narcissistic culture of Lasch and Se nnett, among others, has been criticized in terms of over-generalization (Giddens, 1991: 174–80). Accordingly, it may be more plausible to suggest that narcissistic forms of identity are a tendency within contemporary cultural relations of risk management, and not a wholesale social trend.Beck’s writings, I am suggesting, are less than satisfying on issues of power and domination because he fails to analyse in suf? cient depth the psychological, sociological and political forces by means of which the self-risk dialectic takes its varying forms. To develop a more nuanced interpretative and critical approach, I have suggested, the sociological task is to analyse privatization, commodi? cation and instrumentalization as channels of risk management. Tradition, Modernity, Postmodernity The limitations in the concept of re? xivity I have highlighted are, in turn, connected to further ambiguities concerning the nature of social reproduction in contemporary culture. The produc tion and reproduction of contemporary social life is viewed by Beck as a process of ‘detraditionalization’. The development of re? exive modernization, says Beck, is accompanied by an irreversible decline in the role of tradition; the re? exivity of modernity and modernization means that traditional forms of life are increasingly exposed to public scrutiny and debate. That the dynamics of social re? xivity undercut pre-existing traditions is emphasized by Beck via a range of social-theoretical terms. He speaks of ‘the age of side-effects’, of individualization, and of a sub-politics beyond left and right – a world in which people can and must come to terms with the opportunities and dangers of new technologies, markets, experts, systems and Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 022761 Elliott 13/5/2002 9:5 0 am Page 307 Beck’s sociology of risk Elliott nvironments. Beck thus argues that the contemporary age is one characterized by increased levels of referentiality, ambivalence, ? exibility, openness and social alternatives. It might be noted that certain parallels can be identi? ed between the thesis of detraditionalization and arguments advanced in classical social theory. Many classical social theorists believed that the development of the modern era spelled the end of tradition. ‘All that is solid melts into air’, said Marx of the power of the capitalist mode of production to tear apart traditional forms of social life.That the dynamics of capitalism undercut its own foundations meant for Marx a society that was continually transforming and constantly revolutionizing itself. Somewhat similar arguments about the decline of tradition can be found in the writings of Max Weber. The development of industrial society for Weber was inextricably intertwined with the ri se of the bureaucratic state. Weber saw in this bureaucratic rationalization of action, and associated demand for technical ef? ciency, a new social logic destructive of the traditional texture of society.The views of Marx and Weber, among others, thus advanced a general binary opposition of ‘the traditional’ and ‘the modern’. For proponents of the thesis of detraditionalization, such as Beck, the self-referentiality and social re? exivity of advanced modernity also necessarily implies that traditional beliefs and practices begin to break down. However, the thesis of detraditionalization is not premised upon the broad contrast between ‘the traditional’ and ‘the modern’ that we can discern in much classical social theory. On the contrary, Beck ? nds the relation between tradition and modernity at once complex and puzzling.If tradition remains an important aspect of advanced modernity, it is because tradition becomes re? exive; tradi tions are invented, reinvented and restructured in conditions of the late modern age. So far I think that there is much that is interesting and important in this general orientation of Beck to understanding the construction of the present, past and future. In particular, I think the stress placed upon the re? exive construction of tradition, and indeed all social reproduction, is especially signi? cant – even though I shall go on to argue that this general theoretical framework requires more speci? ation and elaboration. I want, however, to focus on a speci? c issue raised by Beck’s social theory, and ask, has the development of society toward advanced modernization been accompanied by a decline in the in? uence of tradition and traditional understandings of the past? Must we assume, as Beck seems to, that the social construction of tradition is always permeated by a pervasive re? exivity? At issue here, I suggest, is the question of how the concept of re? exivity shou ld be related to traditional, modern and postmodern cultural forms. I shall further suggest that the concept of re? xivity, as elaborated by Beck, fails to comprehend the different modernist and postmodernist ? gurations that may be implicit within social practices and symbolic forms of the contemporary age. In order to develop this line of argumentation, let us consider in some more detail the multiplicity of world traditions, communities and cultures as they impact upon current social practices and life-strategies. I believe that Beck is Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 07 022761 Elliott 308 13/5/2002 Sociology 9:50 am Volume 36 s Page 308 Number 2 s May 2002 right to emphasize the degree to which modernity and advanced modernization processes have assaulted traditions, uprooted local communities and broken apart unique regional, e thnic and sub-national cultures. At the level of economic analysis, an argument can plausibly be sustained that the erratic nature of the world capitalist economy produces high levels of unpredictability and uncertainty in social life and cultural relations, all of which Beck analyses in terms of danger, risk and hazard.It is worth noting, however, that Beck’s emphasis on increasing levels of risk, ambivalence and uncertainty is at odds with much recent research in sociology and social theory that emphasizes the regularization and standardization of daily life in the advanced societies. George Ritzer’s The McDonaldization of Society (1993) is a signal example. Drawing Weber’s theory of social rationalization and the Frankfurt School’s account of the administered society into a re? ctive encounter, Ritzer examines the application of managerial techniques such as Fordism and Taylorism to the fast food industry as symptomatic of the in? ltration of instrumen tal rationality into all aspects of cultural life. McDonaldization, as Ritzer develops the term, is the emergence of social logics in which risk and unpredictability are written out of social space. The point about such a conception of the standardization of everyday life, whatever its conceptual and sociological shortcomings, is that it clearly contradicts Beck’s stress on increasing risk and uncertainty, the concept of re? xive individualization, and the notion that detraditionalization produces more ambivalence, more anxiety, and more openness. Of course, Beck insists that re? exive modernization does not mark a complete break from tradition; rather re? exivity signals the revising, or reinvention, of tradition. However, the resurgence and persistence of ethnicity and nationality as a primary basis for the elaboration of traditional beliefs and practices throughout the world is surely problematic for those who, like Beck, advance the general thesis of social re? exivity.Ce rtainly, the thesis would appear challenged by widespread and recently revitalized patterns of racism, sexism and nationalism