Relationship Between Food And Art English Language Essay

Relationship Between Food And Art English Language Essay This essay will examine the relationship between food and art by asking if food can be thought as an artwork, and if so, the commonalities it shares with other art pieces. To discuss the feasibility of the aforementioned relationship, this essay will use a particular example, through which different theories will be analysed. However, it is important to put forth this essays hypothesis, which agrees that food can be thought as an art piece, a concept which will be discussed later on. Our example concerns the figure of the Catalan cook Ferran Adrià  , who had the best restaurant in the world, El Bulli, for five years, with the added accolade of three Michelin stars until 2011, when it closed. The reason why this case has been chosen has to do with the fact that Ferran Adrià   has been compared as an artist and his dishes as unique artworks by different experts in gastronomy. FOOD AS AN ARTWORK In order to analyse if this connection is feasible, it is important to discuss the notion of food and its role in the society, an aspect that can be easily linked to the idea of artwork. Different authors have discussed the social function of food in the society. For instance, J. Hegarty(2001) says that one of the principal differences between animals and humans is the fact that we cook our aliments, which causes cultural differences among humans. Moreover, he also argues that cooking is something that humans learn and, therefore, it is not an innate characteristic but an idea that can be related to the dichotomy between nature and culture, discussed by different classic anthropologists, such as Claude Là ©vi-Strauss. Since food is one of the aspects that differentiate humans from animals and the notion that cooking is an acquired skill, it does belong to the culture. This is enough to conclude that food has an impact in the society. However, there are other reasons why, such as tho se discussed by O. Castillo and E. Gonzà ¡lez(2007), who purport that during the process of eating, human beings are also looking for other social elements, as establishing new friendships or partnerships. All these ideas discussed by these scholars can be applied in different societies and in specific social contexts, which will help to understand the importance of food within it. For instance, in the case of the birthday of a family member, all the family will meet up and have a meal together, normally lunch or dinner. In this case, the idea of meeting up to eat is used as an excuse to gather together all the family. This is only a particular social context that can be used to exemplify this connection between food and its role in the society as a process that goes beyond the simple fact of eating. So far it can be seen that food has a function in the society, which is a considerable aspect in order to link it with an artwork. As this module has shown throughout the term is that art pieces have social meaning and they structure a part of the society. One example could be the Bark Paintings, a type of Australian Aboriginal art, which are a re-representation of the landscape. Mainly, these form a representation of the external memory recalling clues of the ancestral intention, which is encoded in the landscape, linking emotional ties with the land and the presence of the ancestors in it. Another example could be the basketry by the Yekuana, which is used to structure the society in a particular way; as Guss says, Basketry therefore becomes a significant indicator in the general growth and competence of an individual, used to chart not only practical knowledge but also status and identity(2006:380). Whit both examples it has been shown how art also has a role in the society influe ncing different aspects of such. In the case of El Bulli, this idea that food goes beyond the simple fact of eating is also represented mainly attributed to two reasons. Firstly it can be thought that because of the high prices (minimum 400à ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬/person) the people that decided to go there expected something more than just the food. Secondly, the fact that the waiting list was minimum two years it is another element that shows that the costumers looked for something else than just food but all the experience that goes with it. Some scholars have argued that food cannot be considered art because of its inherent and basic function: consumption. Before discussing this question, it is important to talk about the concept of aesthetic reactions, which in the words of Hegarty(2001), it is related to the idea of beauty, and specifically in the case of gastronomy: This translates into menu balance and harmony in such areas as colour, temperature, taste and texture which in some cases can be dictated by the aesthetic demands of the raw materials which are used to create a gastronomic work(2001:12) From this quote it can be said that if a specific dish has the characteristics mentioned, then it would be thought as beautiful and therefore as art. This idea of aesthetic reactions is also discussed by Tefler, who says that the aesthetic qualities can be characterised as non-neutral, non-instrumental, having certain intensity and often accompanied by judgements for which the judgers claim a kind of objectivity(2002:11). In other words, for Tefler an object has an aesthetic reaction if it is appreciated for its own characteristics, it can impress the viewer and it is not influenced by a personal criterion. In El Bullis case of study the idea of aesthetic reactions is useful because it is one of the characteristics associated with art. Aside from the different opinions of it, it can be said that the notion of aesthetic reactions is mainly related with the idea of beauty, and also to the different characteristics given by Tefler. Regarding this example, it can be seen that some of the dishes do not look as food at first sight but they can be thought as a portrait or as an artistic photograph  [1]  . Moreover, if the Hegarty point of view is taken into account, the harmony of Ferran Adrià  s dishes can be related to the idea of beauty and then to the concept of aesthetic reactions, which is a key concept for the art pieces. However, some scholars believe that food cannot be thought as art because of its function, such as M.L.Quinet(1981), who