The comforts of life and their necessities are questioned. Is it true that humans can live with no luxuries in their habitats? With support from Emerson’s “Self-Reliance” and Melville’s “Bartleby,” it can be concluded that tangible object are not needed for life’s happiness. Instead, it is what a human feels within them that is important. Individualism brings out the true inner self of all the humans. It allows the humans to see what is truly vital in their lives and what is something that just exists for comfort.

However, upon further investigation, differences can be found even between Emerson and Melville. Their individualistic points of views contrast in numerous ways, and their views on necessities are not the same. As one person’s definition of individualism is different from another’s, these two documents contradict in specific details of true individualism. However, both define individualism as the best way to live life.

In Emerson’s “Self-Reliance,” three major topics about individualism are covered: the importance of self-reliance, the role of self-reliance as an individual, and the contribution of self-reliance to the society. Together they form an overall impression of independence and nonconformity.

The importance of self-reliance comes when someone is faced with a tough decision to make. Many adults that are well educated may contradict their own thoughts and think them over multiple times before they ever choose to follow them. However, when children make decisions, they do not know enough to question their thoughts and do what their instinct tells them to. According to Emerson, this instinct or gut feeling is the best way that someone could make a choice. This way, he ensures that a person will be lead to success in all aspects.

When looking at Melville’s “Bartleby,” the overall idea of the story is seen as being selfish towards others in a considerate way. Bartleby refuses to do anything for other people, giving the excuse of “I prefer not to.” Although it is a polite and undemanding way of responding, the effects are firm and powerful. Instead of disrespecting others in the society, he declines others’ requests of favors in a passive way. Instead of giving into other people’s requests, he follows by his own, individualistic decision.

Turning back to Emerson’s “Self-Reliance,” it states that one should feel ashamed of owning lots of property instead of feeling better than others. He believes that having lots of property or lots of luxuries in one’s life gives birth to corruption and dishonesty towards other people. In addition, people may attempt to defeat other people’s statuses by gaining this property or wealth in dishonesty ways. In this case, Emerson believes that one should feel guilt for all the property that they own due to the possibility that they could have cheated systems or broken laws to be able to get the property.

Comparing to Emerson’s point of view of feeling ashamed of having lots of property, Melville greatly contrasts. Bartleby shows no signs of being ashamed for anything that he does; instead, his views towards society only reflect that he does not care about others. There is no mention at all about how much property he owns, or how much this status makes him more socially advanced than others.

Instead of worrying about how much property he owns, Bartleby goes about his own business, not minding about his luxuries or anything that is self-comforting. He purchases what he needs to be able to live his life without any troubles. However, he does not embellish himself with technologies that may induce his laziness. He limits himself and his comforts to what is necessary and a little bit more. Although he is contributing to society when he purchases these products from retailers, he does not think very significantly of it. He uses his money when it is necessary to improve his individualistic lifestyle. He only contributes to society when it is necessary for himself. When others request for his additional contribution to the society, he politely says “I prefer not to,” and declines their request.

The American Revolution, causing the American split, is best described by the American belief that the British provided an intolerable dominance over all Americans, giving themselves rights that no other American had. The overall cause of the American Revolution can be generally summarized by the envious nature of the Americans from their certainty that they were being treated unequally by the British, when in essence the British were not that bad.

When finding the source of this chaos, one can conclude that the Rights of Englishmen changed the way the Americans thought about the English. The beliefs they held were affected greatly by a few simple privileges the English had that Americans were denied. By the statements abiding to protect one’s property, numerous liberties are spawned.

Firstly, inheritance laws protect any property from ancestors that may have died. This way, no property is lost and cannot be given to higher officers without the owners’ family’s consent. These inheritance laws are provided that the husband is still alive, however. A female widow cannot maintain all of the beneficiates; however, she receives her portion of the inheritance. Furthermore, the widow cannot live in her previous housing: “she may remain in the house of her husband for forty days after his death, within which time her dower shall be assigned to her .” Furthermore, if a widow wishes to live by her own, she will not be forced to remarry under some circumstances: “so long as she prefers to live without a husband; provided always that she gives security not to marry without our consent …”

There shall be no taxation without counsel: “no scutage nor aid shall be imposed on our kingdom, unless by common counsel of our kingdom .” The British does not wish for others to assist them in any of their businesses without the acceptance of the British first. The only aid freely accepted is those from the city of London in a reasonable manner.