which have taken hold in many parts of the world, and indeed many serious controversies over race, ethnicity and nationalism involve a reversion to what might be called traditionalist battles over traditional culture – witness the rise of various religious fundamentalisms in the United States, the Middle East and parts of Africa and Asia. These political and theoretical ambivalences have their roots in a number of analytical dif? ulties, speci? cally Beck’s diagnosis of simple and advanced modernity. Beck furnishes only the barest social-historical sketch of simple modernity as a distinctive period in the spheres of science, industry, morality and law. He underscores the continuing importance and impact of simple industrial society for a range of advanced, re? exive determinations (for example politically, economically, technologically and envir onmentally), yet the precise relations of such overlapping are not established or demonstrated in any detail.Exactly how we have moved into the age of re? exive modernization, although often stated and repeated, is not altogether clear. Beck’s main line of explanation seems to focus on the side-effects of modernization as undercutting the Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. com by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 022761 Elliott 13/5/2002 9:50 am Page 309 Beck’s sociology of risk Elliott foundations of modernity. But, again, the dynamics of simple and re? xive modernization, together with their social-historical periodization, remain opaque. In addition, it is not always clear how Beck is intending to draw certain conceptual distinctions between ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ instantiations of respectively simple and advanced modernist socio- symbolic figurations. Rejecting outright any crude opposition between traditional and modern societies, Beck relates a tale of the proliferation of re? exive biographies and practices, lives and institutions, in which creative possibilities develop and new forms of risk and hazard take shape.Yet social advancement is far from inevitable: Beck speaks of counter-modernities. The question that needs to be asked here, however, is whether it is analytically useful for social theory to construct the contemporary age as characterized by interacting tropes of industrial society and re? exive modernization on the one side, and a range of countermodernities on the other. Viewed from the frame of postmodern social theory, and in particular the sociology of postmodernity (see Bauman, 1992a), Beck’s argument concerning the circularity of the relationship between risk, re? xivity and social knowledge appears in a more problematic, and perhaps ultimately inadequate, light. For postmodern so cial theorists and cultural analysts diagnose the malaise of present-day society not only as the result of re? exively applied knowledge to complex techno-scienti? c social environments, but as infused by a more general and pervasive sense of cultural disorientation. The most prominent anxieties that underpin postmodern dynamics of social regulation and systemic reproduction include a general loss of belief in the engine of progress, as well as feelings of out-of-placeness and loss of direction.Such anxieties or dispositions are accorded central signi? cance in the writings of a number of French theorists – notably, Foucault, Derrida, Lyotard, Baudrillard, and Deleuze and Guattari – and also in the work of sociologists and social scientists interested in the rami? cations of post-structuralism, semiotics and deconstruction for the analysis of contemporary society (Lash and Urry, 1987; Harvey, 1989; Poster, 1990; Best and Kellner, 1991; Smart, 1992, 1993; Bauman, 1992a, 2000; Elliott, 1996).Postmodern anxieties or dispositions are, broadly speaking, cast as part of a broader cultural reaction to universal modernism’s construction of the social world, which privileges rationalism, positivism and techno-scienti? c planning. Premised upon a vigorous philosophical denunciation of humanism, abstract reason, and the Enlightenment legacy, postmodern theory rejects the metanarratives of modernity (that is, totalistic theoretical constructions, allegedly of universal application) and instead embraces fragmentation, discontinuity and ambiguity as symptomatic of current cultural conditions.To express the implications of these theoretical departures more directly in terms of the current discussion, if the social world in which we live in the 21st century is signi? cantly different from that of the simple modernization, this is so because of both socio-political and epistemological developments. It is not only re? ection on the globalization of risk tha t has eroded faith in humanly engineered progress. Postmodern contributions stress that the plurality of Downloaded from http://soc. sagepub. om by Madhu Menon on September 24, 2007  © 2002 BSA Publications Ltd.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 309 022761 Elliott 310 13/5/2002 Sociology 9:50 am Volume 36 s Page 310 Number 2 s May 2002 heterogeneous claims to knowledge carries radical consequences for the unity and coherence of social systems. Bluntly stated, a number of core issues are identi? ed by postmodern analysts in this connection: s s s The crisis of representation, instabilities of meaning, and fracturing of knowledge claims;The failure of the modernist project to ground epistemology in secure foundations; The wholesale transmutation in modes of representation within social life itself. Postmodernization in this context spells the problematization of the relationship between signi? er and referent, representation and reality, a re lationship made all the more complex by the computerization of information and knowledge (Poster, 1990). What I am describing as a broadly postmodern sociological viewpoint highlights the de? iency of placing ‘risk’ (or any other sociological variable) as the central paradox of modernity. For at a minimum, a far wider range of sources would appear to condition our current cultural malaise. What is signi? cant about these theoretical sightings, or glimpses, of the contours of postmodernity as a social system are that they lend themselves to global horizons and de? nitions more adequately than the so-called universalism of Beck’s sociology of risk.Against a theoretical backdrop of the break with foundationalism, the dispersion of language games, coupled with the recognition that history has no overall teleology, it is surely implausible to stretch the notion of risk as a basis for interpretation of phenomena from, say, an increase in worldwide divorce rates through to the collapse of insurance as a principle for the regulation of collective life. Certainly, there may exist some family resemblance in trends surrounding new personal, social and political agendas.Yet the seeds of personal transformation and social dislocation are likely to be a good deal more complex, multiple, discontinuous. This is why the change of mood – intellectual, social, cultural, psychological, political and economic – analysed by postmodern theorists has more far-reaching consequences for sociological analysis and research into modernity and postmodernization than does the work of Beck. In Beck’s sociology, the advent of advanced modernization is related to the changing social and technological dimensions of just one institutional sector: that of risk and its calculation.The key problem of re? exive modernization is one of living with a high degree of risk in a world where traditional safety nets (the welfare state, traditional nuclear family, etc . ) are being eroded or dismantled. But what is

