Essay examples --

What drives success? Where does it come from? Can you be born into it? These are some common questions when it comes to success. Every one can has their own opinion about what success is, and also what it takes to become successful people in today’s world. That is where Malcolm Gladwell comes into play. After reading â€Å"Outliers: The Story of Success†, Gladwell has helped me view the journey to success in ways I have and haven’t heard of before. He helps you understand some complex ideas of why someone may be more successful that someone else. To me success is determined by a lot of things and there is no one thing that can make your success, you have to have multiple things that are not found in one place. There are many things that come to your mind think of when it comes to success, age would be one of the many determining factors. In the book, Gladwell used hockey as an example. Hockey is a sport dominated by Canadians. In Canada, there is a hockey deadline where if a kid is not 10 by January 1st, he has to wait until next year to begin playing. This gives a kid with a birthday before the deadline an advantage over his opponents who could only be a few months’ young than him, because he had a year more of experience. Americans’ understand this in a different way. In the United States school system you have to be 6 before a certain time of the year before you can enter kindergarten. This could be different because those who enter earlier could graduate at a younger age, those who have to wait could be more prepared for school. It depends how you look at each situation, because they all can be different. If you have every played a sport, instrument, or simply attended school then you have heard the quote â€Å"Practice makes perfect.... ...l believes that’s why we are behind educationally. I believe this is a true statement, our kids in united stated should spend more time learning than playing video games, texting, and on social media which seems to be the most popular thing these days. Success can be defined by a lot of different things, whether you are tall or short, rich or poor, your definition may be different than one of your peers. I believe there is not a â€Å"right† answer to the questions â€Å"what is success?† or â€Å"how you do you become successful?† This book really gave me a few more ways of thinking about how success comes along. Some of the things Malcolm Gladwell comes up with are extreme but there is no right or wrong answer. To me success is determined by a lot of things and there is no one thing that can make you successful, you have to have multiple things that are not found in one place.

Examine Eliot’s treatment of women in Prufrock, Preludes, Portrait of E

Examine Eliot’s treatment of women in Prufrock, Preludes, Portrait of a Lady and Rhapsody on a Windy Night In all four of the poems; ‘Prufrock’, ‘Preludes’, ‘Portrait of a Lady’ and ‘Rhapsody on a Windy Night’, Eliot makes references to women. Eliot seems to treat women almost as objects to either be looked at with wonder and, at times, fascination or as objects to be scorned upon. In all of the poems Eliot makes the voice of the poem slightly distanced from the women and this, to me, makes the women seem almost untouchable. When looking at the poem ‘Prufrock’ we must first notice that the full title is ‘The Love Song of J.Alfred Prufrock.’ This title seems almost ironic as, after reading the poem, we realise that the poem is not a love song at all. The title is beauteous however, like the women Eliot makes reference to in the poem; â€Å"In the room the women come and go / Talking of Michelangelo.† This small, non-descriptive mention of women tells us much about Eliot’s perception of women in ‘Prufrock.’ These two lines, presented to us almost like a chorus, interrupt the flow of the poem, which is perhaps what women did in Eliot’s life. These lines also show Eliot’s fascination with women as women were less educated than men around 1910 when ‘Prufrock’ was conceived, so for these women to talk of Michelangelo is almost shocking and something to be marvelled upon. In Prufrock, I believe Eliot is concerned with the high society of women and the poem shows his fascination with them. The tone of ‘Prufrock’ is not bitter towards the women, nor does it celebrate them, it merely comments on the women and Eliot seems to give a fairly neutral view of women. ‘Portrait of a Lady’ is another poem in which Eliot ex... ...apsody on a Windy Night’. By appealing to our senses, Eliot draws us in to his poetry up to a point where we can almost smell exactly what he is describing, which brings us closer to the women in his poems. Between the four poems â€Å"Prufrock†, â€Å"Portrait of a Lady†, â€Å"Preludes† and â€Å"Rhapsody on a Windy Night† Eliot provides us with a rounded view of women. He describes the beautiful and untouchable side of them in ‘Prufrock’, the darker, more sordid side of women in ‘Preludes’ and ‘Rhapsody on a Windy Night’ with a description of how false women can be in ‘Portrait of a Lady’. Eliot’s imagery is effective in the poems, as by using it he justifies his reasons for describing the women in the way he does. I feel that Eliot describes women in the way in which he views them, drawing from personal experiences and what he takes from poets who have gone before him.

