The U.N’s attempt at peace in Bosnia Essay Example for Free

The U.N’s attempt at peace in Bosnia Essay In this essay the question that I am going to answer is â€Å"Was the United Nations effective in its activities in the Bosnian War?† I am going to show that the U.N was not effective in the activities regarding Bosnia Herzegovina by first providing background on the cause of the war. I will then talk about the U.N’s beginning mandate and the formation of UNPROFOR and how they have attempted to aid Bosnia. That will transition into different perspectives on the U. N’s effectiveness in this world. I will end my paper with the resolution for the Bosnian war and finally conclude with a summary of the essay. Yugoslavia was once a country that bordered Austria, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece and Albania. In the 1990’s there were a lot of disputes with Yugoslavia from the U.S and Germany. The U.S wanted Yugoslavia to break up because they â€Å"were interested in the more recently established states† (Mahiras) because they controlled key routes through the Balkan Mountains. Germany was interested because as territory of its â€Å"vital interest† Slovenia and Croatia.† In order to obtain this goal the U.S decided to give Yugoslavia and ultimatum that was backed by Germany, and other countries that the U.S â€Å"influenced†, the ultimatum was that â€Å"If Yugoslavia did not announce multi-party elections, it would face economic isolation.† This was the ultimate cause of Yugoslavia’s dismemberment into six different republics which included Serbia, Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina. The individual states turned countries sovereignty would be put to the test in the Bosnian war. In each separate republic of what was formerly known as Yugoslavia they had a majority ethnic group. This, however, was not the case of Bosnia, Bosnia in 1991 â€Å"Muslims comprised 44% of the population, Serbs 31%, and Croats 18% with the remainder mixed.† (GOA pg 1)When Bosnia achieved independence there was a civil conflict between the Bosnian Government and the Bosnian Serbs. In order to try and keep the peace the UNPROFOR was first established (UNPROFOR stood for United Nations Protection Force) and they later created a mandate that was extended to Bosnia. Their original mandate was as follows, â€Å"UNPROFORs mandate was to ensure that the three United Nations Protected Areas (UNPAs) in Croatia were demilitarized and that all persons residing in them were protected from fear of armed attack†. (Department of Public Information) The mandate was then extended â€Å"In June 1992, as the conflict intensified and extended to Bosnia and Herzegovina, UNPROFORs mandate and strength were enlarged in order to ensure the security and functioning of the airport at Sarajevo, and the delivery of humanitarian assistance to that city and its environs.† There were also hidden dilemmas in the U.N. People were beginning to question whether they were keeping the peace, or forcing the peace unto others. Author Ivo Daalder brought up a controversial point when saying, â€Å"U.N. Protection Force in Bosnia confronted a fateful dilemma. UNPROFOR could actively oppose the Bosnian Serb effort and side with the Muslim victims of the war. But this would entail sacrificing the evenhandedness that is the hallmark of U.N. peacekeeping. Alternatively, UNPROFOR could preserve its much-vaunted neutrality and limit its role to protecting humanitarian relief supplies and agencies. But this would effectively leave the Muslims to face the Bosnian Serb assault virtually unprotected.† (Daalder). After the war the U.N is criticized with not having allocated enough time and effort into the Bosnian War. They did not help out enough until the very end and in some regards are held accountable for the Mass Genocide that occurred on their watch. This is what happened with the case in Rwanda. They did not offer aid or assistance until the very end and because of that countless people die. Back on topic, the UNPROFOR was fighting to keep Sarajevo open. They tried to keep Sarajevo open in order to deliver much needed aid however much of the aid did not reach them. It was later recorded that only about 50% of the total aid reached the areas that were most affected. The reasoning behind this was that the continued fighting prohibited the cargo from reaching certain places. In an US Secretary-General Report â€Å"one UNHCR convoy on its way from Zagreb to Sarajevo had to pass some 90 roadblocks, many of them manned by undisciplined and drunken soldiers of no clear political affiliation† (US Secretary General). In addition to the Mandate the U/N also enforced a â€Å"No Fly Zone†. This meant that they banned all military flights in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The U.N also established â€Å"safe areas† around Bosnian and the city of Sarajevo where an airport they were using was located. The public as well as the people in the safe areas expected UNPROFOR troops to protect them, ensure the delivery of humanitarian aid, and, possibly, get them out of these places. However, none of this could be easily delivered. This was because Humanitarian convoys were often halted on the way, usually prior to some military intervention of the Bosnian Serb army. The Bosnian Serbian Army would halt aid because it was going toward the Muslim communities that they were fighting. The UNPROFOR troops did not have sufficient enough numbers or weapons to protect themselves against the Serbian Army. Word was being spread around the world about the war in Bosnia. The media would â€Å"include footage from World War II concentration camps to draw parallels between the past slaughter of Jews and the current slaughter of Muslims by European Christians.