Audience in ‘A Streetcar Named Desire’ Essay

Williams creates dramatic tension in ‘A Streetcar Named Desire’ through the interactions between the important characters in the play, such as the conflict between Blanche and Stanley, and their contrasting styles of communication. The first instance of this occurs in the second scene. Blanche is bathing, whilst Stanley questions Stella about the loss of Belle Reve, referring to the so-called â€Å"Napoleonic code†. As an audience, we sense the tension being created when he says â€Å"And I don’t like to be swindled.† We see Stanley’s aggressive nature and his increasing anger towards Blanche through his actions and words, â€Å"Open your eyes to this stuff!† When Stella cries, â€Å"Don’t be such an idiot, Stanley†, he becomes even more enraged, â€Å"[he hurls the furs to the daybed]† and â€Å"[he kicks the trunk]†. Tension is created here and, as an audience, we sense the drama that is about to come. The atmosphere is tense, and as Blanche comes out of the bathroom antithetically â€Å"[airily]†, the contrast between Stanley and Blanche becomes apparent and the unease is developed further. Although Williams successfully achieves dramatic tension in the play, he does not use Acts, but divides the play into eleven scenes, perhaps because he was unable to sustain dramatic tension for the length of a conventional Act. However, as with all of the scenes in the play, this scene leads to a natural, dramatic climax. Blanche talks casually with Stanley, who’s increasing fury is illustrated in the stage direction, â€Å"[with a smouldering look]†. Finally, the tension is released by Stanley, â€Å"[booming] Now let’s cut the re-bop!† This dramatic cry and instantaneous discharge of tension shocks the audience, but Blanche appears unmoved, speaking â€Å"[lightly]†, â€Å"My but you have an impressive judicial air† and acting â€Å"[playfully]† towards Stanley. Her contrasting manner further infuriates him, again resulting in a build up of tension. However, as Stanley appreciates the tragic loss of Belle Reve,†[becoming somew hat sheepish]†, he allows the conversation and the audience’s attention to be diverted away from himself, and instead to Stella’s pregnancy, diffusing the tension. William’s persistent use of detailed stage directions in ‘A Streetcar Named Desire’ implies that the visual settings of the play are very important. Williams uses this attention to detail to create an atmosphere that  heightens the impact of the drama, and emphasises the tension created within each scene. This is demonstrated in the third scene, where a Van Gogh painting is evoked in the stage directions, which relates to William’s description of the men as â€Å"[as course and direct and powerful as the primary colours]†, enhancing the atmosphere of rife masculinity that contrasts with Blanche’s feminine presence and pale pastels thus accentuating the subsequent dramatic tension that is created. The same applies to the settings surrounding Blanche; for example, in Scene Nine the â€Å"[blind Mexican woman]† is a portent of death, the memory of which terrorizes Blanche, and in Scene Ten imagined â€Å"[lurid reflections]† and â€Å"[grotesque and menacing]† shadows that Blanche sees reflect her madness and fear, enhancing the tension of the scene. Coupled with William’s use of visual effects, sound effects are used to create dramatic tension. The Varsouviana, polka music, plays regularly throughout the play. It is heard only by Blanche and is used to illustrate Blanche’s feelings of guilt towards Allan’s suicide, and plays whenever she is particularly disturbed, creating tension. Her response is to drink heavily, in an attempt to overcome the sound. The music continues to grow louder and so the tension is amplified. Only when she is drunk enough, does the music subside with the final shot, and a dramatic climax is reached. For all the drama created by the music, Blanche seems to have accepted this part of her torture, as demonstrated when she states in a matter-of-fact manner â€Å"there now, the shot! It always stops after that!† as though the reliability of the music’s regularity is a comfort to her. In Scenes Four, Six and Ten, Williams introduces a roaring locomotive at dramatic moments: Blanche’s criticism of Stanley, her account of Allan’s death and before Stanley rapes her. The result of which is developing tension, to be released in the climax of the scene. The locomotive also has connotations of fate, in that, like the streetcar, it can only travel on one line, and in one direction, to one destination. Also, the locomotive’s headlight illustrates Blanche’s fear of exposure; she crouches and shuts her ears whenever it approaches, in an attempt to shield herself from the harsh reality, also creating tension.

High Stakes Curriulum and Teasting Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

High Stakes Curriulum and Teasting - Essay Example ontributing to the high stakes curriculum and testing since it greatly supports standard-based education reforms by ensuring schools institute high standards and setting measurable to improve the quality of education in American schools. The RTTT contributes to high stakes curriculum and testing since it promotes innovation and reforms with local and state district K-12 education. The Common Core Standards contribution is pegged on the fact that it clearly denotes what students should learn and the basic skills they should acquire in each grade. According to Oakes and Lipton (2007), the main advantage of these initiatives is that they mainly seek to improve the quality of education and ensure American children gain quality and relevant education in order to sustain the future growth of the Nation. Secondly, Sowell (2010 stated that the initiatives aim at ensuring public schools offer quality education unlike the usually norm whereby it is perceived that only private schools offer quality education. Thirdly, Sowell (2010) wrote that the initiatives aim at creating a just society whereby every child is able to gain quality education that will make him or her competitive in the future. Sowell (2010) lamented that the main disadvantages of these initiatives is that they create confusion within the education sector because of varying requirements imposed on schools and the insistence of uniformity among schools, hinders some schools from customizing their education program in order to address their individual or state challenges that is impairing their education