Frankenstein overview :: Character Analysis, Literary Analysis

Frankenstein is, in my opinion a story about a scientist who makes a being who possesses more soul than it’s creator. The scene in which the creation of young Victor stands by Victors beside, while startling understandably, gives you compassion over this poor being. The scene where he says. â€Å"His jaws opened, and her muttered some inarticulate sounds, while a grin wrinkled his cheeks... one hand was stretched out, seemingly to detain me....† This suggests a yearning for contact with the outside world. What I really consider disturbing is the egotistical manner in which Victor operates himself. He wallows in his own tragedy. He is more interested in his own wretchedness than the fate of his beleaguered family or even this abusive environment his creation faces. He brings his sorrow upon himself, but yet at every opportunity is contemplates the abortion of his creation, even though he constantly ignores him, when he yearns for his love. I wonder whether the villagers find the creature so terrible because is so deformed, or because his appearance suggests a life so malevolent that they cannot fathom to imagine it. He is constantly attacked with no real cause. I ponder this because if he were truly so fearsome, why would one engage him face to face. Perhaps they believe that his presence is pure evil and a danger automatically. Or maybe it’s because his appearance is so different from theirs. People are never very welcome to the outcasts of society. Another thing so appealing was Walton’s admiration of Victor. For a man so lonely that he finds

Assess critically the contribution Essay

Taylorism is a form of job design, which stresses short, repetitive work cycles; detailed, set task sequences; a separation of task conception from task execution; and motivation linked to pay. Taylor argued that the principal objective of management should be to secure the maximum prosperity for the employer, coupled with the maximum prosperity for each employee (1911). Fredrick Taylor’s five principles of scientific management: 1. A clear division of tasks and responsibilities between management and workers. 2. Use of scientific methods to determine the best way of doing a job. 3. Scientific selection of the person to do the newly designed job. 4. The training of the selected worker to perform the job in the way specified. 5. Surveillance of workers through the use of hierarchies of authority and close supervision. Taylor proposed this by measuring what workers did against the time taken, to develop ‘one best way of working’ (1911). By using quantitative methods a workers output could be accurately measured. At the time of its inception Taylor found that firms who introduced scientific management as he prescribed became the worlds most meticulously organised factories (Nelson, 1980). Managers are responsible for identifying the best cost efficient work practices and training workers to become highly productive and affective in their specific work task. Taylor argued that it stands to reason that an employee becomes more productive when working at their speciality and concluded with stating that there are more benefits gained for both employees and employers from dividing workers. With linking pay to each task performed, Managers can thus control the workforce and output and consistently achieve desired goals. The piece rate pay system  pays workers in parallel to number of items each worker has produced, hence also providing employees with an incentive to work. Henry Ford’s theory (Fordism) referring to mass production in industry (Marcouse, 1996) united the idea of assembly line and Taylor’s theory of division of labour and payment. Fordism focused on dividing jobs into unskilled and semi-skilled tasks. Whilst managers at Ford vehemently opposed any relation to Taylorism, it can be said that Fordism retained the faults of Taylorism of an autocratic work environment with little room for creativity as well as the benefits of the piece rate system relying on financial motivation. Criticisms of Taylorism: 1.Assumed that the motivation of the employee was to secure the maximum earnings for the effort expended; and neglected the importance of other rewards from work (achievement, job satisfaction, recognition), which later research has found to be important. 2. Neglected the subjective side of work-the personal and interactional aspects of performance, the meaning that employees give to work and the significance to them of their social relationship at work. 3. Failed to appreciate the meaning that workers would put on new procedures ad their reaction to being timed and closely supervised. 4. Had inadequate understanding of the relation of the individual incentive to interaction with, and dependence on, the immediate work group. Taylor did attribute ‘underworking’ to group pressures, but misunderstood the way in which these worked. He failed to see that these might just as easily keep production and morale up. 5. Ignored the psychological needs and capabilities of workers. T he one best way of doing a job was chosen with the mechanistic criteria of speed and output. The imposition of a uniform manner of work can both destroy individuality and cause other psychological disturbances. 6. Had too simple approach to the question of productivity and morale. It sought to keep both of these up exclusively by economic rewards and punishments. Incentive approaches under the scientific approach tended to focus on the worker as an individual and ignored their social context. Pay system may result in a worker valuing quantity over quality. 7. Functional foremanship was deemed to be too  complex and an unwieldy mode of supervision. (Huczynski, 2013) Ways to alleviate the negative effects of Taylorism especially to worker motivation and performance and find new ways to job designs came about following the introduction of the American psychologists Fredrick Hertzberg two factor theory of motivation. Hertzberg had the idea that there were two sets of factors that affected motivation and job characteristics: Motivators: These factors refer to the extent to which a job offers opportunities for achievement, creativity, responsibility, opportunities for personal growth. These are intrinsic to the job itself. Hygiene factors: These comprise issue as the nature of supervision and supervisory style, the level of pay, working conditions, and interpersonal relations. These are extrinsic to the job. For Hertzberg it was only the motivator factors that have the potential to generate satisfaction and motivation. If hygiene factors are improved, they do not result in improved motivation, but if removed, will result in demotivation. To raise levels of motivation and therefore performance, following Hertzberg theory of motivation, companies needed to ensure that the hygiene factors were in place, and to also ensure that the ‘motivator factors’ (i.e intrinsic motivators) were incorporated into the jobs. In particular, jobs needed to be designed in such a way that workers could be given opportunities for achievement, responsibility and personal growth. Criticisms of Hertzberg two-factor theory: Can job characteristics fall neatly into two categories of motivators and hygiene factors? Can a job characteristic be both? (Example can