has the argument that the function of art is to provide an object for aesthetic contemplations and, on the other hand, the foods function is its consumption, which causes that these two concepts cannot be associated. However, she also states that in some cases food can be considered art as long as it has an aesthetic function and it is not expected to be eaten. This idea is relevant to demonstrate that what makes this discussion so complex is the main function of the food. But even if the purposes between them are different, it does not have to be the only criterion to conclude that food is not art. The Quinets idea is helpful because it introduces a key difference between the arts function, an idea discussed later on. Finally, it is relevant to discuss Teflers idea that not all objects with aesthetic reactions can be considered artwork, because they do not share the characteristics of what constitutes an art piece, a point I will endeavour to explore next. An artwork is by Tefler a man-made thing, even if the human involvement need consist of no more than putting a natural object in a gallery and giving it a title(2002:12). She differentiates between artwork which can be seen in a classificative or evaluative manner. In general terms, an artwork in the classificative sense has to do with how the object is regarded and if it is intended for an aesthetic consideration. On the other hand, an artwork in the evaluative way deals with the idea if the object deserves the merit of being considered as such. This difference in the meaning of an artwork is useful in terms of knowing that the concept of art cannot be thought as a static one with only one meaning. In regard to food this categorisation is also useful, because as Tefler says, food can be thought as art in the classifying way of artwork, since for many cooks and costumers some meals are intended to be considered in an aesthetic consideration, in other words, to be savoured, appraised, thought about, discussed(2002:14). So, the main point of those meals is not to provide nourishment but to have a further experience. This idea of food as an artwork in a classifying sense can be highly related with Ferran Adrià  s work, which requires a lot of thought and analysis before cooking it, and its aim is to provide an unforgettable experience to the customer, which goes beyond the simple fact of eating. In relation to this classification of artworks it is also important to mention the difference between art and craft, which is argued by various scholars. Quinet, who thinks that food cannot be considered art in general terms, concludes that The culinary arts, one might claim, are indeed arts, but only when we use the term art in the sense of mere craft; and this is not the way in which the term is used in aesthetics(1981:159). The difference between art and craft is also analysed by Tefler, who says that it lies in the degree of creativity, so something is considered art if it is an original creation and when the object is a result of carrying out instructions then it is contemplated as craft. The relationship between this classification and food is significant, because depending on the level of creativity in the process of cooking, food could be thought as art or not. Even if in general terms a receipt is being followed when cooking, in the case of El Bulli, the creativity applied i n their dishes is enormous, because there is a long process of analysis behind with the goal to create new imaginative dishes. One example of such could be the dish called Peach paper  [2]  , which is presented as a letter or also the liquid olives  [3]  , which is the result of a complex molecular technique created by Ferran Adrià   named spherification. Hence, the food cooked in El Bulli can be considered an art according to the amount of creativity. In relation to this difference between art and craft it is also advantageous to mention the classification between fine and useful arts, argued by Hegarty. The useful arts are those that are utilitarian, such as the design of a building or furniture. However, fine arts are defined by seeking to relate, to communicate and commune between people in that, the artist assumes an audience when he/she for example, writes a poem or paints a picture(2001:8). Food can be related to this last idea of fine art, as well as theatre, music or dance(Anson,2006), an idea that can also be known as minor art. CONCLUSION This essay has discussed the idea that food can be considered as art by using a specific case of study, El Bulli. Different arguments have been put forth to demonstrate the existence of this connection between art and food, such as its social role in the society as well as other artworks. Concerning the case of study of this essay, it can be said that El Bullis dishes can be related to the idea of artwork. One reason is their aesthetic reactions, meaning that they are associated with the concept of beauty, causing the difficulty to differentiate some of them from portraits. Another reason is because their function goes beyond the idea of nourishment, since they are expected to provide a further experience. Furthermore, they have a high degree of creativity, which makes it possible to correlate them with the idea of art and differentiate them from the notion of craft. appendix http://www.elbulli.com/catalogo/commons/generar_img.php?id=879PoG=G Picture 1.1: Soup of pink grapefruit with tarragon and praline salted with black sesame (2003) http://www.elbulli.com/catalogo/commons/generar_img.php?id=987PoG=G Picture 1.2: Blooming cucumbers in vinegar with mustard seeds and tarragon (2004) http://www.elbulli.com/catalogo/commons/generar_img.php?id=920PoG=G Picture 1.3: 2m of Parmesan spaghetti (2003) http://www.elbulli.com/catalogo/commons/generar_img.php?id=1207PoG=G Picture 1.4: Tree passion fruit (2005) Picture 1.5:http://www.elbulli.com/catalogo/commons/generar_img.php?id=973PoG=G Ties of beet with vinegar powder (2004) http://www.elbulli.com/catalogo/commons/generar_img.php?id=1098PoG=G Picture 1.6: Paper of peach Tramontana (2005) http://www.elbulli.com/catalogo/commons/generar_img.php?id=1095PoG=G Picture 1.7: Spherical green olives- I (2005) Liquid olives http://www.elbulli.com/catalogo/commons/generar_img.php?id=1085PoG=G Picture 1.8: Bicolour wafers of carrot and beet (2004)

To What Extent Was Slavery the Cause of the American Civil War?