Different Paths to God Found in Bonaventure's The Soul's (or Mind's) Term Paper

Different Paths to God Found in Bonaventure's The Soul's (or Mind's) Journey to God - Term Paper Example The path detailed in The Soul’s Journey to God is a path to ecstasy, to truly knowing the Creator. Bonaventure describes this path as, â€Å"the road by which this rapture is reached† (54). This is a path that no believer can pass through alone. It is only through Christ that we can attain ecstasy. â€Å"There is no other path but through the burning love of the Crucified† (54). So one must both desire to be close to God, have faith and love, and also realize that you cannot do it yourself. You must have the help of Christ to attain your goal. We attain the first degree through â€Å"an outcry of prayer† and â€Å"the flash of insight† (55). Both of these must come through Christ. Bonaventure issues an invitation: â€Å"I invite the reader to the groans of prayer through Christ crucified.† But the first step is purification of the spirit. Bonaventure admonishes that you must first exercise your conscience and experience remorse. But again, on e must begin with Christ. â€Å"We cannot rise above ourselves unless a Higher Power lifts us up† (59). This process involves a three-prong process, which according to Bonaventure, mirrors the three days in the wilderness described in Exodus. He also compares it to the three periods of light in a day: evening, morning, and noon. He also relates it to the threefold essence of Christ. This three-prong process begins with the material. The second prong is about the spirit. And the third prong is the mind. These are much like the three essences of God, which are material, temporal, and exterior. In order to know God, you must pass through his essences. Since God had a literal Hand in creating all things in the physical world, you can find Him in all physical things. Therefore, all physical things on the Earth can point you toward God. Thus, the three-prongs of understanding and readying yourself for an encounter with God begin with the material, move toward the spirit, and then l astly through the mind. Bonaventure explains that any of these prongs can be doubled, which is why he has broken the process into six steps. Bonaventure explains the correlation to the creation of the universe. God took six days to create the world and then took the seventh day to rest. Our world is a minute version. As Bonaventure explains, â€Å"so the smaller world of man is led in a most orderly fashion by six successive stages of illumination to the quiet of contemplation† (61). This also corresponds to the six stages of the powers of the soul. Bonaventure explains that we ascend through these stages: â€Å"sense, imagination, reason, understanding, intelligence, and the summit of the mind†¦we have these implanted in us by nature, deformed by sin, and reformed by grace. They must be cleansed by justice† (62). Returning to this quiet of contemplation is akin to returning to our original state of being. We were created as perfect for the quiet of contemplation. However, when Adam and Eve turned away from their original intention, mankind was also turned from our perfect state of being, designed for the quiet of contemplation. Our next phase after examining the material is to look into our spirit and see where we can find God. God’s image is not only spiritual, but everlasting. We must see how our interior reflects God, who created us all. Bonaventure uses the metaphor of a mirror. You are both looking for God in a mirror and through a mirror. Bonaventure explains that ascendancy to God requires the avoidance of sin, â€Å"

Marymount University computer lab Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Marymount University computer lab - Term Paper Example This part takes 11days of the time schedule with the first week of activity being exclusively the meetings before the process of gathering information on the current system also begins to run concurrently with it for the remaining eight days. The next stage is the discussion and analysis of the risks and the financial requirements of the project. This stage runs for three days as shown in the graphs and charts and begins immediately after requirement gathering stage. The second last activity is the obtainment of the building approvals by the relevant authorities that takes five days. The very last activity is the movement of equipment to the building that also takes five days. This section explains the expenditure throughout the whole project. The financial plan is generally divided into two main parts which are the requirement gathering and development part and the maintenance section. The main focus here is in the development part. The other budget estimation that also experienced a lower actual amount is the Mice budget that was first set for $50 and the actual figure comes up to $40 giving a deference of $10 on the actual estimated values. The other budgets are expected to run in line with the actual budgeted figures as earlier estimated making the schedule more realistic and precise as expected. This gives the entire budget for the project to

Harley Davidson Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Harley Davidson - Case Study Example (Harley Davidson.com) As Harley Davidson is the market leader through a differentiation strategy and unique customization ability and because of high costumer loyalty as company's wide sponsored events and close interactions with its customers. Most market leaders are companies focused on low cost, mass production capacity in which the firm takes advantage of its economies of scale. Harley Davidson's continuous improvement in design, engineering and processes allow for such a leadership through customization and results in operational excellence. Harley Davidson has a grate net work of its dealer ship and has over 1300 dealers through out the world. In 2005, Harley Davidson motorcycles were sold in over 60 countries, with an international sales growth of 15%. For the first six months of 2006, motorcycle sales were up 11 percent and interest continues because of the high gas prices according to the Motorcycle Industry Council. In 2004, the most recent year data was available, the industry posted $7.6 billion in sales of 725,000 on-highway bikes, up from nearly $4.7 billion in 2000 with 471,000 bikes sold. Harley-Davidson brand bikes represented 48.9% of the approximate 517,600 total new U.S. registrations in 2005, down slightly from a 49.5% market share in 2004. In 2005, there were about 252,900 new U.S registrations of the brand's heavyweight motorcycles, up from about 244,500 in 2004. Harley Davidson's closest competitors in U.S. market share in 2005 were Honda (16.6%) and Suzuki (12.4%). Because of Harley Davidson's dormant market share and strength of its brand name, there is little direct price competition. There are High Barriers to Entry to the market. The first is the length of time it takes to build up technical capabilities. The second barrier to entry is the enormous dealer networks that the entrenched players have. There are fairly few but highly competitive brands the motorcycle industry. Most of Harley Davidson's competitors are outside of the US where they hold a dominant share of the market. There is an emotional connection to owning a motorcycle that diminishes the threat of substitution In fact, the motorcycle industry has been cited as a beneficiary of the rise in oil and gas prices and thus has become a more viable substitute to automobiles. Harley Davidson motorcycles represent a niche lifestyle product that buyers will want to purchase regardless of the price so HDI is able to pass on increased costs to its customers. The rise in aluminum, steel and oil could continue to impact production costs over the next several quarters. However, we expect this rise to be moderate as the raw material industries are fragmented and competitive. Corporate Strategy: HDI always focused on the brand name recognition since its inception and desirability of its

Global civ. (Guns, Germs, and Steel) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Global civ. (Guns, Germs, and Steel) - Essay Example Basically, Diamond argues that those humans who moved out to areas that were ecologically and geographically favorable for food production became advantaged. Instead of spending all their lives hunting animals and gathering fruits from the wild, they practiced agriculture and domesticated animals. More food could be obtained faster by engaging in agriculture than in hunting and gathering thus creating enough time for other things. According to Diamond, this extra time obtained was used in inventing the things that he views to be the proximate causes of the inequality witnessed today. Consequently, these proximate factors helped these societies to come up with political organizations and later on facilitated the conquering and taking over of other societies. The ultimate argument that Diamond presents is that ecology and geography determined the fate of societies. He notes that initially all human beings were hunters and gatherers. Hunting animals and gathering food from the forest was not very productive and very little was obtained. The result of this was spending so much time in searching for food. Basically, Diamond argues that people’s lives circulated around looking for food to eat and doing nothing else. When people started to move from Africa to other continent this situation changed in some places. The author notes that some regions were fertile and could support agriculture. With the emergence of agriculture, food production increased greatly and surplus was created. Animals were also domesticated (Diamond 83). For the first time people could focus on other things apart from just looking for food. But this only happened in those areas that were geographically and ecologically favorable for agriculture. The surplus time which had been created was used to invent other things which the author views to be the proximate causes of the