pay be a motivator as well as a hygiene factor-?) Blunt and Jones (1992) They point out that some studies from Nigeria have indicated that hygiene factors, in particular pay, supervision and working conditions, acted as motivators. Machungwa and Schmidt (1983) reported on a study conducted in Zambia and found that material rewards and the physical conditions of work appeared to have both motivating and demotivating effects. This was interpreted by Blunt and Jones in the following way: if material rewards were inadequate they were demotivating, but they acted as motivators if they were perceived as reasonable. This appears to directly contradict Hertzberg’s theory, but Blunt and Jones consider that this is only likely to be the case in less developed countries, as Hertzberg (1987) himself appears also to argue. However, one study does not refute a theory. Hertzberg did his original work on qualified professionals, such as engineers, whereas the people surveyed in the study above were manual workers. This in itself might be enough to account for the difference. In general, we can expect professional or managerial workers everywhere to be more intrinsically motivated than ma nual workers given the different nature of the work that the two groups undertake, but as we shall see the way work is organized may compensate for such differences in the relative interest value of different types of work The theory is regarded as a Universalistic theory; that it will impact all individuals in the same way in all work situations. It does not take into consideration that some people may not have a desire for personal growth, and are therefore unlikely to be motivated by job enrichment initiatives that give them higher levels of autonomy and responsibility. Hertzberg theory was superseded by Richard Hackman and Greg Oldham ‘the Job Characteristics Model’; which argued in a similar respect to Hertzberg theory, that if jobs are enriched this will lead to improvements in attitudinal outcomes (increased satisfaction and motivation) and improvements in behavioural outcomes (higher productivity and lower rates of absenteeism). Three critical psychological states: Hackman and Oldham argued that jobs should be designed in such a way that they are focused on the achievement of three critical psychological states: Workers must experience work as being personally meaningful-something that  they care about. Workers must experience personal responsibility for their work- accountability for their work. Workers must know if their work performance is effective-they must have knowledge of the results of their work activities. If these 3 critical psychological states are achieved, higher levels of satisfaction, motivation and performance will result from the worker. However this theory too has had its criticisms. Current literature now argues the importance and focus on team working, however one should acknowledge that the interest in team working is not something that is new to current times. Autonomous and semi-autonomous work groups were central to earlier theories of the 1960’s and 1970’s. Team working has now re-emerged as part of the lean production & flexible working debates. An American Theorist, Harry Bravemen thesis known as the ‘Bravemen thesis argues to counter the popular view in social science and management literature that Taylorism has been superseded by human relations and other more sophisticated approaches; that there is in fact a tendency for workers and their jobs to become de-skilled through fragmentation, rationalisation and mechanisation. This argument of deskilling workers and jobs was continued in the context where it became known as McDonalization a term that came about after the publication of a book by Georg Ritz. McDonalisation is a form of work design aimed at achieving efficiency, calculability, predictability and control through non-human technology, to enhance organisational objectives by limiting employee discretion and creativity. He used the term to refer to the processes used at the growing number of fast food restaurants dominating the American market. McDonalds is a modern example of the Taylorised way of work. The tasks are de-skilled and simplified for an employee at McDonalds and limited by the  sophisticated technology of fast food preparation. Hamburger grilling instructions are detailed and precise, cooking times and the sequence of events dictated to make a burger. Drinks dispensers, French fry machines, programmed cash registers all limit the amount of time required to carry out a specific task and leave little room for the employee to do as they wish, little room for creativity or innovation to processes. This way of working ensures the aims of the organisation to achieve greatest efficiency, calculability, predictability and control all of the key elements described by the Ritzer’s ‘Mcdonalization’. Regardless of the fact that the de-skilling may lead to de-motivated employees, which may result in high absenteeism and high staff turn over; its ability to integrate new workers into the production processes and dismiss employees without losing knowledge form the organization allows the model to still be successful. Taylorism can also be illustrated in modern day call centres. A case study on a customer service call centre run by two British Companies, Martin Beirne, Kathleen Riach and Fiona Wilson found strong continuities with Taylorism, in relation to work design and operation. They found the work to be pressurized and highly paced with managements focus on productivity and cost minimisation. Most of the jobs were narrowly defined and closely monitored. The time duration of each call taken; the content of the conversation with each customer; and the advise also given to the customer was prescribed (from Beirne et al 2004). But modern day illustrations of Taylorism don’t end there. It is also seen in relation to ‘scientific selection & training’. We’ve now moved away from an industrial economy towards a knowledge –based economy where an organisations competitive success depends on its talent. Much effort is devoted by contemporary organisations to select and recruit the right person for a role. Taylorism also placed importance and the introduction of scientific selection criteria by management to do a particular task. In line with his emphasis on scientific approach to selection, Taylor advocates scientific training as he argues that â€Å"it is only when business systematically cooperate to train the competent man†¦that it shall be on the road to national efficiency†. (Taylor, 1911: p 98). In the context of the knowledge  economy, organisations are generally encouraged to develop employees’ skills and knowledge. ‘Now one of the very first requirements of man who is to handle pig iron as a regular occupation is that he shall be so stupid and so phlegmatic that he more nearly resembles in his mental make-up the ox than any other type. The man who is mentally alert and intelligent is for this very reason entirely unsuited to what would, for him, be the grinding monotony of work to this character. Therefore the work man who is best suited to handling pig iron is unable to understand the real science of doing this class of work’. (Taylor 1911/1997 pg 59) â€Å"The task is always so regulated that the man who is well suited to his