Wild Animal as Pet Essay Example for Free

Wild Animal as Pet Essay Many people in the world get pets every day, but why blame them? Theres nothing wrong with having a friend of another species. But, if you want a pet, there is one thing you shouldnt do. You should never take an animal from the wild, and keep them as pets. The reasons are pretty clear. I, myself, have learned from self-experience that they are tougher to take care of than your average cat, dog, bird, or fish. They are not used to a captive environment. This can be bad, considering that its probably not how they were meant to live. Another thing is that you may not be able to get as much information on the wild pet, because they simply arent meant to be one. You would be able to find much more information on domesticated animals; hence, you can take better care of a domesticated pet, rather than a wild one. Wild animals are scared easier. How many times have you approached a pond without all of the frogs jumping in the water? How many times have you actually been close to catching a bird or fish with your bare hands? (Well, I have, but thats another story.) Chances are that the animal will run, fly, or swim away. If cornered, it will attack out of self-defense. That brings me to another point. If you cant find that animal in a legal pet store, it is probably too dangerous to keep for a pet. Many wild animals have poisonous venom, or deadly scratches and bites. This can be very dangerous. Something close to that point is that the animal may be rabid, have salmonella, or some other dangerous decease or virus. The probability of this is much less if your pet is a domesticated animal that was legally bought. If you or your family get hurt or killed, just remember that you cant sue Mother Nature. I think my point is pretty clear. Dont take animals from the wild and keep them as your own pet. Am I, however, telling you not to get a pet at all? No. As a matter of fact, I am encouraging you to get one! Just as long as it is not from the wild.

The Effects of World War II on Kurt Vonneguts Writing :: Biography Biographies Essays

The Effects of World War II on Kurt Vonnegut's Writing February 13, 1945: Dresden, Germany. War is raging across Europe. In a deep underground meat locker beneath Schlacthof-Funf, Slaughterhouse Five, 100 American prisoners and their six German guards feel the Earth move as Royal Air Force bombers lay wreckage to the city above. They can only hear the mass terror as the greatest slaughter in European history takes place, killing an estimated 135,000 civilians and destroying cathedrals, museums, parks, and even the zoo. In the morning, after the carnage has ended, the prisoners are put to work excavating bombed-out buildings to search for the dead. One of those Americans was none other than Private Kurt Vonnegut, Junior. Vonnegut's experiences in World War II were to haunt him the rest of his life, and were to feature prominently within his writing. Two of his novels, Mother Night and Slaughterhouse Five, take place almost entirely within Hitler's Germany. The latter is perhaps Vonnegut's most autobiographical work to date, the action occurring in and around Slaughterhouse Five, the very hellhole in which he toiled for his captors. The former is no doubt less autobiographical, but the main character certainly has many things in common with his creator: an American artist within Nazi Germany, doing what he felt was necessary to stay alive and to further his work. Mother Night, ironically, was not brought about as much by Vonnegut's exposure to the Nazis in Dresden, but more from his impressions and experiences in the mid-West during the Thirties, when American Nazis were rampant in Indianapolis and his own aunt encountered the new race laws of the German Germans, but it no doubt drew heavily upon his experiences at the hands of Nazi captors and his time spent in their land. Even in the stories that do not actively portray the

The Comedic Wave

During the time of Shakespeare, it was understood that a play described as a comedy would be one that â€Å"implies a positive understanding of human experience [. . . .] a marriage or at least some kind of union or reunion that resolves the conflict and brings the characters into a state of harmony† (McDonald, 2001, 81). This describes the storyline of Shakespeare’s play Romeo and Juliet: it is a comedy that by modern standards would be sub-categorized as dark because much of the storyline isn’t humorous; however, the culminating events include a reunion and (a precarious) harmony among the feuding Montagues and Capulets.   The plot of Romeo and Juliet is not unique: the concept of—boy meets girl—boy courts girl—boy loses girl—is the center of many other stories, but the impact left by the wave of comedy which is created by such plot lines makes the theme one that is timeless. It seems inevitable that Romeo Montague and Juliet Capulet will overcome the feuding of their families, marry, and live happily ever-after; however, this is not to be, for the lovers are â€Å"star-crossed† (Romeo and Juliet, Prologue).   The play builds to its dà ©nouement—the dual suicides of Romeo and Juliet—by taking the audience though the lives of the two youngsters as they attempt to overcome their familial origins.   By the time the audience realizes that the two lovers will unite only in death, the impact is profound. (Juliet) What's here? A cup, clos'd in my true love's hand? Poison, I see, hath been his timeless end. [. . . .] O happy dagger! [Snatches Romeo's dagger.] This is thy sheath; there rest, and let me die. She stabs herself and falls [on Romeo's body].   (V. iii. 205-206; 212-215) It is a wave that has been built slowly throughout the play—one that remains with an audience member perhaps indefinitely. The war between the Montagues and the Capulets has raged for years, and part of the tragedy which becomes darkly comedic in this piece is that the barrier that stands between Romeo and Juliet is nothing but a word: specifically a surname.   During her famous balcony speech, Juliet, thinking aloud to herself says, O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo? Deny thy father and refuse thy name.   (II.i.74–76) Juliet is asking the universe not where her love is, but why Romeo is a Montague.   Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations would describe the situation thusly: â€Å"one might say: the ostensive definition explains the use—the meaning—of the word when the overall role of the word in language is clear† (Wittgenstein, L, #30).   In other words, the reason Romeo and Juliet cannot wed has been determined by the definition—the â€Å"role†Ã¢â‚¬â€their respective surnames play. A truly effective comedy builds slowly, creates tension-filled expectation, and comes to a resolution that leaves a reader or an audience member with a long-lasting memory of the event.   Shakespeare creates this in Romeo and Juliet by establishing the â€Å"meaning† of the surnames of his characters, and placing each into his/her respective â€Å"role.† References McDonald, R.   (2001).   The Bedford companion to Shakespeare: An introduction with documents.   (2nd ed.).   Boston: Bedford. Shakespeare, W.   (1992).   Romeo and Juliet.   (B. A. Mowat ; P. Werstine, Ed.)   The new Folger library.   New York: Washington Square. Wittgenstein, L.   Philosophical investigations.   The Galilean library.   Retrieved November 29, 2006 from http://www.galilean-library.org/pi3.html.

An Introduction to Math