Legal Environment of Business - BLAW-3400-004 Essay

Legal Environment of Business - BLAW-3400-004 - Essay Example A qualified workers right to Family and Medical Leave started on August 5, 1993. For every leave taken prior to that date is not considered t as FMLA leave (Rossin†Slater, et. al,. 224). Nevertheless, measures succeeding under the legislation of FMLA leave intends, for instance, the child birth happening before 5 of August 1993, still permit qualified workers to the benefits of Female Medical Legislation on and after 5, of August 1993. The law contains a number of provisions linking to employer coverage as well as all government agencies; worker qualification for legislation benefits; preservation of health benefits for the period of leave, entitlement to leave and work reinstatement ; notice and certification of leave; and, safeguarding of workers who apply or get FMLA leave. Moreover, the legislation comprises certain employer recorded information (Post, Robert and Siegel, 2032). The Family Medical Leave permits workers to balance family life and their work by taking rational unpaid leave for a given reasons. The FMLA is proposed to balance the needs of families with demands of the place of work, to encourage the economic security and stability of families, and to support national interests in protecting family integrity (Waldfogel and Jane, 17). The FMLA tries to achieve these rationales in a manner that put up with the legal interests of bosses, and which reduces the possibility of employment favoritism on the basis of gender, while encouraging equal employment chances for women and men. The ratification of the Family Medical Leave was constituted on two primary distresses – the needs of America employees and the improvement of high-performance institutions (Gerstel, Naomi, and Katherine, 520). Gradually more American children and rising numbers of the aged are reliant on family members who are employed to spend lengthy hours on the work (Post, Robert and

Logistics and Supply Chain Management Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words - 1

Logistics and Supply Chain Management - Essay Example y method to achieve successful results in business performance, since it offers the basis for improving flexibility and maximizing the degree of firms’ responsiveness to external influences and changes in markets and demands. Finally, the issue of logistics in terms of functional and cross-functional organizational structure will be additionally discussed in order to reach conclusions upon the benefits attached to each case. The increased competition along with the globalization effect have undoubtedly set new grounds for conducting business. This situation actually urges corporations and organizations throughout the world to acquire and maintain competitive edges and core competencies that will eventually provide the basis for success. Around the globe companies are striving for profitability; a fact that logically tests and underlines the necessity for cost-cutting, innovative solutions and higher margins or returns to be achieved. Markets are expanding and constantly developing, creating new needs and opportunities for revenues. Nonetheless, the â€Å"price-wars† and the intense rivals among major players in all industries constitute a business environment that requires strategic approach on the part of corporations in order to maintain and sustain competitiveness. Supply chain management is a business area that has gained the attention of virtually all companies that attempt to increase efficiency gains through flexibility and responsiveness to changes in the market and the demand levels. For this very reason, strategic approach to SCM (supply chain management) has become integral part of the organizational planning. Voss (1987) defines JIT as a disciplined approach that eventually aims at improving business performance through increasing productivity and eliminating waste. In more details Just-in-Time actually targets maximization of production in a cost-effective manner, on the one hand, and delivery of sufficient quantity of products/parts on the other