job will thrive while working at this rate during a long term of years and grow happier and more prosperous, instead of being overworked†. (Taylor 1911) Thus scientific management matched the worker to the job and in the process separated the conceptualization of work from its execution. It also provided safeguards against personal bias and individual favoritism, which is something that can still be applied to the current context of contemporary organisations. Taylorism is also found in the Saudi Educational system, for example metaphorically describing students as the ‘raw material’ of schools; controlling the movement of teachers & students through class bells; conceiving of the curriculum as a product; dividing students into grades or dividing curriculum into units and individual lessons; describing the school facilities as a ‘plant’ are a result of a ‘factory model’ schooling that has its roots in the adoption of scientific management principles by educational administrators. Contemporary schools in Saudi are still largely influenced with its teaching and learning deeply rooted in ‘scientific management’ as seen with the following: 1. Schools are large and bureaucratized. 2. Students change teachers every year. 3. Teachers plan and teach alone. 4. Curriculum is fragmented. 5. Tracking students by ability levels. 6. Deskilling of teachers through alignment of teaching mandated curriculum and standardized tests. 7. Emphasis on monitoring /surveillance & bureaucratic activity-scripted curriculum and scripted tests. Taylorism does not permit autonomy in work. Input by production workers in the organisation, planning, and direction of the manufacturing process was not allowed, requiring workers to do exactly what they were told to do and no more. This authoritarian approach to work can been illustrated in the schooling: That student’s are excluded from the planning, organisation and direction of the educational process. De-skilling of the teachers as their work is conceptualised by others (Ministry of Education who agrees the standard curriculum to be used in schools) and enforced by the bureaucratic outcome of accountability systems implemented in schools. The other way that Taylorism continues to influence the education system is through the use of individual rewards for individual effort (example the focus on a students individual test results). Taylor developed wage-incentive schemes emphasizing piecework and historically assembly line foremen attempted to stop any sort of worker inter action. Elton Mayo who introduced Human Relations theory based on his research at the Hawthorne electrical factory was to see how productivity will improve if the lighting condition changes and he followed Taylor’s scientific principles by testing the changes against a control, with part of the factory lighting being unchanged, (Kelly 1982). This lead him to conduct further experiments which vast doubts on Taylors assumptions about the importance of money in motivation (Marcouse, 1996). According to Huczynski and Buchan, the conclusions which can be drawn from Hawthorne studies are: 1. People at work are motivated by more than just pay and conditions. 2. Their need for recognition and sense of belonging are very important. 3. A person’s attitude to work is shaped strongly by the group in which that individual  belongs within the company. 4. The ability of the informal group or clique to motivate an individual at work should not be underestimated. (Huczynski and Buchanan 1991) . Another contributor to the Human Relations approach is Abraham Harold Maslow, an American psychologist who was best known for creating Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. They range from physical & social to psychological needs. Maslow (1943, 1954) stated that human motivation is based on people seeking fulfilment and change through personal growth. Self-actualized people as those who were fulfilled and doing all they were capable of. The Human Relations models have changed management and how workers are in fact valuable employees and stakeholders of an organisation. The key difference between scientific management and the human relations model is highlighted when analysing the motivational techniques to increase productivity. Scientific management emphasises the use of financial measures in order to secure employers objectives whereas the human relations model argues that management should acquire the insight into the skills that will manipulate social factors in order to harness their employees social needs to managerial ends (Fincham & Rhodes, 1999). Thus, behavioural science; motivation theories in combination with the humanistic theories of management, have added to Taylors principles and allowed for contemporary organizations to succeed where scientific management alone failed. Taylorism was an influential management theory of the late nineteenth century. Despite its relevance to its time the influence can still be seen in todays twenty first century: educational institutes, service sector and the manufacturing industries. Though there are limitations to his method, this principle has a considerable profound and lasting influence to all contemporary organizations because of  Taylor’s â€Å"preoccupation with the efficient use of resources†. This philosophy can almost apply to every organization, despite its work structure, such as structures of team working or job enrichment; one of the ultimate goals should be improve efficiency. As Braverman says, â€Å"the principle of scientific management is not a failed system, but a set of guiding principles which continue to inform and influence the role and function of modern management†. Some of the methods he advocates, such as division of labour, scientific selection and training, have become the features of modern society. More primarily, as efficiency is one of the enduring needs of all organizations, his preoccupation with the efficient use of resources thus becomes the driving force behind the evolution of subsequent management theories and the root of management practice. References: Huczynski, A. and Buchanan, D: Organisational Behaviour. Eighth Edition. Pearson 2013. Huczynski, A. and Buchanan, D.,1991. Organizational behaviour An Introductory Text. Second edition. London: Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd. Hertzberg,F., B.Mausner and B.Snyderman: The motivation to work (New york: Wiley 1959). Taylor F.W (1997): The principles of scientific management. Mincola, NY (original work published 1911). Braverman, H (1974): Labour and Monoploy capital: The degradation of work in the twentieth century. New York Monthly review press. Kelly, John. (1982), Scientific Management, Job Redesign, & Work Performance. Academic †¨Press. Marcouse, I. et al. (1996), The Complete A-Z Business Studies Handbook, Hodder & †¨Stoughton. Ritzer, George. (2000) The McDonaldization Of Society. Sage Publications Inc. Taylor, Frederick W (1911) The Principles of Scientific Management, Harper Bros. Fincham, R & Rhodes, P (1999) Priniciples of Organisational Behaviours, Oxford Univeristy Press. Nelson, David (1980) Frederick W Taylor and the Rise of Scientific Management, The University of Wisconsin Press. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-96. Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Row.