† (Hedge). The Serbians were sweeping across Bosnia raiding in destroying predominately Muslim communities. They were better armed, allowing them to slaughter the Muslims who had barely any weaponry. They would leave death and destruction in their wake. When they would go into the villages they would commit as they called it â€Å"Ethnic cleansing† and mass rape. It would later be discovered that most of the people who committed these heinous crimes were mostly from the Bosnian Serbian community. Due to these crimes the United Nations Security Council created Resolution 808 which read an international tribunal shall be established for the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991. As of 2011 they had finally caught the last fugitive to be indicted for his war crimes â€Å"The Yugoslav war crimes tribunal crowned 18 years of operations on Wednesday with the capture of the last of 161 suspects from the wars of the 1990s† (Traynor). Culture played a huge card in this war. â€Å"a cultural dimension, marked by the intentional destruction of historical monuments and cultural artifacts — it has been estimated that by the end of 1992 up to 70 percent of the architectural inheritance of Bosnia-Herzegovina had been damaged or destroyed, including over 300 mosques, 150 Orthodox churches, and 50 Catholic churches†.(Vreme) As the Serbians were going through villages they were destroying any religion affiliated with the enemy. They only wanted things left standing that were important to them. â€Å"Many of these atrocities had an explicitly anti-Muslim character, and were justified as acts of historical revenge directed against the Ottoman legacy, â€Å"the continuation in an extreme form of a process of de-Islamization that had begun decades earlier.†(Mazower)† (Nation) Around this same time there was a treaty that would negotiate peace plans in Bosnia. It called for a multiethnic Bosnia. This plan was presented to the Bosnian Serbian Army. They went on to reject the initial plan and the continued fighting. Due to this turn of events NATO was on reserve to initiate and air strike in accordance the U.N. In 1994 Nato began its first air strikes killing 64 people and injuring plenty other. They became more involves with some of their jets were gunned down. Things starting looking bleak and the war continued through most of 1995. After this time the Clinton Administration decided to take action. This is how the war ultimately got decided. The Clinton Administration created a solution with the help of Madeleine Albrigh who went on to say that the UNPROFO hindered rather than help peace agreements in Bosnia. Instead she along with her follow people helped find a new solution, â€Å"The outlines of such a solution, which was based on the Contact Group plan of 1994, included: recognition of Bosnias sovereignty and territorial integrity within its existing borders; division of Bosnia into two entities—a Bosnian Serb entity and a Muslim-Croat federation; entity borders would be drawn in a compact and defensible manner, with the federation territory accounting for at least 51 percent of the total; and acceptance of special parallel relationships between the entities and neighboring states including the possibility of conducting a future referendum on the possibility of secession† (Daalder). The war end ed with the Dayton Peace Agreement signed on 21 November 1995. The final version was signed on 14 December 1995 in Paris. In conclusion, the U.N was ineffective in its efforts to stop the Bosnian War. They tried to send supplied but the cargo did not reach its destination half of the time. The troops were not armed well enough to put up a fight against the Serbians. Countless people died because they refused to take the drastic measures necessary to stop the War before it escalated. The U.S had to intervene and with them came the plan that ultimately ended the war peacefully. After the war the TCPY arrested and charged 161 people with War crimes that violated Resolution 808. I will conclude with saying that the U.N was not effective in its activities in the Bosnian War. Bibliography. Department of Public Information, United Nations. UNPROFOR. Welcome to the United Nations: Its Your World. http://www.un.org/Depts/DPKO/Missions/unprof_p.htm (accessed November 20, 2012). Daalder, Ivo. Decision to Intervene: How the War in Bosnia Ended | Brookings Institution. Brookings Quality. Independence. Impact.. http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/1998/12/balkans-daalder (accessed November 20, 2012). HEDGES, CHRIS. Muslims From Afar Joining Holy War in Bosnia New York Times. The New York Times Breaking News, World News