The Reluctant Fundamentalist - Changes in Changez Essay Example for Free

The Reluctant Fundamentalist Changes in Changez Essay ?The collective aspect of the set of characteristics by which a thing or person is definitively recognizable or known is their identity. A person’s behavior, his/her background, the inevitable bits and pieces of his/her nature and history sown together make him/her who he/she are. Changez is the protagonist of the Novel â€Å"The Reluctant Fundamentalist† by Mohsin Hamid. His character is complex and diverse from the rest. It is volatile and his perspective of his identity is irresolute. By this I mean that his understanding of who he is constantly being altered through the course of the novel, and I will discuss this in the following paragraphs. Changez’s identity refers to who he is; every aspect of his personality adds up to his identity. Changez belongs to an upper-class family from Lahore, Pakistan. He lives in a house with his parents, his sister his brother. This family is not poor, but is not wealthy compared to the society it mixes with. Changez’s family is relatively liberal as everybody, including the women, work, in order to maintain the high living standards that they are used to. Changez has been born and brought up in Lahore and has always been a promising and scholarly student. The novel states that he has gone through his entire school life without getting a single B grade. Post his education at school; he received a scholarship to Princeton. This reflects two aspects of Changez’s life; first, his above average intellect that made him eligible for such a pristine offer, and second, his dire need for the financial aid in order to be able to be part of such a prestigious institution. Like for everybody, Changez’s history is inevitably a part of his identity. It may not be very important, but his financial condition does raise barriers in his life and can be categorized as important enough to be a part of his identity as this causes constraints. Other than these aspects of his life, an important part of Changez’s identity is his mindset. Before getting to Changez’s metamorphosing personality, I would like to state a constant about him: His mannerisms. Through the course of the novel, Changez’s way of speaking is always polite and humble. This may be a contradiction to his proud and confident personality. As I see it, Changez believes that he is a cut above the rest and works tirelessly to prove it and live up to his own expectations. However, while he feels superior to his acquaintances, he is never seen being impolite or cocky towards them. As Changez’s journey begins in Princeton, he is always slightly different from his acquaintances. His politeness makes him bit of an outsider and he is never quite part of the people there. Another thing that makes Changez different from the rest is his economic stability. A part of Changez’s identity worth commenting on is not only the need for him to work three jobs whilst being at college, but his efforts to not let his peers at Princeton find out about these jobs. In my view, he wants to keep up with everyone and flourishing on the financial front is one of his life’s goals. I think this is one of Changez’s catalysts that make him work so hard. It is one of the factors that provide him with the drive to flourish. Underwood Samson employs Changez for a job that is almost out of reach. This reflects his diligence and charm. At this point in his life, Changez claims to be a lover of America and his admiration for the country stands strong. As Changez is not as wealthy as he projects himself to be, it is difficult for him to watch as his friends part with money thoughtlessly on their trip to Greece. ‘Lahore-ancient city†¦democratically urban, similar to Manhattan. ’ Changez claims that coming to New York was like coming ‘home’ for him. New York is full Urdu speaking cab drivers and has other similarities to Lahore. Changez feels like he is ‘immediately a New Yorker, never an American. ’ In my view, this shows that while he is drawn to New York in a binding way, and while he feels like he belongs to the city, he does not belong to the country. He feels like his nationality is Pakistani and that is where he belongs. I don’t think that at this point he is conflicted between New York and Pakistan, I think he feels like he belongs to both the places, one city and another country. He wears his country’s attire with pride and he also mentions that he from the moment he was in New York, he felt like a New Yorker. Changez’s national identity, at this point, is Pakistani. Earlier, however, Changez leaked a sense of pride towards belonging to Pakistan. There is no displacement or confusion in Changez as far as the identification of home belonging to a certain geographical space is concerned. On the contrary, the idea of home seems fixed and determined as Pakistan. A further possible hint of his pride of being Oriental, rather than a Westerner, is given by his decision to combine a pair of jeans with a kurta, a typical item of clothing worn in Pakistan and in some other Eastern countries, when meeting Erica’s parents, hence an important occasion. Later, in contrast, Changez recognizes that Pakistan was once at the forefront of modernity but he feels a sense of shame and resentment that it is now poor –disparity compared to the view he gets from the 41st floor of his office building. Changez feeds off the power and money that he feels coming closer to him, as these are the base of his ‘American Dream’ and as I earlier mentioned, his need to earn money drives him to work hard. Changez’s identity withholds a hunger for these things, and at the same time he feels ‘privileged’ to be given this opportunity to become the person he has been working towards becoming. Filipino workers ‘look up’ to rich young Americans and Changez starts to adopt the same attitude and language in order to be looked at with the same respect as his collogues when they are in Manila. He feels sense of power that comes with the realization that due to his job, he decides people’s futures. This power is a part of Changez’s identity, whether the power is present or not. The hunger for the power is a definitive part of Changez. He is, however, unsettled by a taxi driver who shows hostility towards him. Changez feels like he is part of a play and ought to be making his way ‘home’ like the Taxi driver. The realization that he is falsely altering his identity haunts him, and he feels like he is acting like ‘one of them. † Here, his identity is unsettled and in the state of flux as it is not concrete and sure. In chapter six, I quote Erica, who says, â€Å"I love it when you talk about where you come from, you become so alive. † This is an observation made by Changez’s lover at the time. She feels like a part of Changez feels either proud or joyed to be talking about his native land. In my opinion, this observation made is free from any bias and is purely based on Changez’s behavior that unintentionally and unknowingly gives off a sense of liveliness when he speaks of Pakistan, because somewhere inside, it makes him feel alive. Also, after having a seemingly awkward and immensely intimate experience of almost making love to Erica, Changez falls asleep and dreams of ‘home’, which in my view refers to Lahore. This projects his subconscious as being predominated by his thoughts of his home in Pakistan. An important part of the novel as well as a definer of Changez’s identity is the instance where he sees reports of the 9/11 on TV and his thoughtless reaction is to smile at it. This act can be interpreted in many ways, and my understanding of it is that while Changez loves America and is in awe of it’s power, it gives him a sense of relief that even something as grand as the USA could be brought down to it’s knees. He is aware that this act of destruction was done by Afghanistan. Changez is not a sadistic person and derives no pleasure from the realization that a substantial number of people were harmed during this attack; this lack of sensitivity is not a part of his identity. Having said that, I would like to point out that it is a sense of indifference to the victims that makes him smile. He does not smile at the way the power is exerted, but at the existence of the power. Previously, Changez saw America as almost indestructible and invincible, which made him feel small in comparison. Based on that idea, I think Changez finds a sense of relief when he sees that even a country like America can be brought down. For a lover of America, this is rather strange reaction to the tragedy that is the 9/11. Changez’s identity conflict comes into light here. Other than his national identity, Changez’s pride, which is a part of his personal identity, is also seen being flippant soon after. Changez claims that ‘he does not know how to describe his experience.. He did not seem to be himself† when he pretends to be Chris in order to help Erica make love to him. This is an extremely stark contrast to Changez’s personality traits that are proud and hold high self-esteem and self-contentment. Later, he does claim that he had ‘diminished’ himself in his own eyes. This shows conflict in his mind as to who he is and what stands conscientious in his eyes. After the 9/11, Changez’s perception of America as a nation that looked forward was altered to a nation that was looking back, and he felt like ‘an outsider. ’ This is an important change in his identity as Changez goes from being an outsider to blending in to the American society associated with Underwood Samson back to being a misfit. Changez returns to Lahore for some time later on. â€Å"This was where I came from, this was my provenance, and it smacked of lowliness,† says Changez. â€Å"The house had not changed in my absence, I had changed; I was looking about me with the eyes of a foreigner, and not just any foreigner, but the particular type of entitled and unsympathetic American who so annoyed me when I encountered him†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Here, Changez’s conflict seems to clear up but his change in identity is more evident. He accepts the change in himself and also points out that he has evolved into the person that he resented previously. On the next page, he states that he was a man lacking in substance and hence was easily influenced by even a short sojourn in the company of others. This is also a contradiction to the person Changez was when he started at Princeton or at Underwood Samson. He no longer seems proud of who he is, and pride was a core element in his identity. When Changez’s brother ruffled Changez’s hair, Changez felt like he had not been touched so familiarly in a while. He said he felt an ‘almost child-like twenty-two year old. † This is who he is. He is unsure of who he is. He feels like a middle-aged child and his age may be a constant, but his youth or adulthood is a question and he does not know where he stands. This adds clarity to the idea of him being conflicted when trying to be definitive of his own identity. He feels like whilst trying to be an earning member of the family, he is also the youngest. He continues to feel a little bit like a child irrespective of his status and career placement. On returning to America, in spite of numerous suggestions from his mother and colleagues, Changez does not shave his beard. He claims that it is a ‘form of protest’ on his part, ‘a symbol of identity’. He also thinks that it may be a symbol of the reality he had left behind. This shows that he is beginning to believe that the home he has left in Lahore is reality and he is no longer a New Yorker, but a patriot, that in times of need and conflict he belongs to Pakistan. â€Å"I know only that I did not wish to blend in with the army of clean-shaven youngsters who were my coworkers and inside me, for multiple reasons, I was deeply angry. † Changez states that he does not want to blend in with the Americans. This is yet another aspect of his identity. He does not want to be an American and when a choice has to be made, even when it is more difficult to be a Pakistani, in fact more then, he choses to be one. After being sent on a project by his company, Changez understands that the ambitious part of him that was predominant in his personality now takes a back seat when his country and family come into question. In the beginning of the novel we see Changez as a hardworking person who goes out of his way to make his way to the top. It is a vital part of his personality; it does not hold the same amount of importance anymore. Changez returned to his country, Pakistan, and takes care of his family. In the novel, there is no definitive reason as to why Changez left America, but I believe that he did not purely leave because something from Pakistan was pulling him back, but because because there was not enough in America to keep him there. While he felt a connect with New York and had strived to reach there, there was an open-ended relationship with Erica that had little hope of ever being resolved. Also, his job, was no more. I believe that this was clearly very important to Changez. So, he returned to Pakistan and continued his life as a college professor there. Changez’s identity goes through a major evolutionary process over the course of the years he is in America. These changes are reflected on his personality in many ways, ranging from his career-orientation, his personal life, his nationality as well as his priorities. There is, however, never complete clarity to me as to what he thinks of as important and where ‘home’ is to him, until the end. I cannot for sure clarify that he is completely content because in spite of his return I sensed an undertone of sadness when he left his dream behind.