John Langdon Essay

Who is John Langdon? John Langdon was one of the two first senators of the state of New Hampshire. Early on in his political life, Langdon was a supporter always of the Revolutionary War and then later served in the Continental Congress. After serving in Congress, Langdon turned a different direction and became governor of New Hampshire. He could have run for vice president of the United States but turned it down. He was a great part in America’s history and grew up with America as it has turned out to be today. John Langdon was played many roles in our country today including: a patriot, a soldier, and a statesman. Langdon’s family was one of the first to settle near the middle of New Hampshire’s river, the Piscataquis River. John was then taught as a kid growing up by an educator at a school near by. John Langdon’s father asked John and his brother, Woodbury, to join along on his successful agricultural business. They both ended up becoming apprentices of local merchants. Langdon was an unstationary man, as by the age of twenty-one he was captain sailing to the West Indies, and four years later John owned his first merchantman. His brother was even more successful. They both began to do the trade business and by 1770 both men were accounted as the wealthiest citizens in the area. In 1777, Langdon turned his attention to a different subject. He wanted to help the soldiers. Since he was the lower speaker of the house for New Hampshire, he spent much time reorganizing and making the states militia stronger. He then split them up into two brigades. One brigade was centered in the east was to protect and prevent ambushes from the Royal Navy and support the New England states. The second brigade was organized in the west to guard from any sudden ambushes from Canada. Then lastly John Langdon is most famously known for being one of two delegates of New Hampshire at the Continental Congress. He was in Congress from 1775 to 1776, and then resigned in June 1776. He then became a superintendent for the construction of several ships of war. He was also a participant at the Battle of Bennnigton and led a group into Saratoga. Then in 1784 he was a member of the state senate, and then the president of New Hampshire in 1785 and 1788. Then in 1787 he was a member of the Continental Congress and a delegate of New Hampshire. He led New Hampshire from the beginning of his life till the very end. From 1805-1811 he was the governor of New Hampshire. He then died in Portsmouth, New Hampshire on September 18th 1819 and was buried in the North Cemetery. John Langdon was not a huge part of America’s course of history was he was overall a big part of New Hampshire. He was a leader of that state was the moment his family first lived there to dying and being buried there. I think New Hampshire should recognize more of what John Langdon did for their state. My name is Crystal Moreland and I am a Field Organizer for Congresswoman Shelley Berkley’s campaign. I wanted to let you know that Brent Martelli has contacted me about his volunteer time with the campaign. We are very excited to have him and would be more than happy to show him all the different aspects of what goes on in a campaign such as voter identification and event involvement. I think this is a great experience for your students to have and I very excited to get them involved. I hope they have a great experience and learn a lot!

Ap English Certainty vs/ Belief

Certainty Certainty is the belief in yourself that you can empower anything. Doubt is the fear of failure and is what the mass majority are overcome with. Certainty is the inner strength that everyone has, just not many want to express, that is why there are leaders and followers, strong and the weak, living and the dead. With inner strength your capabilities are limitless but when there is doubt, there is nothing. Doubt is one obstacle in a world filled with a plethora of them.Doubts are what control you from succeeding, they hold you back, tie you down , and strangle you from what you want , and just in the final seconds when your pulse lowers, your blood circulation is stopping , and you feel your hand trembling out of the fear, you grasp onto the only thing you have left , certainty. Certainty is your life support, it’s all you have left to live for, you cling onto and your ride through the storm on certainties back. It’s in that moment when you realize your life is ahead of you, and you’re certain of that. Doubt is your glutinous sin, and Satan is its master.You have to break free from its reins all that you’ve ever known and cling to certainty. With certainty you’re either in or you’re out. There is no equilibrium that you can find. Certainty is having 100% faith in something. It is the same as life, if you are certain with your life you are successful and can move mountains; doubt makes you weak and you are succumbed by the mountains. Leaders like this were Aristotle, a philosopher in physics, Benjamin Franklin, the inventor of electricity, and more modern leaders such as FDR, and JFK, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs. They saw the world through eyes of certainty.Certainty gave them the power to discover a new world. They took what others saw as impossible and made it possible. There was never a doubt in their mind that they wouldn’t conquer. Doubt overcomes many in the world today and it really is like an epidemic. Many doubt themselves before they try. This creates the 80% of the world and the 20%. The 80% are those consumed in doubts about their lives, but the 20% will conquer the world if they had the means. Certainty is the only inoculation for doubt. Take a little bit of certainty since there is much to go around and achieve what you never thought possible.