Multimedia. http://www.nytimes.com/1992/12/05/world/muslims-from-afar-joining-holy-war-in-bosnia.html (accessed November 20, 2012). Mahairas, Evangelos. The Breakup of Yugoslavia . IACenter.org. http://www.iacenter.org/folder02/hidden_em.htm (accessed November 20, 2012). Nation, R.Craig. WAR IN THE BALKANS, 1991-2002. WAR IN THE BALKANS, 1991-2002. www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/00117.pdf (accessed November 20, 2012). THE SECRETARY-GENERAL PURSUANT TO SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION. Security Council . Security Council . daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N92/202/18/PDF/N9220218.pdf?OpenElement (accessed November 20, 2012). The Role of UN During and After the War in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Role of UN During and After the War in Bosnia-Herzegovina. www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=1ved=0CDMQFjAAurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ceeisaconf.ut.ee%2Forb.aw%2Fclass%3Dfile%2Faction%3Dpreview%2Fid%3D166445%2Fgoga.docei=zKSrUM6NE_K40AHHvoDQDwusg=AFQjCNHsaKAUo7bXMPbP_Hie99RnTfYLXwsig2=tCOCOkY0Y (accessed November 20, 2012). Traynor, Ian. Goran Hadzic capture a milestone for Yugoslav war crimes tribunal | World news | The Guardian . Latest US news, world news, sport and comment from the Guardian | guardiannews.com | The Guardian . http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/20/goran-hadzic-capture-war-crimes-milestone (accessed November 20, 2012). United States General Accounting Office . Effectiveness of U.N, operations in Bosnia. Humanitarian Intervention. www.gao.gov/assets/80/78825.pdf (accessed November 20, 2012).

Canterbury Tales: The Knight :: Geoffrey Chaucer Canterbury Tales Essays

Canterbury Tales: The Knight In his prologue, Geoffrey Chaucer introduces all of the characters who are involved in this fictional journey and who will tell the tales. One of the more interesting of the characters included in this introductory section is the Knight. Chaucer initially refers to the Knight as "a most distinguished man" and, indeed, his sketch of the Knight is highly complimentary. In this essay, I will contrast Chaucer's ideal Knight with its modern equivalent. The Knight, Chaucer tells us, possessed good horses, "but he was not gaily dressed". Indeed, the Knight is dressed in a common shirt "much stained" by where his armor had left its mark. In other words, Chaucer is telling us that the Knight has just arrived home from service and is in such a hurry to go on his pilgrimage that he has not even paused before embarking on it to change his clothes. Additionally, the Knight has led a very busy life as his fighting career has taken him to a great many places. He has seen military service in Egypt, Lithuania, Prussia, Russia, Spain, North Africa, and Asia Minor where he always "won the highest honor". Amazingly, even though he has had a very successful and busy career, he remains an extremely humble man: indeed, Chaucer maintains that he is meek "as a maiden". Moreover, Chaucer claims the Knight has never said a rude remark to anyone in his entire life. Clearly, the Knight possesses an outstanding character, and Chaucer gives to the Knight perhaps one of the most flattering descriptions in the General Prologue than any other character. His Knight can do no wrong: he is an outstanding warrior who has fought for the 'true faith' (according to Chaucer) on three continents. In the midst of all this, however, Chaucer's Knight remains modest and polite. Thus we see him as the embodiment of the traditional chivalric code: bold and fearless on the battlefield, devout and courteous off it. Apart from the moral message contained in the story, perhaps this tale of Chaucer's is of even further interest to modern-day readers. In our twentieth-century America, we would like to think that we simply don't have enough people in our society who we can liken to Chaucer's Knight. Perhaps we are under the impression that our modern society does not breed such virtuous people as existed in Chaucer's time. We remember that Chaucer's work represented one of the few sources of literature available to the people of England in the latter half of the fourteenth century; The Canturbury Tales was indeed a precursory form of mass Canterbury Tales: The Knight :: Geoffrey Chaucer Canterbury Tales Essays Canterbury Tales: The Knight In his prologue, Geoffrey Chaucer introduces all of the characters who are involved in this fictional journey and who will tell the tales. One of the more interesting of the characters included in this introductory section is the Knight. Chaucer initially refers to the Knight as "a most distinguished man" and, indeed, his sketch of the Knight is highly complimentary. In this essay, I will contrast Chaucer's ideal Knight with its modern equivalent. The Knight, Chaucer tells us, possessed good horses, "but he was not gaily dressed". Indeed, the Knight is dressed in a common shirt "much stained" by where his armor had left its mark. In other words, Chaucer is telling us that the Knight has just arrived home from service and is in such a hurry to go on his pilgrimage that he has not even paused before embarking on it to change his