James Dyson: Theories of Decision Making

James Dyson: Theories of Decision Making James Dyson is a UK-based engineer and founder of Dyson Appliances Ltd he is identified as the inventor of the first bag less vacuum cleaner. In 2012 his sales were over  £1billion and he has a sales presence within 45 countries worldwide. DAL had emerged as the market leader in the vacuum cleaner market in the UK as well as the USA. This paper will critically identify the key theories used by Dyson in his decision making process, strategic preferences will also be analysed within the development of the Dyson range of products. Theoretical models will be used to understand Dysons analytical decisions and the strategic choices that have been used within the development of the Dyson product range. Economic decisions will be evaluated to try and gauge the long term affect upon the stakeholders within the business. Background James Dyson started his career at the Royal College of Art in London where he studied furniture and interior design. In 1974 after spending four years with Roturk Marine Engineering as a designer he started his own business and made his first invention. The Ballbarrow which was an update on the wheelbarrow and used a plastic ball for easier manoeuvrability instead of the conventional wheel was his first invention, almost all of Dysons inventions and ideas are because of personal frustration with the current product available on the market. Ballbarrow was launched in 1975 and was priced at three times more than the conventional wheelbarrow; the product which sold surprisingly well was sold on to a major manufacturer four years after its concept to enable Dyson to finance his future inventions. In 1978 Dyson realised his vacuum cleaner was continuously losing suction power; he noticed how dust was quickly clogging the pores of the bag which was leading to a block in the airflow. He then made the decision to resolve this problem, after five years and over 5000 prototypes he launched the first cyclonic bag less vacuum cleaner. Dyson offered his invention to all of the most important manufacturers but none would invest in a bag less vacuum cleaner because of the potential loss of sales on the  £500 million bag industry. Despite initial financial obstacles in 1993 Dyson launched his new design of cyclone bag less vacuum cleaner the Dyson DC01which was seen as being a vast improvement over the conventional vacuum cleaner, other major manufacturers who had earlier rejected the cyclone idea have since copied Dysons concept to ensure their stake within the vacuum market remains intact. Business Strategy Corporate Culture Marketing professionals have different views on brand building, there are different models that all agree on what makes up a brand, the most obvious factors include awareness, quality and association (Boyle 2003, 79-93). Dysons achievement emphasises the need for the creation of a strong brand and is certainly one way for a business to accomplish and retain competitive advantage. A strong branding will lead to a brand equity which is a uniqueness that sets it apart from similar products (Tuominen 2007, 65-100).When uniqueness and value are delivered within a product range this can enable a business to maintain a higher price over its competitors products. Max Conze CEO of Dyson believes their competitive advantage is because of recruitment of the brightest graduates, expansion into various other markets and concentration on engineering development, our lifeblood is inventing that is where we invest the majority of our money and that DAL are more than a vacuum company we are a technology company. A new innovation needs to be given the right look; key decisions for Dyson are its attributes, brand characteristics and value for money innovative products will not be a success unless the benefits are greatly visible at the point of purchase. Dysons products original had the iconic yellow colour that makes them look childishly simple. Some have a roller ball and the transparent plastic holding cells that conceal the dirt that is removed. This has the aim of easier move ability and also shows the dirt that has been suctioned from your living space. Dyson has denied using branding saying Were only as good as our latest product, and I dont believe in brand at all. The comments from Dyson seem questionable considering his own unique style of vacuum cleaner and the millions of pounds that have been spent on TV commercials and advertising. Dysons mission statement is Take everyday products that dont work well, and make them work better. All the evidence points to a very clever marketing campaigner being as innovative as the products he sells. The products are easily identifiable by its brand name and are a continuing source of dominance and differentiation within the vacuum market. Strategic Planning In saturated product markets the development of a unique strategic product can give you a sustainable economic advantage within the market. A small number of businesses have managed to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage; Apple and Sky are two of the leading companies that can make claim to have been highly successful within their area of expertise and justifiable deserve the praise and accolade they have within it. Dyson plays down his decision making skills with reference to his vacuum cleaner commented we were in the right place at the right time and with the right product. But the reality is for it to happen there has to be a clear vision of where the company is going and where the market opportunity exists. Key features of sustainable competitive advantage include charging a premium for its services even low cost suppliers out price other low cost suppliers. Leading the market by innovation will get new ideas quicker to market also having control of market channels and buying power helps an organisation to adopt a new competitive price structure. Dyson and his colleagues have continued to develop new innovations to maintain their competitive advantage, creation of vacuum cleaners with higher suction through an entirely new cyclone system and a robot cleaner are amongst the latest inventions to be marketed. Not all of Dysons products have become a market leader in 2000; he launched the worlds first two-drummed washing machine, the Contra rotator. Dyson and his engineers constantly re-evaluate different products and they found with the traditional washing machine that the fabric is not flexed enough and washing by hand gave better results than a single drum machine. Dysons two drummed washing machine took four years and  £25 million to develop the machine it came with a revolutionary built-in jack and trolley. In 2005 the Contra rotator was withdrawn from the market, Dyson stated It wasnt a failure and it was a great washing machine but it was too cheap and we didnt make money from it. Schools of Strategy Henry Mintzbergs Ten Schools of strategic management are interlinked; the intention of this chapter is to mostly concentrate on three of the schools which the author feels that Dyson most uses within his ideology and approach to strategic management. The Entrepreneurial School: This strategy process has a single person