Night World : Black Dawn Chapter 8

What are you doing?† he repeated ferociously.His grip was hurting her. â€Å"I'm throwing the water bag down there,† Maggiesaid. But she was thinking, He's so strong. Stronger than anybody I've ever met. He could break mywrist without even trying. â€Å"I know that! Why?† â€Å"Because it's easier than carrying it down in myteeth,† Maggie said. But that wasn't the real reason,of course. The truth was that she needed to get temptation out of the way. She was so thirsty thatit was a kind of madness, and she was afraid ofwhat she would do if she held onto this cool, sloshing water bag much longer. He was staring at her with those startling eyes,as if he were trying to pryhis way into her brain.And Maggie had the odd feeling that he'd succeeded, at least far enough that he knew the real reason she was doing this. â€Å"You are an idiot,† he said slowly, with cold wonder. â€Å"You should listen to your body; it's telling youwhat it needs. You can't ignore thirst. You can'tdeny it.† â€Å"Yes, you can,† Maggie said flatly. Her wrist wasgoing numb. If this went on, she was going to dropthe bag involuntarily, and in the wrong place. â€Å"You can't,† he said, somehow making the wordsinto an angry hiss. â€Å"I should know.† Then he showed her his teeth. Maggie should have been prepared. Jeanne had told her. Vampires and witches and shapeshifters, she'd said. And Sylvia was a witch,and Bern had been a shapeshifter. This boy was a vampire. The strange thing was that, unlike Bern, he didn'tget uglier when he changed. His face seemed palerand finer, like something chiseled in ice. His goldeneyes burned brighter, framed by lashes that lookedeven blacker in contrast. His pupils opened and seemed to hold a darkness that could swallow aperson up. But it was the mouth that had changed the most.It looked even more willful, disdainful, and sullen-and it was drawn up into a sneer to displaythe fangs. Impressive fangs. Long, translucent white, tapering into delicate points. Shaped like a cat's canines,with a sheen on them like jewels. Not yellowing tusks like Bern's, but delicate instruments of death. What amazed Maggie was that although helooked completely different from anything she'd seen before, completely abnormal, he also lookedcompletely natural. This was another kind of creature, just like a human or a bear, with as muchright to live as either of them. Which didn't mean she wasn't scared. But shewas frightened in a new way, a way ready for action. She was ready to fight, if fighting became necessary. She'd already changed that much since entering this valley: fear now made her not panicked buthyper alert. If I have to defend myself I need both hands.And it's better not to let him see I'm scared. â€Å"Maybe you can't ignore your kind of thirst,† shesaid, and was pleased that her voice didn't wobble.†But I'm fine. Except that you're hurting my wrist. Can you please let go?† For just an instant, the brilliant yellow eyesflared even brighter, and she wondered if he wasgoing to attack her. But then his eyelids lowered,black lashes veiling the brightness. He let go ofher wrist. Maggie's arm sagged,and the leather bagdropped from her suddenly nerveless fingers. It landed safely at her feet. She rubbed her hand. And didn't look up a moment later, when he saidwith a kind of quiet hostility, â€Å"Aren't you afraidof me?† â€Å"Yes.† It was true. And it wasn't just because hewas a vampire or because he had a power thatcould send blue death twenty feet away. It was because of him, of the way he was. He was scary enough in and of himself. â€Å"But what good is it, being afraid?† Maggie said,still rubbing her hand. â€Å"If you're going to try tohurt me,IT fight back. And so far, you haven't triedto hurt me. You've only helped me.† â€Å"I told you, I didn't do it for you.And you'll neversurvive if you keep on being insane like this.† â€Å"Insane like what?† Now she did look up, to seethat his eyes were burning dark gold and his fangswere gone. His mouth simply looked scornful and aristocratic. â€Å"Trusting people,† he said, as if it should havebeen obvious. â€Å"Taking care of people. Don't youknow that only the strong ones make it? Weak people are deadweightand if you try to help them, they'll drag you down with them.† Maggie had an answer for that. â€Å"Cady isn'tweak,† she said flatly. â€Å"She's sickShe'll get betterif she gets the chance. And if we don't take care ofeach other, what's going to happen to all of us?† He looked exasperated, and for a few minutesthey stared at each other in mutual frustration. Then Maggie bent and picked up the bag again.†I'd better give it to her now. I'll bring your can teen back.† â€Å"Wait.† His voice was abrupt and cold, unfriendly. But this time he didn't grab her.†What?† â€Å"Follow me.