In the context of the period 1763-1865, how far was the American Civil War caused by long term divisions over the issue of slavery? In his second inaugural address in March 1865, Abraham Lincoln looked back at the beginning of the Civil War four years earlier â€Å"all knew,† he said, that slavery â€Å"was somehow the cause of the war. † This essay will endeavour to discuss the role of long term divisions caused by the slavery debate in the eventual outbreak of the Civil War.In doing so this analysis will encompass the period between the birth of the nation beginning with the start of the American Revolution in 1763 and the conclusion of the Civil War in 1865. This being a period in which the newly independent nation struggled with its state system, with each of the former colonies possessing the rights to a significant level of self-governance that inevitably led to disagreements and conflicts of interest.One such conflict was the disagreement over slavery which James Ford, like Lincoln, believes was crucial in creating a clear North-South divide that would eventually lead to the Civil War. Whilst recognising slavery’s overwhelming contribution to the outbreak of the American civil war in 1861, one must acknowledge alternative factors beyond slavery, which contributed to the nations descent towards armed conflict. Revisionists such as William Gienapp and William Freehling emphasise the political contribution to the outbreak of the war and the influence of sectional ideology on ante bellum politics.It was this differing ideology that created the tensions between Southern and Northern parties creating political chaos during the 1850s, the North believing they were attempting to save democracy whilst the South campaigned for increased States’ rights, all of which provoked the outbreak of war. As well as the long-term divisions over slavery and the short term political contributions to the outbreak of war, historians such as Charles an d Mary Beard placed emphasis on the fundamental differences between the North and South economic systems, disregarding the moral and political contributions.This analysis will argue that ultimately the issue of slavery was the main reason for the outbreak of war in 1861; however the short term political blunders and failure of the political system created a chaos that made war inevitable. Had the American political system thrived, the divisions over slavery could have been resolved without war being waged. Slavery is the moral dimension that lies at the heart of the historiographical debate. James Ford Rhodes identified slavery as the central and virtually only cause of the war. If the Negro had not been brought to America,† he wrote, â€Å"the Civil War could not have occurred. † Introducing slavery to America created differences of opinion between the North and the South, on the morality of slavery. It was these differences that created tensions between the regions an d ultimately fuelled the outbreak of war in 1861. The Northern climate was not suited to plantation agriculture which resulted in Congress passing an Ordinance in 1787, keeping slavery out of the North West Territory.The Northern belief insisted that the South was ruled by a ruthless ‘Slave Power’ which, conspiratorial in its methods, consisted of slaveholding planters and political leaders who were determined to convert the whole United States in to a nation of masters and slaves. The aggressive attitude of Southerners arising from the decision by Chief Justice Taney in the Dred Scott case of 1857 that all blacks, slave as well as free, were not and could not be citizens of the United States increased rather than allayed Northern suspicions.This conspiracy, as the Northerners believed it to be, was fundamentally an aristocracy founded upon these principles; that slavery was not morally wrong, it is a right possessed by the slaveholder, and that it is constitutional. Ad mitting Missouri as a slave state and introducing the Fugitive Slave Act in the Compromise of 1850, only exacerbated Northern suspicions which is illustrated through what John Rankin believed, â€Å"The Slave Power has already seized upon the General Government, and has overthrown the rights of Free States†¦the struggle between the slave and free institutions is for existence.They are antagonistic principles and cannot exist long together – one or the other must fall. † ‘Slave power’ heightened through media influences such as the non-abolitionist Cincinnati Daily Commercial claiming â€Å"There is such a thing as THE SLAVE POWER† encouraged the Northern populace that action needed to be taken against the South in order to preserve the existence of their personal liberty. On the other hand, many Southerners like historian Ulrich Bonner Phillips, viewed slavery as a hierarchic order thus making it wholesome practice.Phillips recalls setting off to school as a young child and burdened by the prospect that his â€Å"sable companion† was able to play all day long. According to Hugh Tulloch, the Southerners had evolved a unique form of social relations based on slavery; whereby the master’s role was essentially paternal, â€Å"without slavery the black would either lapse into African savagery. † It is this view and that of Edward Channing’s, â€Å"the slaves were often happier than their masters† that appears so distorted in comparison to the Northern interpretation on slavery.It was this that became an important factor in consolidating antislavery sentiment in the North, thus widening the sectional rift between the North and South. â€Å"If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think and feel. † Lincoln’s view on the peculiar institution further heightened the issue as Southern states regarded his election as a threat to their power, and pr ovoked the secession of South Carolina from the Union, shadowed by a further 10 states.Modern fundamentalists such as James McPherson and Eric Foner similarly describe the two sections as â€Å"different and deeply antagonistic societies† agreeing that slavery was the root of that antagonism. The North's commitment to capitalism and modernisation, these scholars explained, was the context for abolitionism and for the free labour ideology of Abraham Lincoln's Republican Party. The South's commitment to agriculture and slave labor was reflected in the region's distinctive cult of honour, its preoccupation with localism and states' rights, and its defense of social inequality.Had African slave trade been declared illegal long before 1808, the million plus slaves that were in the USA in the early 19th century would not have existed, therefore would have had no effect on population influxes which stimulated an industrial and economic change, nor the geographical expansion which ca used the conflict within the different states. Although Rhodes placed his greatest emphasis on the moral conflict over slavery, he suggested that the struggle also reflected fundamental differences between the Northern and Southern economic systems.In the 1920s, the idea of the war as an irrepressible economic rather than moral conflict received fuller expression from Charles and Mary Beard, insisting there were â€Å"inherent antagonisms† between Northern Industrialists and Southern planters. Undoubtedly, the issue of slavery itself would not have created divisions and differences within the nation had someone, or a group of people spoke up and shared their desire to â€Å"fight the gross evil of