clothes. Additionally, the Knight has led a very busy life as his fighting career has taken him to a great many places. He has seen military service in Egypt, Lithuania, Prussia, Russia, Spain, North Africa, and Asia Minor where he always "won the highest honor". Amazingly, even though he has had a very successful and busy career, he remains an extremely humble man: indeed, Chaucer maintains that he is meek "as a maiden". Moreover, Chaucer claims the Knight has never said a rude remark to anyone in his entire life. Clearly, the Knight possesses an outstanding character, and Chaucer gives to the Knight perhaps one of the most flattering descriptions in the General Prologue than any other character. His Knight can do no wrong: he is an outstanding warrior who has fought for the 'true faith' (according to Chaucer) on three continents. In the midst of all this, however, Chaucer's Knight remains modest and polite. Thus we see him as the embodiment of the traditional chivalric code: bold and fearless on the battlefield, devout and courteous off it. Apart from the moral message contained in the story, perhaps this tale of Chaucer's is of even further interest to modern-day readers. In our twentieth-century America, we would like to think that we simply don't have enough people in our society who we can liken to Chaucer's Knight. Perhaps we are under the impression that our modern society does not breed such virtuous people as existed in Chaucer's time. We remember that Chaucer's work represented one of the few sources of literature available to the people of England in the latter half of the fourteenth century; The Canturbury Tales was indeed a precursory form of mass

Should Poetry Be Banished from Human Life

The main aim of this paper is to decide whether we should banish poetry from the human world or not. In order to reach this decision we first have to get back to some of the legendary figures in literary criticism of all time such as Plato, Aristotle and Philip Sydney and see for our selves how they treated this issue and answered some important questions concerning literature. Literary Criticism is the branch of study concerned with defining, classifying and evaluating works of literature. It began almost simultaneously with creation. However, it was only with Plato that criticism became a vital force in the ancient world. Plato was born probably in 427 B. C. He was the first conscious literary critic who has put his ideas in a systematic way in his dialogues. In his Ion and Republic (precisely book X), he expressed his condemnation of poetry. Ironically, admirers of Plato are usually lovers of literary art. It is so because Plato wrote dramatic dialogues rather than didactic volumes and did so with rare literary skill. You would expect such a philosopher to place a high value on literary art, but Plato actually attacked it. He argued that it should be banned from the ideal society that he described in the Republic. Plato objected to poetry on three grounds: Educational, Philosophical and moral point of view. Plato’s objection to Poetry from the point of view of Education is emphasized when he condemns poetry as fostering evil habits and vices in children in â€Å"The Republic† Book II. Homer’s epics were part of studies. Heroes of epics were not examples of sound or ideal morality. They were lusty, cunning, and hungry for war. Even Gods were no better. This is clear in Plato’s Ion: If we mean our future guardians to regard the habit of quarrelling among themselves as of all things the basest, no word should be said to them of the wars in heaven, or of the plots and fighting of the gods against one another, for they are not true (11). Thus he objected on the ground that poetry does not cultivate good habits among children. Plato accuses poetry of telling lies to children. However, he has no objection to children being told untrue stories if they are edifying stories. He wanted to tell children that there never has been quarrelling between citizens. He says in The republic: If they would only believe us we would tell them that quarrelling is unholy, and that never up to this time has there been any quarrelling between citizens: this is what old men and old women should begin by telling children; and when they grow up, the poets also should be told to compose or them in a similar spirit. (11) Plato’s objections against poetry from a Philosophical point of view become clear in his attack on what he called mimesis (imitation). He explains that poetry does not offer reality but unreal imitations. However, Philosophy is concerned with truth. According to his theory of mimesis, arts deal with illusions far away from the truth. He said in book X of The Republic: â€Å"then the imitator, I said, is a long way off the truth†. 