† He gave the order briefly andturned without pausing to see if she obeyed. It wasclear that he expectedpeople to obey him, withoutquestions. â€Å"Bring the bag,† he said, without lookingover his shoulder. Maggie hesitated an instant, glancing down atCady. But the hollow was protected by the overhanging boulders; Cady would be all right there for a few minutes. She followed the boy. The narrow path that wound around the mountain was rough and primitive, interrupted by bands of broken, razor-sharpslate. She had to pick her way carefully aroundthem. In front of her, the boy turned toward the rocksuddenly and disappeared. When Maggie caught up, she saw the cave. The entrance was small, hardly more than acrack, and even Maggie had to stoop and go in sideways. But inside it opened into a snug littleenclosure that smelled of dampness and cool rock. Almost no light filtered in from the outsideworld. Maggie blinked, trying to adjust to the neardarkness, when there was a sound like a match strike and a smell of sulphur. A tiny flame was born, and Maggie saw the boy lighting some kindof crude stone lamp that had been carved out ofthe cave wall itself. He glanced back at her and his eyes flashed gold. But Maggie was gasping, looking around her.The light of the little flame threw a mass of shifting, confusing shadows everywhere, but it alsopicked out threads of sparkling quartz in the rock.The small cave had become a place of enchantment. Andatthe boy's feet was something that glitteredsilver. In the hush of the still air, Maggie couldhear the liquid, bell-like sound of water dripping. â€Å"It'sa pool,† the boy said. â€Å"Spring fed. The watees cold, but it's good. Water .Something like pure lust overcame Maggie. She took three steps forward, ignoring the boy completely, and then her legs collapsed.Shecupped a hand in the pool, felt the coolness encompass it to the wrist, and brought it out asif shewere holding liquid diamond in her palm. She'd never tasted anything asgood as that water. No Coke she'd drunk on the hottest day of summer could compare with it. It ran through herdry mouth and down her parched throatand then it seemed to spread all through her, sparklingthrough her body, soothing and reviving her. A sort of crystal clearness entered her brain. She drankand drank in a state of pure bliss. And then, when she was in the even more blissfulstate of being not thirsty anymore, she plunged the leather bag under the surface to fill it. â€Å"What's that for?† But there was a certain resignation in the boy's voice. â€Å"Cady. I have to get back to her.† Maggie sat backon her heels and looked at him. The light dancedand flickered around him, glinting bronze off hisdark hair, casting half his face in shadow. â€Å"Thank you,† she said, quietly, but in a voice thatshook slightly. â€Å"I think you probably saved mylife again.† â€Å"You were really thirsty.† â€Å"Yeah.† She stood up. â€Å"But when you thought there wasn't enoughwater, you were going to give it to her.† He couldn'tseem to get over the concept. â€Å"Yeah† â€Å"Even if it meant you dying?† â€Å"I didn't die,† Maggie pointed out. â€Å"And I wasn'tplanning to. Butyeah, I guess, if there wasn't anyother choice.† She saw him staring at her in utterbewilderment. â€Å"I took responsibility for her,† shesaid, trying to explain. â€Å"It's like when you take ina cat, or-or it's like being a queen or something.If you say you're going to be responsible for your subjects, you are. You owe them afterward.† Something glimmered in his golden eyes, just fora moment. It could have been a dagger point ofanger or just a spark of astonishment. There wasa silence. â€Å"It's not thatweird, people taking care of each other,† Maggie said, looking at his shadowed face. â€Å"Doesn't anybody do it here?† He gave a short laugh. â€Å"Hardly,† he said dryly.†The nobles know how to take care of themselves.And the slaves have to fight each other to survive.† He added abruptly, â€Å"All of which you should know.But of course you're not from here. You're fromOutside.† â€Å"I didn't know if you knew about Outside,† Mag gie said. â€Å"There isn't supposed to be any contact. Therewasn't for about five hundred years. But whenmy-when the old king died, they opened the pass,again and started bringing in slaves from the outside world. New blood.† He said it simply andmatter-of-factly. Mountain men, Maggie thought. For years there had been rumors about the Cascades, about menwho lived in hidden places among the glaciers andpreyed on climbers. Men or monsters. There were always hikers who claimed to have seen Bigfoot. And maybe they had-or maybe they'd seen ashapeshifter like Bern. â€Å"And you think that's okay,† she said out loud.†Grabbing people from the outside world and dragging them in here to be slaves.† â€Å"Notpeople.Humans.Humansarevermin;they're not intelligent.† He said it in that same dispassionate tone, looking right at her. â€Å"Are you crazy?†Maggie's fists were clenched; herhead was lowered. Stomping time. She glared upat him through narrowed lashes. â€Å"You're talking to a human right now. Am I intelligent or not?† â€Å"You're a slave without any manners,† he saidcurtly. â€Å"And the law says I could kill you for the way you'retalkingto me.† His voice was so cold, so arrogant†¦but Maggiewas starting not to believe it. That couldn't be all there was to him. Becausehe was the boy in her dream. The gentle, compassionate boy who'd looked ather with a flame of love behind his yellow eyes,and who'd held her with such tender intensity, hisheart beating against hers, his breath on her cheek. That boy had been real-and even if it didn't makeany sense, Maggie was somehow certain of it. And no matter how cold and arrogant this one seemed, they had to be part of each other. It didn't make her less afraid of this one, exactly.But it made her more determined to ignore herfear. â€Å"In my dream,† she said deliberately, advancinga step on him, â€Å"you cared about at least onehuman. You wanted to take care of me.