slavery† thus the influence and the rise of abolitionists need to be taken in to account when assessing the causation of the war.Abolitionists were committed to the doctrine of ‘moral suasion’; the idea that Southern slaveholders could be persuaded that slavery w as morally wrong. Arguably, it was the abolitionist’s actions that publicised and brought slavery in to the political arena and through their anti-slavery postal campaign in 1835, the Democratic administration could not avoid the issue. By building these campaigns, abolitionists turned themselves into an organised movement, urging the national government to debate slavery and heightening the nation’s opinion on the institution.The Fugitive Slave Act in 1850, became one of the most powerful weapons in the hands of the Abolitionist Movement. The Constitution introduced a clause stating that fugitives from slave labour must be sent back to the South if captured in the North. It forced citizens to assist in the recovery of fugitives and denied fugitives who claimed to be freemen the right to a fair jury trial. This caused outrage among the Northern black community who were no longer able to legally prove that they were free. Foner stated the act gave slavery what is called â€Å"extra-territoriality†, thus making slavery a national institution.Even though the Northern States could abolish slavery, they still could not avoid their Constitutional obligation to enforce the slave laws of the Southern States. The Act drew more attention to the inhumanity of slavery and caused increased tension between the North and the South. Northern whites resented having to be forced into hunting slaves against their will by the officials enforcing the Act. It was also significant because it helped to create legendary abolitionists and anti-slavery orators such as Frederick Douglas and Henry Highland Garnet and generated the release of ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin’ in 1852 by Harriet Beecher.Beecher’s book expanded support and contributed to the outbreak of the war by personalising the political and economic arguments of slavery whilst providing depiction of the horrors of slavery. Installments were published weekly from June 1951 in an abolitio nist newspaper. In November 1862, President Lincoln famously said, â€Å"so you are the little woman who wrote the book that started this Great War. † More importantly, the Act allowed Northerners who had always thought slavery was so far away to see it personally for the first time.This display of cruelty convinced more people of the evils of slavery and made them opposed to the Southern institution of slavery and the Act as it had now cemented slavery within the law. This increased support for the abolitionists' cause would infuriate the South and increased sectional tensions. Despite slavery existing in America since the 1600s, economic and social paths taken by the North and the South increasingly began to change towards the 1800s and as a result created significant sectional differences between the states.Southerners did not necessarily go to war to defend slavery, nor did northerners go to war to end it. It is often suggested that we have ignored the well-known facts th at most southerners did not own slaves and that most northerners shared the era’s racist attitudes. After all, only about 25% of southern white families owned slaves and 50% of these owned less than 5 slaves. Consequently, one must consider the basic differences between the economies and the practical issues that divided the sectional leaders.Charles and Mary Beard came to the conclusion that there had existed an â€Å"irrepressible conflict between a static, agrarian South and the expanding, industrialising North. † The Beards insisted that â€Å"inherent antagonisms† between Northern industrialists and Southern planters contributed to the outbreak of war. Massive changes in transport help to explain the agricultural and industrial changes. The development of steamboats revolutionised travel on the great rivers; by 1850 over 700 steamships were operating on the Mississippi and its tributaries and the North were able to boast more than two-thirds of the railroad tracks in the country.Less than one in ten Americans lived in towns in 1820; one in five did so by 1860, but it was this urbanisation that was more prevalent in the North as opposed to the South with the percentage of population living in towns of 2500 or more being 26% in 1859 on Northern states, compared to only 10% in the Southern states. Unlike the South, the North had a growing number of immigrants; between 1830 and 1860 most of the five million immigrants to the USA settled in the North. Slave labour was the foundation of a prosperous economic system in the South.In 1793 the invention of the cotton ‘gin’ revolutionised the region; it is significant to recognise the relationship between the invention of the cotton gin and when cotton became America’s leading crop with the number of slaves in the South. In 1790 America produced 1,500 pounds of cotton. By 1815 production had reached over 100,000 pounds and in 1848, production exceeded an astonishing 1,000,000 pounds. Simultaneously, slavery spread across the Deep South as the cotton engine fuelled slave labour, pushing the North and South’s industrial methods even further apart.By itself, the South's economic investment in slavery could easily explain the willingness of Southerners to risk war when faced with what they viewed as a serious threat to their â€Å"peculiar institution† after the electoral victories of the Republican Party and President Abraham Lincoln in 1860. Economically, the taxes on imported and exported goods contributed greatly to the North- South divide. From the time of the first Congress in 1789 to the outbreak of the Civil War there was dissension between the Northern and the Southern states over the matter of protective tariffs, or import duties on manufactured goods.Northern industries wanted high tariffs in order to protect their factories and labourers from cheaper European products. Demanding that â€Å"American labourers shall be protected aga inst the pauper labour of Europe,† tariff proponents argued that the taxes gave â€Å"employment to thousands of mechanics, artisans and labourers. † The vast majority of American industry was located in the Northern states, whereas the economies of the agricultural Southern states were based on the export of raw materials and the importation of manufactured goods.The South held few manufacturing concerns, and southerners had to pay higher prices for goods in order to subsidise Northern profits. The collected tariffs were used to fund public projects in the North such as improvements to roads, harbours and rivers. From 1789 to 1845, the North received five times the amount of money that was spent on southern projects, â€Å"Sectional legislation, such as subsidies to ship-owners and manufacturers, took money from the pockets of the planters and farmers and transferred it to the pocket of Northern capitalists. This economic policy heightened tensions and exacerbated the sectional disagreements over the best type of government. The stark differences in their economies resulted in supporting either the Democrats or Whigs which brings in to play the revisionist interpretation that political blunders and the breakdown of the system ultimately divided the sections, increasing their hostility to one another. The structure of American