in charge normally the CEO and is built on a strategic vision. Supporters of the entrepreneur school believe that managerial success is a personalized leader ship which is based on strategic vision; this will also be evident in the starting up and building of an organisation and in the case of breaking up of an organisation. The Entrepreneurial School Of Knowledge Main components within the entrepreneur school include a strategy making which is preceded by rigorous search of opportunities. Power is central to the leader and is characterised by large leaps in the wake of uncertainty and that growth will always be the main aim of the organisation. The basic principles of the school are that strategy exists as a perspective in the leaders mind and the formulation process is conscious only to a certain extent. The leader Dyson will promote a vision which he watches closely and this power will allow him to make changes or amendments within the organisation based on intuition and experience. The criticism of this school of thought is that it is centred on an individual leader and there formulation of a strategy, if employees lose faith within their leader due to a poor economic decision or strategy this can lead to a demand for a change of leadership within the organisation. The Design School: The design school looks to find a match for internal capabilities and external possibilities; it seeks to gain importance within the analysis of internal and external situations. Internal relates to strengths and weaknesses and external covers the opportunity of a threat to an organisation. SWOT is the analysis that is used which covers managerial values and social responsibility and can also play a role in the formulation of a strategy. Design School Model-Mintzbergs The main principles of a design school include a planned process of conscious thought with a leader who takes the responsibility regarding control and consciousness of an enterprise. The models within the strategy should be simple and informal; the process will be complete only when the strategy is explicit and formulates a perspective. Implementation will only commence when the best one has been chosen. Criticism against this thought school include a lack of clarity within an organisation relating to their strengths and weaknesses and the time frame of when to formulate the strategy. There are also assumptions that data will be aggregated and sent to a higher level not showing potential losses and the environment will always remain stable within the future. The Learning School: The learning school has a view that strategies emerge when organizations can learn as much from failures as they do from success. Learning organisations assume that managers and workers close to design, manufacturing and distribution know more about their activities than their superiors and that the transfer of knowledge from one part to the other ensures that relevant knowledge reaches the desired place. Learning School Knowledge Network The main principles of the learning school can be complex and the nature of the organisations environment makes implementation and formulation identical to a large extent. The leader for e.g. Dyson will pay close attention over time to what works and what does not work and this structure will be incorporated into their overall plan of action. Criticisms of the school can include a threat of weak decisions and a largely passive approach to strategy. The seven remaining schools are planning, positioning, cognitive, power, cultural, configuration and environmental school all the schools are interlinked and can at different levels have a relevance to the James Dyson organisation. The author for e.g. feels that the environmental school has a much smaller link to the Dyson organisation than many of the other strategies available has this school is set to be reactive based on external environment. Most of the other schools just make reference to the environment but this school believes that the environment is ultimately the crucial key concept within this model. But protagonists of the environment school include Mintzbergs and Freeman and the basic models include the four groups of contingency view stability complexity, market diversity and hostility (Thompson 2004, 1082 1094). Strategic choice for Stakeholders Stakeholders are individuals who are affected or have an effect on the actions of an organisation. Stakeholder method focuses on the needs of its main stakeholders which include the owners, employees, customers and the local community. In contrast to this the shareholders method focuses on dividend to shareholders, which means the business objectives would be to increase profit. Dyson made a controversial decision in 2002 when he moved his manufacturing to Malaysia to be closer to his suppliers and to reduce his production cost. This move from Wiltshire to Malaysia was the cause of 800 job losses which would affect both employees who would have been made redundant and the local community. The Unions reacted furiously to the job losses general secretary of Amicus, the engineering union Derek Simpson Dyson has no commitment to his workforce and is a desperately bad example to the rest of the sector. and: This latest export of jobs by Dyson is confirmation that his motive is making even greater profit at the expense of UK manufacturing and his loyal workforce. Tony Blair told MPs he was deeply disappointed at the Malaysian transfer. Dyson commented in 2005 on his controversial decision to move production to Malaysia that record profits and his vacuum cleaners becoming the number one best seller worldwide as justified his decision to move production in 2002 away from the UK. After the move Dysons manufacturing costs have dropped significantly and as a result his profits have increased. Dyson said that the company may not exist at all today if it werent for the move. This decision would initially seem to point to a focus on shareholder dividends but this is unlikely to be the case as Dyson owns 100 percent of the shares and does not need to worry about his return to shareholders. Conclusion James Dyson has been a controversial figure within the business world but with an estimated worth of  £350m and a product presence in over 45 countries worldwide he has led Dyson Appliances Ltd (DAL) to be the leader in the vacuum cleaner market. He as over the last 30 years proven that risk-embracing entrepreneurship often run the most innovative companies and that his strategic sometimes controversial approach has at least for James Dyson been a great success. He has received a knighthood for his services to business in 2007 and has created the James Dyson Foundation in 2002 to support design and increase engineering education for future engineers. Sources Used www.inventors.co.uk/p/Sir-James-Dyson.htm 2012:1www.bbc news.co.uk-Dyson: Business whirlwind 2012:1-2www.guardian.co.uk/technologyinterview 2011:1www.forbes.com-sir-dyson-doesnt-believe-in-brands-why-has-he-spent-millions-building-one/2012:1www.quickmba.com/strategy/generic 2010:1www.guardian.co.uk/contrarotator/james-dyson 2012:1www.telegraph.co.uk/finance-production-moves-to-Malaysia 2012:1www.the guardian.com reinventing Britain 2011:1