† â€Å"You shouldn't even be allowedto dream aboutme,† he said. His voice wasas tense and grim asever, but as Maggie got closer to him, looking directly up into his face, he did something that amazed her. He fell back a step. â€Å"Why not? Because I'm a slave? I'm a person.† She took another step forward, still looking at him challengingly. â€Å"And I don't believe that you're asbad as you say you are. I think I saw what youwere really like in my dream.† â€Å"You're crazy,† he said. He didn't back up anyfarther, there was nowhere left to go. But his wholebody was taut. â€Å"Why should I want to take care of you?† he added in a cold and contemptuous voice.†What's so special about you?† It was a good question, and for a moment Maggie was shaken. Tears sprang to her eyes. â€Å"I don't know,† she said honestly. â€Å"I'm nobodyspecial. There isn'tany reason for you to care aboutme. But it doesn't matter. You saved my life whenBern was going to kill me, and you gave me waterwhen you knew I needed it. You can talk all youwant, but those are the facts. Maybe you just care about everybody, underneath. Or-â€Å" She never finished the last sentence. As she had been speaking to him, she was doingsomething she always did, that was instinctive to.,her when she felt some strong emotion. She had done it with P.J. and with Jeanne and with Cady. She reached out toward him. And although shewas only dimly aware that he was pulling his handsback to avoid her, she adjusted automatically,catching his wrists†¦. And that was when she lost her voice and whatshe was saying flew out of her head. Because something happened. Something that she couldn't ex plain, that was stranger than secret kingdoms orvampires or witchcraft. It happened justas her fingers closed on hishands. It was the first time they had touched like that, bare skin to bare skin. When he had grabbed her wrist before, her jacket sleeve had been in be tween them. It started as an almost painful jolt, a pulsatingthrill that zigged up her arm and then sweptthrough her body. Maggie gasped, but somehowshe couldn't let go of his hand. Like someone beingelectrocuted, she was frozen in place. The blue fire, she thought wildly. He's doing thesame thing to me that he did to Bern. But the next instant she knew that he wasn't. This wasn't the savage energy that had killed Bern, and it wasn't anything the boy was doing to her. Itwas something being done to both of them, by some incredibly powerful source outside either of them. And it was trying †¦ to open a channel. Thatwas the only way Maggie could describe it. It was blazing a path open in her mind, and connectingit to his. She feltas if she had turned around and unexpectedly found herself facing another person's soul.A soul that was hanging there, without protection,already in helpless communication with hers. It was by far the most intense thing that hadever happened to her. Maggie gasped again, seeingstars, and then her legs melted and she fellforward He caught her, but he couldn't stand up either.Maggie knew that as well as she knew what wasgoing on in her own body. He sank to his knees, holding her. What are you doing to me? It was a thought, but it wasn't Maggie's. It washis. I don't know †¦I'm not doing it †¦ I don't understand!Maggie had no idea how to send herthoughts to another person. But she didn't need to,it was simply happening. A pure line of communication had been opened between them. It was afierce and terrible thing, a bit like being fused together by a bolt of lightning, but it was also so wonderful that Maggie's entire skin was prickling and her mind was hushed with awe. She felt as if she'd been lifted into some new andwonderful place that most people never even saw. The air around her seemed to quiver with invisible wings. This is how people are supposed to be,shethought. Joined like this. Open to each other. Withnothing hidden and no stupid walls between them. A thought came back at her, sharp and quickasa hammer strike. No! It was so cold, so full of rejection, that for a moment Maggie was taken aback. But then she sensedwhat else was behind it. Anger†¦ and fear. He was afraid of this, andof her. He felt invaded. Exposed. Well, I do, too,Maggie said mentally. It wasn'tthat she wasn't afraid. It was that her fear was irrelevant. The force that held them was so much morepowerful than either of them, so immeasurably ancient, that fear was natural but not important. The same light shone through each of them, strippingaway their shields, making them transparent toeach other. It's all right for you. Because you don't have any thing to be ashamed of!The thought flashed by so quickly that Maggie wasn't even sure she hadheard it. What do you mean?she thought. Wait †¦ Delos. That was his name. Delos Redfern. She knew itnow, as unquestionably as she knew the names ofher own family. She realized, too, as a matter of minor importance, an afterthought, that he was a prince. A vampire prince who'd been born to rule this secret kingdom, as the Redfern family had ruled it for centuries. The old king was your father,she said to him. And he died three years ago, when you were fourteen. You've been ruling ever since. He was pulling away from her mentally, trying tobreak the contact between them. It's none of your business, he snarled. Please wait,Maggie said. But as she chased after him mentally, trying to catch him, to help him,something shocking and new happened, like a second bolt of lightning.