politics and the antebellum party realignment provides a way to assess the relationship between the American political system and the origins of the war.Modern revisionists like Stampp attempt to recapture the eventualities of antebellum politics, placing emphasis on the shared values of the North and South and the failure of political leaders to reach compromises which could have averted war. Erin Foner argued the coming of the Civil war constituted the greatest failure of American democracy; â€Å"the intrusion of sectional ideology into the political system brought about the war. The fundamental issues can be traced bac k to the standoff over sovereignty during the American Revolution, and from this founding era the disagreement over how much authority the national government should have on the one hand and how much sovereignty and independence the individual states should retain on the other began. An unworkable arrangement followed, whereby states tried to coordinate a national war effort, a national economy, and a national government without sacrificing their individual sovereignty.However, continental currency became worthless and states became free to do their own thing. Shays' Rebellion in 1786-87, occurred as a protest to rising debt and economic chaos and due to the failure of the national government was unable to gather a combined military force amongst the states to help put down the rebellion. This was a catalyst for the Founding Fathers to scrap the Articles of Confederation and devise a new Constitution. However, the Constitution contained a number of provisions that strengthened the f orces of sectional division within the nation.It was the American political system that was particularly vulnerable to sectional strains and tensions and thus the Civil War was able to occur within a particular political framework. William Gienapp believes it was â€Å"the Constitution’s provision for amendment that significantly contributed to the outbreak of war. † The constitution’s ambiguity on whether Congress could impose conditions on a new state or refuse to admit a new state to the Union became a source of controversy which stimulated the growing conflict between the sections.More important, believed Gienapp, was the ambiguity of whether a state had the right to leave the Union. It was this silence that contributed to the debate over secession as it allowed Southerners to plausibly maintain that secession was a legal right of each state, and thus fuelled Southern extremism. Political blunders from the 1820s widened sectional differences, according to Ga bor Boritt; â€Å"the crystallisation of rival sectional ideologies orientated towards protecting white equality and opportunity. Each section began to see the other as a threat to its vital social, political and economic interests. A view had been produced that one section or the other has to be dominant. The Missouri Compromise, so Rodger Ramson believed, allowed in the long term, â€Å"the right of Congress to pass legislation allowing or prohibiting slavery in the western territories. † However in 1854 the Kansas Nebraska Act nullified the Missouri Compromise and is claimed to be a political miscalculation of massive proportions. Alan Nevins labelled the entire episode as a â€Å"disaster†.The political effects of this Act were enormous, irrevocably splitting the Whig Party. Every northern Whig had opposed the bill; almost every southern Whig voted for it and due to the competition of the Know-Nothing party and their failure to respond to nativist concerns, the pa rty was effectively killed off. With the emotional issue of slavery involved, there was no common ground to be found and Northern Whigs reorganised themselves to become the Republican Party committed to blocking westward expansion of slavery. Animosity between the North and South was again on the rise.The North felt that if the Compromise of 1820 was ignored, the Compromise of 1850 could be ignored as well. The Dred Scott case in 1957 brought the Missouri Compromise in conflict with the Fifth Amendment that upheld that no one be deprived of his or her right to life, liberty, and property. Political historian, Michael Holt notes, â€Å"The issue that drove the deepest wedge between North and South in the two decades before the Civil War was not the institution of slavery itself, but the question of whether slavery should be allowed to expand westwards beyond the boundaries of the slave states. Without the discipline of a strong party system, more outspoken views on slavery and seces sion began to be heard. Holt declares that the breakdown of the party system, no longer operating on economic issues, allowed demagogues to arise who accentuated the differences between North and South. Politicians in both sections â€Å"kept the country in constant turmoil and whipped up popular emotions for the selfish purpose of winning elections† thereby bringing about the Civil War. Lincoln declared before his unanimous nomination, â€Å"A house divided against itself cannot stand.I believe this Government cannot endure permanently, half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved- I don’t expect the house to fall- but I do expect it will cease to be divided. † Despite Holt placing emphasis on the breakdown of the second party system, Stampp focuses on Lincoln’s actions as president, ‘inviting’ by his proposition a war of sections; â€Å"Thus Mr Lincoln invites a war between the free States and the slave States, a war between North and the South, for the purpose of either exterminating slavery in every Southern state, or planting it in every Northern State. The existence of national political parties became increasingly focused on the contest for Presidency. The coming of the war In April 1861 was seen as both sides waging war in an attempt to save democracy as they understood it. For southern secessionists, at stake was the right of self-government and the fundamental right of southern whites to control their own destiny. For the North, the war was a struggle to uphold the democratic principles of law and order and majority rule, as well as preserving the Union, which they believed was inseparably linked to democracy.Boritt noted, â€Å"few northerners failed to appreciate the fundamental irony that they were ready to kill their fellow Americans in order to prove democracy was a workable form of government†. Due to this rivalry of sectional ideologies, each came to think that one section or the other had to be dominant. Residents of each section feared the other, and before the physical fighting the sectional conflict represented a struggle for control of the nation’s future. On December 20, 1860, in response to Lincoln's victory, South Carolina seceded from the Union.By the time of his inauguration on March 4, 1861, six more states had also seceded and formed the Confederate States of America. Ramson states, â€Å"the attempt by the southern states to create a Confederacy separate from the American Union failed because the slave society of the South was unable to sustain an effort in the face of a determined foe. The promise of eliminating slavery eventually provided a unifying force behind the North’s efforts to hold the union together. † In conjunction with the fight for democracy, revisionists like Holt, Gienapp and William W.Freehling have focused on those political debates within each section that do not fit into the a direct narrative of the slavery controversy. Political