There shall be regular discussion among the higher classes of the kingdom regarding the aid or scutage provided to the British. When the discussion has been planned, it will be assembled as soon as possible: “… when the summons has thus been made, the business shall proceed on the day appointed, according to the counsel of such as are present …” The discussion will go on regardless of the presence of necessary people.

No unnecessary punishment will be given to anyone whatsoever. All punishments must fit the crime committed; the intensity of the crime will decide any further punishments. When the punishment is being determined, one has the right to trial by jury . During the selection of the jury, a fair selection with peers will be determined. Over excessive punishment will not be permitted: “and for a grave offense he shall be amerced in accordance with the gravity of the offense, yet saving always his ‘contentment .’”

When a person dies, his will becomes the determining factor of who receives his earnings. If a will is not written, the inheritance goes to the nearest kin: “if any freeman shall die… his chattels shall be distributed by the hands of his nearest kinsfolk and friends, under supervision of the church …” If debts exist, they will be paid to the king.

Upon unsatisfactory behavior by the British government, the citizens are given a right to rebel: “… and if we shall not have corrected the transgression … within forty days … those five-and-twenty barons shall, together with the community of the whole land, distrain and distress us in all possible ways … seizing our castles, lands, possessions …”

Finally, one of the final rights of the Englishmen is security in one’s home from unlawful entry. The home is a place of peace and tranquility, and one must feel protected. This right forbids any outside people from entering the property of an Englishman under penalties determined by a jury when taken to trial .

The origination of the Rights of Englishmen came from English history throughout many centuries in time. In the beginning, there were some privileges that only the king and queen was permitted to have. Later on, these rights were spread throughout the land, giving citizens equal opportunities at this luxury. Only Americans under the kingdom were permitted to have liabilities: “the founders of America began their lives as loyal subjects of the British Crown, proud to enjoy the rights of Englishmen .”

Americans felt discriminated against due to the fact that they were not permitted to have equal rights as the British. When the Americans were kept in captivity, they were not treated equally from the British. They were used as experiments for war. Children that disobey British officers were taken away, restrained, and beaten with a whip. Any supporters of the punished child are punished themselves .

Furthermore, Americans were brutally punished and used for inhumane experiments by the British. A movie portrayed two American men being used for testing the skills of the British. The American men were given a dummy that represented George Washington and were told to run. Behind them a giant herd of dogs and some men on horses chased. These repetitive inhumane actions caused the Americans to lose their trust and reliability in the British throughout time .

No assistance may be given to the kingdom without the permission of the king and many other high-classed followers and administrators below him. No loans may be made to the king against his will: “… such loans were against reason and the franchise of the land …” However, beyond this point, people are required to allow the king to use their money: “… and required to lend certain sums of money unto your Majesty …” Upon denial, punishment could include being jailed, confined, or molested. As seen, the British did claim some unfair power over the Americans.

The Bill of Rights was created to provide a greater, more equal living condition to both Americans and the British. Many new specifics were created, and were promoted to help the entire population.

To prevent anything from changing immediately, the Bill of Rights states firstly that no laws can be suspended or executed without the proper authority, consent, and discussion that must come beforehand. From this being outlawed, anyone who wishes to alter a law will have a higher difficulty doing so. From this law spawns a different circumstance where people will pretend to be in a position of authority to change the laws. This was stated in the bill: “pretended power of dispensing with the laws, or the execution of law by regal authority, as it hath been assumed and exercised of late, is illegal .”

The right of petitioning is given, and permission is given to petition the king. People who disagree with this are in essence committing a crime: “… all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal .” This new law provides a possible more friendly connection between the king and his followers.

Some of the new laws provide a more open and secure environment for the citizens. To reduce their fear of being attacked by the government, no military troops may be contained within the kingdom: “… the raising or keeping a standing army within the kingdom in time of peace, unless it be with consent of parliament, is against law .” This provides a lower chance for citizens to be harmed under an unplanned attack by the government for the sole purpose of a mass killing of its people.

Furthermore, any other previous laws could not be impeached; there was no way that a citizen could attempt to end a law already made in the past when at court. The only way this could be done was in compliance of the parliament.

The best attempt to reduce any unnecessary punishment was made. As stated previously, the punishment must fit the crime. As an extension, it was said that “excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted .” This maintains a humane way of living together with other people, not worrying about excessive, unnecessary pain when only committing a small crime.