17) In his opinion, Philosophy is better than poetry because Philosophy deals with idea while poetry is twice removed from the original idea. He made his point clear when he compared the poet to the painter who imitated a bed that was designed by a carpenter and before that, was originally created by God. Plato was an idealist. He believed that Ideas alone are true and real and that the earthly things such as beauty and goodness are mere copies of the ideal beauty, goodness which exist in heaven or the world of Ideas. He said: Well, then, here are three beds: one existing in nature, which is made by God, as I think that we may say-for no one else can be the maker?.. And what shall we say of the carpenter-is not he also the maker of the bed? Yes. But would you call the painter a creator and maker? Certainly not. Yet if he is not the maker, what is he in relation to the bed? I think, he said, that we may fairly designate him as the imitator of that which the others make. Good, I said; then you call him who is third in the descent from nature an imitator? Certainly, he said. And the tragic poet is an imitator, and therefore, like all other imitators, he is thrice removed from the king and from the truth. (15, 16) Plato says that since the idea of the bed belongs to God; the maker and we can also consider the carpenter who built it a maker of a copy. However, the painter only imitated another copy which makes him thrice removed from reality. As a moralist, Plato disapproves of poetry because it is immoral, as a philosopher he disapproves of it because it is based in falsehood. He is of the view that philosophy is better than poetry because philosopher deals with idea / truth, whereas poet deals with what appears to him / illusion. This is very clear in The Republic, Book X, when he says: And what is the faculty in man to which imitation is addressed? What do you mean? I will explain: The body which is large when seen near, appears small when seen at a distance? True. And the same objects appear straight when looked at out of water, and crooked when in the water; and the concave becomes convex, owing to the illusion about colors to which the sight is liable. Thus every sort of confusion is revealed within us; and this is that weakness of the human mind on which the art of conjuring and of deceiving by the light and shadow and other ingenious devices imposes, having an effect upon us like magic, True. (19, 20) Thus, in his opinion, true reality consists of the ideas of things and objects in our world are reflections or imitations. Therefore, poetry is inferior to philosophy as the artist imitates these objects existing in our actual world and as a result, his work is an imitation of an imitation and is built on illusion. He believed that truth of philosophy was more important than the pleasure of poetry. He argued that most of it should be banned from the ideal society that he described in the Republic. One of Plato’s important theories is his theory of inspiration. In his Ion, he gives a psychological account of literary creation. He is interested in how men come to write poetry. He compares the state of the poet when he writes poetry to a state of madness or unconsciousness. He explains that the poet does not speak his words but is rather captured by inspiration or what he called ‘The power divine’. He says: For the poet is a light and winged and holy thing and there is no invention in him until he has been inspired, and is out of his senses, and the mind is no longer in him: when he has not attained to this state, he is powerless and is unable to utter his oracles. (9) Thus, he believes that poetry is nothing rational, and that is why even the poets themselves do not often understand what they write in that moment. Therefore, poetry cannot be relied upon as it is not the result of conscious. His last objection on the moral effect of poetry is that it harms by nourishing the passions, which ought to be controlled and disciplined. Plato thinks that it is the duty of the wise man to control passion by reason; poetry by exciting and strengthening the passions, makes this task more difficult. In Plato’s opinion, whatever encourages and strengthens the rational principle is good, and emotional is bad. In The Republic, Book X, Plato says: Then the imitative poet who aims at being popular is not by nature made, nor is his art intended, to please or to affect the rational principle in the soul; but he will prefer the passionate and fitful temper, which is easily imitated †¦. And therefore we shall be right in refusing to admit him into a well-ordered state, because he awakens and nourishes and strengthen the feelings and impairs the reason †¦ Poetry feeds and waters the passion instead of drying them up; she lets them rule, although they ought to be controlled, if mankind are ever to increase in happiness and virtue. (22) Then he attacks tragedies and comedies explaining their effect on both actors and spectators who might imitate their act. He believes that imitation soon becomes a second nature and the actor who imitates tends to behave like the object of his imitation. Tragedies give an uncontrolled expression to the emotions of pity and grief and thus play a woman’s part. In his The republic, Book X, he says: Hear and judge: The best of us as I conceive, when we listen to a passage of Homer, or one of the tragedians, in which he represents some pitiful hero who is drawling out his sorrows in a long oration, or weeping, and smiting his breast- the best of us, you know, delight in giving way to sympathy, and are in raptures at the excellence of the poet who stirs our feelings most. Yes, of course I know. But