historians have shown Northern voters were preoccupied with and motivated by issues such as nativism; slavery was not their overriding concern and did not explain their voting behaviour. The Southern electorate, too, was deeply divided on the basis of class, economic setting, and sub-region. The differences between the Upper South and the Deep South in particular make it dangerous to generalise broadly about the â€Å"fundamental† nature of Southern Society.When historians assert that slavery caused the Civil War, most are saying that only the presence of the â€Å"peculiar institution† made it impossible to resolve peacefully the constitutional, political, and economic issues that had long animated sectional tensions. Conversely, Historians like Jefferson Davis have been keen to refute the argument that the war was caused by the long term divisions of slavery and support the political argument that it was the Republican Party that e ngineered the war by furthering Northern political and economic aggrandisement against the South.As soon as the question of slavery expansion in to western territories entered the political agenda, voters were unwilling to drop the issue without protest but when waging war, the North and the South were fighting for what they believed to be a democracy and were motivated by nativism to defeat the opposition; which posed threat and disunion to their democracy. To conclude, the divisions over slavery in America ultimately contributed to the outbreak of war in 1861. This long term factor influenced the economic and social paths taken by both Northern and Southern States during the 1800s and as a result widened sectional differences.This greatly impacted the American political system resulting in the breakdown of the two-party system through blunders made by politicians in the 1850s in an attempt to win elections and save their democracy. This breakdown heightened tensions between the tw o sections and was exacerbated by the increasing influence of the abolitionist movement from 1830s onwards. It would be a limited assumption to deem the breakout of the Civil War purely on the divisions of slavery, as many fought in an attempt to save their own democracy.However, had slavery never been introduced in to American civilization the nation would never have been divided over the institution, the economic paths taken by both North and South wouldn’t have been so diverse, thus eliminating political differences and an abolitionist movement would never have been formed. ——————————————– [ 1 ]. Hugh Tulloch, ‘The debate on the American Civil War era’, p. 110. [ 2 ]. James Ford Rhodes, ‘History of the United States from the Compromise of 1850’, p. [ 3 ].Kenneth M. Stampp, ‘The Causes of the Civil War’, p. 21. [ 4 ]. Ibid. , p. 23. [ 5 ]. Hugh Tulloch, ‘The debate on the American Civil War Era’, p. 37. [ 6 ]. Ibid. ,p. 35 [ 7 ]. Ibid. , p. 38 [ 8 ]. Ibid. , p. 37 [ 9 ]. Eric Foner, ‘Politics and Ideology in the age of the Civil War’, p. 35. [ 10 ]. Charles and Mary Beard, ‘The rise of American Civilization’, p. [ 11 ]. Hugh Tulloch, ‘The debate on the American Civil War Era’, p. [ 12 ]. Eric Foner, ‘Politics and Ideology in the age of the Civil War’, p. 61. [ 13 ].Kenneth M. Stampp, ‘The causes of the Civil War’ p 93 [ 14 ]. Ibid. , p. 86. [ 15 ]. Eric Foner, ‘ [ 17 ]. Gabor S. Boritt, ‘Why the Civil War Came’, p. [ 18 ]. Roger L. Ransom, ‘Conflict and Compromise: The Political Economy of Slavery, Emancipation, and the American Civil War’, p. [ 19 ]. Michael F. Holt, Political Parties and American Political Development from the Age of Jackson to the Age of Lincoln (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State Univers ity Press, 1992), p. 4. [ 20 ]. Kenneth Stampp, ‘The causes of the Civil War’ p

The Scarlet Letter The Objectification, Ostracization,...

The Scarlet Letter: The Objectification, Ostracization, and Targeting of Women. Kevin Sachtleben Harris- Period 3 â€Å"From the intense consciousness of being the object of severe and universal observation, the wearer of the scarlet letter was at length relieved, by discerning on the outskirts of the crowd a figure which irresistibly took possession of her thoughts.†(Hawthorne, 52). This quote from the top of page fifty two surrounds the most controversial event in the book from when Hester was publicly shamed and humiliated because of her crime of adultery. In concurrence with this event, Hawthorne embodies the three most prevalent anti-feministic ideas from the book: objectification, ostracization, and targeting of women in 17th century Puritan society. Even though the shaming of Hester had just begun and the trial had just been concluded, the town was already beginning to push her away and view her not as Hester Prynne, but as the â€Å"A† for adultery. When I read this, I began to feel astonished at the fact that people would begin to judge her so quickly while having such lit tle knowledge of the event for which Hester was in trouble. Not only was Hester ostracized for a crime that we now know as a relatively conventional event, to make matters worse, everyone in the crowd scapegoated solely her which was uncanny to me since with the crime of adultery, there must be another person involved, specifically a man. This made me think about why nobody had done anything to

Amount Of The Capital Raised Finance Essay - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 8 Words: 2532 Downloads: 2 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Finance Essay Type Research paper Did you like this example? Amount of Capital Raised On May 18th, 2012 Facebook had its initial public offering. The company offered 421,233,615 shares priced at $38.00. This enabled Facebook to raise about $16 billion on the first day of IPO. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Amount Of The Capital Raised Finance Essay" essay for you Create order The company was valued at about $104 billion at its listing. The approximately $16 billion capital raised was split in the following manner: $176 million was paid for underwriting discounts and commissions $6.764 million proceeded to Facebook $9.066 million proceeded to selling shareholders Thus, the company received only 37% of the cash raised overall, while the rest of the money went to the underwriters and to the selling shareholders. Initially it was planned to offer only 337 million shares priced at $31.50 which would value the company at about $85 billion, however due to high market demand the amount of shares and the price was increased 2 days before the IPO. Cost of the IPO Facebooks IPO has been grossly overpriced. During the first day of IPO the stock market closed with only 0.6% rise in stock price. In subsequent days the price fell dramatically and the price at 1st November 12 is $21.21 an underperformance of 56%. Facebook paid 176 million to underwriters which is merely 1.1% of total 16 billion of the revenue Facebook raised during the IPO. However, taking into account the Facebooks direct cash raising of from the IPO was 6 billion, the underwriters fee raises to 2.6% of Facebooks proceeds. This is quite low as compared to 3.6% median fee on the 10 largest U.S. initial offerings in history before this one. With larger IPOs, banks are often willing to take a small percentage fee and can use high-profile offerings to help land more IPO mandates later on.  [1] Worth noting that as Facebooks price was going down, Facebooks CEO Mark Zuckerberg sold 30.2 million shares earning $1.13 billion and was followed by Facebook director Peter Thiel who sold 16.8 million shares for $633 million. View on IPO pricing Valuation plays a big role in judging the price of an IPO. Revenues are a very important consideration Facebook earns most of its revenue through advertising which can be very uncertain in the future because as this revenue stream is historically volatile. Facebook will need to find additional revenue streams that is less volatile, if it is justify such a high valuation. In the first quarter of 2012, Facebooks revenue had increased, but Net Income went down. Revenue was $1,058 billion, up 45% year over year from $731 billion though Net Income decreased from $233 million to $203 million. Despite these facts, the company and underwriters went ahead with the listing of the company. Over this same period, Facebook had generated high anticipation and demand for its stock. This high demand influenced the elevated IPO price of $38/share driving the IPO valuation of Facebook to $104 billion. Facebooks IPO valuation was at the same market capitalization levels as McDonalds, Amazon and B ank of America (as the AP report indicates).The graph below shows Facebooks valuation in comparison to other large internet IPOs. + Name Date Deal Size (M USD) Valuation (M USD) # of shares (mill.) Offer price (USD) Facebook 18-May-12 $15,998 104000 421.2 $38.00 Google 18-Aug-04 1,666 23,000 18.6 $85.00 Alibaba 6-Nov-07 1,500 7,800 858.9 $1.74 Yandex 23-May-11 1,304 8,400 52.2 $25.00 Shanda Games 24-Sep-09 1044 3,300 83.5 $12.50 Some may argue that Facebook was correctly valued considering Facebooks large user base of over 901million. Facebook is considered the largest internet IPO. And to further analyze the IPO pricing, a comparison between Facebook and Googles IPO is appropriate. Both Facebook and Google have transformed the way internet is used. Advertisers need both platforms to reach their customers. Both companies also experienced a declining growth rate of revenues prior to their IPO. However, unlike Google, investors are worried about the effectiveness of advertising as a sustainable revenue source. Facebook receives approximately 85% of revenue through advertising and 15% through subscript ions (Forbes). Facebook is increasing its presence on the mobile platform, but this is decreasing the scope of reach for advertisers. This example shows that Google is providing more sustainability for investors whilst Facebook has yet to find a solid revenue generation strategy which implies that Facebook IPO, in principle, is overvalued as the largest internet IPO. Conclusively, the IPO pricing can be judged as being too high. IPO Underwriters and their role Morgan Stanley Co LLC was acting as the lead representative underwriter. Based on Facebooks prospectus, the list of underwriters is as follows: Name Number of shares Morgan Stanley Co. LLC 162,174,942 J.P. Morgan Securities LLC 84,878,573 Goldman, Sachs Co. 63,185,042 Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith Incorporated 27,380,185 Barclays Capital Inc. 27,380,185 Allen Company LLC 8,424,672 Citigroup Global Markets Inc. 9,477,755 Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC 9,477,755 Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. 9,477,755 RBC Capital Markets, LLC 4,212,336 Wells Fargo Securities, LLC 4,212,336 Blaylock Robert Van LLC 673,974 BMO Capital Markets Corp. 421,234 C.L. King Associates, Inc. 631,850 Cabrera Capital Markets, LLC 421,234 CastleOak Securities, L.P. 673,974 Cowen and Company, LLC. 421,234 E*TRADE Securities LLC 210,617 Itaà º BBA USA Securities, Inc. 210,617 Lazard Capital Markets LLC 421,234 Lebenthal Co., LLC 673,974 Loop Capital Markets LLC 673,974 M.R. Beal Company 673,974 Macquarie Capital (USA) Inc. 421,234 Muriel Siebert Co., Inc. 673,974 Oppenheimer Co. Inc. 421,234 Pacific Crest Securities LLC 421,234 Piper Jaffray Co. 421,234 Raymond James Associates, Inc. 421,234 Samuel A. Ramirez Company, Inc. 631,850 Stifel, Nicolaus Company, Incorporated 421,234 The Williams Capital Group, L.P. 589,727 William Blair Company, L.L.C. 421,234 Total: 421,233,615 The underwriter is the organization that is responsible for pricing, selling, and organizing the issue, and it may provide additional services. With direct public offerings, there is no need for an underwriter. Underwriter will assist in the preparation and submission of appropriate SEC filings, helping potential investors make informed decisions about an offering. All underwriters are required to exercise due diligence in verifying the information they submit. In addition to SEC filings, underwriters will create a preliminary prospectus that will become a major part of the issues marketing campaign. Facebooks underwritersrole was to purchase Class A common stock and sell them to the public at the offer price of $38 per share in addition to other official underwriting responsibilities. The underwriting agreement stipulated that underwriters were to pay for Class A common stock offered by the prospectus. They were to also adhere to certain legal matters with regards to purchasing the stock. On the first day of trade, NASDAQ experienced technical errors that led to delays and errors in Facebook trade. The underwriters prevented a potential tragedy by scooping up shares of the company during the NASDAQ situation. This propped up the stock, keeping it above the $38 offering price through most of the day.  [2] The practice is standard during IPOs, especially high-profile ones like Facebook. The big banks buy into a wave of selling as a way to prevent their customers from suffering big losses. The group of underwriters led by Morgan Stanley helped prop up shares after NASDAQ experienced technical problems processing trades. Underwriters have conflicting objectives on the day of the IPO when the stock price appears at risk of falling below the issuing price. Their obligation to the firm and their reputation, pushes them to support the stock, especially around the IPO price. The Aftermath 5.1. Losing Investors confidence and investment Underwriters: Morgan Stanley (MS) and other underwriters have put their reputation at risk, given the price of Facebook fell below expectations.. One of potential consequences is the loss of their best customers. The underwriters having over-estimated the market demand, are now perceived as being too greedy to issue excessive volume of stock and maximizing the price for their own benefit. A loss of reputation and the loss of via an over-estimated price transferred to the disappointed investors could result in many quitting the market. Facebook: Due to the reputational damage incurred, Facebook and its underwriters may lose their clientelle thus reducing their will to continue investing. Furthermore, during Facebook opening day, the NASDAQ exchange trading system failed, and it was delayed for half an hour before they start trading and with many of the orders either not being able to be changed or performed. This further intensified the fear and uncertainty of investors due to over-pricing. 5.2. Future secondary offering difficulty Facebooks reputation has been damaged due to the sloppy process of issuing IPO and the underwriters maximizing the IPO price. The rapid decline of the stock price after the release IPO is a direct result and true price indicators. This will make investors in subsequent stock offering more vary and cautious. 