To promote fairness, it was made that any outside influences of the jurors were outlawed. To maintain an equal decision, “all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void .” In the past there have been many outside possibilities that could have affected a juror’s decision. External payments in one’s favor could be one of the possibilities. With that reduced, fairness is maintained.

Finally, to improve the laws, discussion was necessary and must be done on a regular basis: “… for the amending, strengthening, and preserving of the laws, parliament ought to be held frequently .” Many previous laws forbid the changing of laws by many people. In this case, when a necessary and required change is found, proper action can be taken without breaking any former rules and laws made.

The power held by the British was the original source of the American Revolution, due to their envy. Political power is described as the “… power which every man, having in the state of nature, has given up into the hands of the society, and therein to the governors whom the society hath set over itself …” Without the followers, this power is deemed useless: “… and this power has its original only from compact, and agreement, and the mutual consent of those who make up the community .” When the powerful bodies have nobody or nothing to control, their power becomes insignificant.

Men wish and attempt to gain power for a variety of reasons, one of them being capable of protecting their property. Because of this, power is limited and controlled within the population: “… to limit the power and moderate the dominion of every part and member of the society.”

When a survey was conducted throughout the citizens of the United States, it was found that over 99% of all households in America own at least one television. Out of those citizens that did, 66% of them owned more than three televisions. On average, an American household owns 2.24 televisions. When the interaction between children and their parents were surveyed, it was found that youths prefer watching television over discussing personal issues with their parents. For many children, television was elected as their favorite activity. Compared to education, the ratio of the number of hours they spend in school to the number of hours they watch television annually was 900:1500 (California State University, Northridge). Information from the census denotes that an average family as 3.85 family members (United States Census). Using the previous information researched, one can conclude that each person has 2.24 ÷ 3.85 = 0.581 televisions for themselves.

A catenary is a shape resembling a parabola; it looks like “a hanging flexible chain or cable when supported at its ends and acted upon by a uniform gravitational force (its own weight),” as stated by Wikipedia. Originally Leonardo da Vinci concluded it was a parabola. However, later in the century, a group of mathematicians and physicists proved that this was incorrect and eventually named this new curve a hyperbolic cosine. Another interesting property about a catenary is that “a polygon, such as a square… can ‘roll’ smoothly on a track made of segments of catenaries,” according to the UBC Mathematics Department.

An image was added, coordinated, and tabulated in Geometer’s Sketchpad. When all the coordinates were provided, two points were chosen and were plugged into the hyperbolic cosine equation. When the equation was used to find some y-values when x-values were inserted, they were very close to the actual original image curve.

Furthermore, when three points were selected and the equation a parabola that passed through all three points was calculated. When this parabola was sketched on top of our original catenary, they were very similar but they did not match directly over each other. When the parabola was graphed, the slope of the catenary was steeper than the one of the parabola.

Our model is best described as a catenary because our points labeled in Geometer’s Sketchpad fit best under an equation of a catenary. When a parabola or any other curve is applied, all points do not match up directly on top of the curve; the points near the vertex or the slope or steepness of the curve move away or towards the selected points. Thus, the given equation will not be of greater accuracy compared to the equation of the catenary.

We surveyed IMSA students to see if they liked or disliked brussel sprouts. If a neutral response was given, they were not taken as a subject. If we received a straightforward yes or no response, we gave them a strip of paper covered with PTC and asked if it tasted bitter or like soggy paper. If they stated the strip of paper was bitter, they were recorded as a PTC taster. Our sample size was 30 students selected at random on the IMSA campus. We used the chi-square test of independence to see if the ability to taste PTC is independent of the favor of brussel sprouts.

A majority of the IMSA students surveyed could taste PTC and disliked brussel sprouts. The ability to taste PTC was independent of the like or dislike of brussel sprouts (X2 = 0.130, df = 1, P = 0.719).

Scientists at the University of Toronto experimented with 25 subjects and the few that were able to taste PTC had a great aversion to cruciferous vegetables such as broccoli and brussel sprouts (Catalyst Spring 2005). One woman stated that she had so little tolerance for cruciferous vegetables that she had to spit them out. PTC tasters are more apt to dislike the bitter taste of many cruciferous vegetables (Tepper, 1998). Since these experiments focused broadly on cruciferous vegetables, all of them suggest that the ability to taste PTC may influence whether you like or dislike brussel sprouts. Our experiment comparing these two variables shows that they are independent of each other. PTC tasters have a very rare chance of developing goiter, or the enlargement of the thyroid gland, because non-tasters may eat cruciferous vegetables in large quantities. PTC affects the iodine metabolism which leads to goiter (Tepper, 1998). But brussel sprouts are full of vitamins C and K which affect the healing of bruises and blood clotting. Thus, the deficiency of these vitamins cause slower healing abilities for the human body (George Mateljan Foundation, 2001). Overall, PTC has its advantages and disadvantages.