when any sorrow of our own happens to us, then you may observe that we pride ourselves on the opposite quality- we would fain be quiet and patient; this is the manly part, and the other which delighted us in the recitation is now deemed to be the part of a woman. Very true, he said. Now can we be right in praising and admiring another who is doing that which anyone of us would abominate and be ashamed of in his own person? No, he said, that is certainly not reasonable. (22, 23) Similarly, for example, one who imitates a female part in a comedy tends to grow effeminate. Imitation will make him cowardly or clownish, if such roles are imitated. In order to explain this in his The Republic, Book X, Plato said: And does not the same hold also of the ridiculous? There are jests which you would be ashamed to make yourself, and yet on the comic stage, or indeed in private, when you hear them, you are greatly amused by them, and are not at all disgusted at their unseemliness; the case of pity is repeated; there is a principle in human nature which is disposed to raise a laugh, and this which you restrained by reason, because you were afraid of being thought a buffoon, is now let out again; and having stimulated the risible faculty at the theatre, you are betrayed unconsciously to yourself into playing the comic poet at home. 23, 24) For all of the above reasons, Plato insisted that all kinds of poetry should be banned from his ideal state that he created in his The Republic. In this respect, Plato says: Therefore, Glaucon, I said, whenever you meet with any of the eulogists of Homer declaring that he has been the educator of Hellas, and that he is profitable for education and for ordering of human things, and that you should take him up again and again and get to know him and regulate your whole life according to him, we may love and honour those who say things-they are excellent people, as far as their light extend; and we are ready to acknowledge that Homer is the greatest of poets and first of tragedy writers; but we must remain firm in our conviction that hymns to the gods and praises of famous men are the only poetry which ought to be admitted into our state. For if you go beyond this and allow the honeyed muse to enter, either in epic or lyric verse, not law and the reason of mankind, which by common consent have ever been deemed best,but pleasure and pain will be the rulers in our state. (24) However, Plato decided to play fair with lovers of poetry. That’s why he granted a chance to all poets and defenders of poetry to be a part of his ideal state and to be allowed to return from exile, only if they made a fine literary work that proves that poetry does not just delight but is also useful to human life. Plato says: Shall I propose, then, that she be allowed to return from exile, but upon this condition only that she make a defence of herself in lyrical or some other metre? Certainly. And we may further grant to those of her defenders who are lovers of poetry and yet not poets the permission to speak in prose on her behalf: let them show not only that she is pleasant but also useful to states and to human life, and we will listen in a kindly spirit; for if this can be proved we shall surely be the gainers I mean, if there is a use in poetry as well as a delight? Certainly, he said, we shall be the gainers. (25) Those are Plato’s principal charges on poetry and objection to it. Before we pass on any judgment, we should not forget to keep in view the contemporary social conditions in which he lived. It was a time of political decline. Education was in a sorry state. The epics of Homer were part of studies and Homer’s epics were misrepresented and misinterpreted. However, they were venerated by the Greeks almost like The Bible. In them, there are many stories which represent the gods in an unfavorable light. So they were the common objects of criticism on the part of philosophers and educationists. The wonderful flowering time of Greek art and literature was over. Literature was immoral, corrupt and degenerate. Women were regarded inferior human beings and slavery was wide spread. Confusion prevailed in all spheres of life intellectual, moral, political and educational. There was a constant debate between the philosophers and poets. Thus, in Plato’s time, poets added fuel to the fire. He looked at poets as breeders of falsehood and poetry as mother of lies. Ironically it was Plato's most famous student, Aristotle, who was the first theorist to defend literature and poetry in his writing Poetics against Plato’s objections and his theory of mimesis. Aristotle was born in 384. B. C. For centuries during Roman age in Europe and after renaissance, Aristotle was honored as a law-giver and legislator. Even today his critical theories remain largely relevant, and for this he certainly deserves our admiration and esteem. In Poetics, his main concern appears to be tragedy, which in his day was considered to be the most developed form of poetry. Another part of poetics deals with comedy, but it is unfortunately lost. In his observations on the nature and function of poetry, he has replied the charges of Plato against poetry.

Math Word Problem Worksheets for Second-Graders