5.3. Lawsuit due to misleading information Facebook and its lead underwriters Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., JPMorgan Chase Co. and other underwriters are being sued by investors and various other stakeholders because of the misleading information in the purchase of Facebook IPO. The shareholders claimed that Facebook and its major underwriters concealed a severe and pronounced reduction in revenue growth forecasts due to the expansion of mobile devices users rather than personal computers. Though Facebook has not published their advertisement revenue split by users who log on through mobile devices, this effect was forecasted to reduce advertising revenues. According to the complaint Facebook told its bank underwriters to materially lower  [3]  its forecasts for the company based on this. The lawsuit also accused that Underwriters reduced the estimation of Facebook revenues forecast for the second quarter and whole financial year of 2012, but they did not inform public investors before the IPO. Addit ionally, the underwriters reduced their earnings estimates dramatically during the roadshows and but were told to disclose this to a select group of investors only, not all prospective investors. Explanation of first day trading The overvaluation is the one considered more important. We can say that Facebooks valuation was credible because of the companys great reach, but, no one knows how Facebook will be able to monetize that reach. As an example, Google, at that time, had an attractive standard price-earnings ratio around 15 to 20  [4]  . That was where Facebook supposed to be in terms of price to earning as a comparable. Among the factors driving the increased price initially, was that there were many investors interested in Facebook, especially among individual investors. According to Mona DeFrawi, chief executive of Equidity, an IPO consultancy. Many people didnt buy Facebook because its an investment, but because they feel like they want to own a piece of history  [5]  . Also, the demand surpassed most analysts expectations in spite of growing criticism of the social networks mobile strategy and advertising business. To make one example, General Motors was removed from Facebooks paid advertising platform. The companys $104 billion valuation c ould not be supported by financial fundamentals and hence doubts were raised over whether the company will develop enough new and effective advertising tools or other revenue streams to match investor expectations. In order to succeed Facebook not only has to have an optimistic valuation, they really need a great performance so as to avoid the stock price declining due to these expectations. Other reasons to conclude this: Other Social Media Failures on Wall Street. In Wall Street the trend is very important and considering that 19 social media IPOs debuted last year, we should at least see how they performed. No less than 82.4% of last years social media IPOs are now trading below their opening day prices. And 57.9% (or 11 out of the 19) are trading below their offering prices. Two of the most notable flops were Zynga (Nasdaq: ZNGA) and Groupon (Nasdaq: GRPN). Zynga is the worlds leading social game developer with 227 million average monthly active users in 175 countries. Its behind the popular social games like CityVille, FarmVille, Mafia Wars and Words with Friends. Zynga began trading on NASDAQ December 16, 2011. It priced its shares on December 15 at $10 per share. The stock bombed in its first trading day, closing down 5%. Zyngas stock jumped on February 3, 2012 trading at $13.39 per share, climbing 26% in the two days following Facebooks IPO filing on February 1, 2012. Zynga is highly dependent on Facebook, as thats where th e majority of its games are distributed, and the companies have had a close relationship for years. Facebook reported that 12% of its revenue comes from Zynga and hence could have been seen as a proxy for Facebooks performance. As for the latter (Groupon), it zoomed 55.7% higher on the first day of trading. Within weeks, though, the stock collapsed to trade below its IPO price of $20 per share. Groupon recorded a $389 million loss in 2010 and $102 million in the first quarter of this year. This trend will continue as Groupon has reported that expenses will increase substantially in the foreseeable future. The reasons to avoid Facebooks IPO extend beyond Wall Streets poor reception for social media stocks as a group. Slowing Growth Kills Stock Prices When it comes to investing in IPOs, investors think in the future of the company. And if the company cant keep growing, their investment is doomed. In about four years time, Facebooks user base went from 66 million to 800 million. If Facebook grows at the same rate over the next four years, its user base would hit 9.7 billion. Realistically, Facebook should top one billion users this year, which is a growth rate of about 25%, year-over-year. In other words, the growth is already waning. And slower growth doesnt translate into higher stock valuations. Especially since Facebook is already overpriced. Profits Matter on Wall Street Facebook Founder and CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, contends he focuses on products over dollars. As he said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, The thing to take away isnt that we dont care [about business]. People for years were asking me why arent we trying to make more money. I would say Im trying to build a business for the long termÃÆ' ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¦Ã‚  [6] Not focusing on profits is fine and even more when youre a private company. Not so much when youre a public company. Wall Street obsesses over profits. As a result, share prices ultimately follow earnings. Even if Zuckerberg immediately finds this out, Facebooks IPO is still grossly overvalued. Consider: Internet giant, Google (Nasdaq: GOOG), trades at a market cap of about $200 billion and generates about $9.6 billion in profits. That means for Facebook to support its $100 billion valuation it would need to generate about $5.3 billion in profits. To profit from it will require buying high and se lling higher. Comparisons to previous large internet IPOs Facebook close after its first day of public trading with a rise of 0.6%. According to a number of reports a number of underwriters sold out on the first day and also a number of investment banks also supported the stock to ensure that it remained steady at the end of the days trading. Some individual investors may have brought into the hype around the stock price or not wanted to miss out on first day IPO gains experience recently by LinkedIn. The performance since the IPO has been substantially down despite a recent rally, closed at $27.XX on 30th November 2012. At around 70% of the issue price this has left IPO and early public stock investors with a large percentage paper loss. Some analysts before the listing made comparisons to the largest rival social network, LinkedIn which has increase over 130% since listing; in fact no major stock analyst forecast a decline in the stock price raising moral hazard issues given the number of underwriters involved  [7]  . Interes tingly Facebook has rallied over the last month and Facebook met quarterly earnings per estimates at 6 cents. Concensus price expectation is $29 ( at 30th November 2012)  [8]  above its current close of $27.32 and the preference is for a Strong Buy.