Was William Shakespeare really that great of an author? Were all his masterpieces really genuine, original works of art, or were they mere imitations of other’s work? In my opinion, the connection between the play and the letter is parasitic; Shakespeare draws out ideas from the letter itself and avoids using his own thoughts to improve his own work.

The biggest, most noticeable trait of The Tempest being parasitic towards William Strachey’s letter is the storm at the beginning. As a distinct scene in both works, the storm shows the arrival and beginning of both of the plots. In the letter, the great force of the storm is emphasized in the beginning: “… the storm in a restless tumult had blown so exceedingly as we could not apprehend in our imaginations any possibility of greater violence; yet did we still find it not only more terrible, but more constant, fury added to fury, and one storm urging a second more outrageous than the former, whether it so wrought upon our fears or indeed met with new forces.” (Strachey 1) That quotation amplifies the power of the storm and its great immensity. In William Shakespeare’s book, the storm is introduced in a similar manner: “Heigh, my hearts! Cheerly, cheerly, my hearts! Yare, yare! Take in the topsail! Tend to th’ master’s whistle! Blow till thou burst thy wind, if room enough! … Down with the topmast! Yare! Lower, lower! Bring her to try with main course! A plague upon this howling! They are louder than the weather or our office.” (Shakespeare I.1.5-8, 34-37) The way this is written denotes the fact that the storm is too powerful for the entire human crew to control. Even through these numerous orders and attempts of control, nothing has come as a result.

In addition, another notable connection between the two works is the scene of the island. Strachey wrote about how the Bermudas were evil and demonic in nature. This exact idea can be found in Shakespeare’s work: “But felt a fever of the mad and played / Some tricks of desperation. All but mariners / Plunged in the foaming brine and quit the vessel, / Then all afire with me; the king’s son Ferdinand, / With hair upstairing (then like reeds, not hair), / Was the first man that leapt, cried ‘Hell is empty, / And all the devils are here!’” (Shakespeare I.2.209-215)

Continuing on the island, Strachey writes about violent thunder and lightning. Searching through Shakespeare’s book, one will find: “The fell together all, as my consent. / They dropped as by a thunderstroke. What might, / Worthy Sebastian – O, what might? – No more! / And yet methinks I see it in thy face, / What thou shouldst be. Th’ occasion speaks thee, and / My strong imagination sees a crown / Dropping upon thy head.” (II.1.202-208) During this scene, Shakespeare uses different language that can be found in the letter. Substituting his usual “thunderbolt,” he uses “thunderstroke” instead.

Still resuming on the island, the animals mentioned by Strachey are very similar or identical of what is used by Shakespeare. The animals included the “toade,” “beetell,” “battes,” “sparrowes,” and “owles.” (17-22) Ariel mentions something very similar with the animals: “Where the bee sucks, there suck I; / In a cowslip’s bell I lie; / There I couch when owls do cry. / On the bat’s back I do fly / After summer merrily. / Merrily, merrily shall I live now / Under the blossom that hangs on the bough.” (Shakespeare V.1.88-94) Also, the bird named the “Sea-Meawe” is described in great detail by Strachey, and the same is done by Shakespeare: “I prithee now, lead the way without any more talking. Trinculo, the king and all our company else being drowned, we will inherit here. Here, bear my bottle. Fellow Trinculo, we’ll fill him by and by again.” (Shakespeare II.2. 170-173)

Finally, the conspiracies spread throughout the letter and book can be conjoined with a few scenes and examples. In the letter, the conspirators threaten their lives by questioning the governor’s authority. Similarly, somewhere in the middle of the play, Alonso and Prospero get their lives threatened in a similar way. In the letter, Strachey describes how the conspiracies never worked too well because someone always gave it away. This same idea is present in The Tempest, when Arial says “This I will tell my master.”

Overall, because of these various reasons, I believe that Shakespeare’s work is just a rewritten replication of Strachey’s letter. It’s parasitic nature reduces the originality of the play and makes a reader think if Shakespeare is really as excellent of a writer as rumors say he is.