Complexity Measures in Design and Development

Complexity Measures in Design and Development Albert Einstein once said â€Å"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler†. These simple words coming out of a genius’s mind carry a lot of meaning and depth in them. The last two decades saw an exponential rise in different branches of engineering and sciences; and with these developments came in a crowd of very advanced yet very complicated technologies. Are these complexities intended? The answer is very simple NO; the very word advanced is almost always inherited by complexity. No one would want to design and manufacture something very complex, but the more advanced a technology is, the more complex it gets. Even the works done by the man who said those words are far too complex for a common man; and actually that is exactly what he meant. Everyone tries to make things as simple as possible, but no simpler than that, they just can’t and the simplest product design possible can become very complex in some regards. With increasing complexity, there is always a danger of system being destabilized, reduction in overall performance, higher cost, higher maintenance, etc. The way to keep control over complexity is to have measure of it, so that management and manufactures know what exactly to-do and how to change their operational strategy. In this dissertation I am presenting a detailed overview of complexity, it’s different meanings and interpretations in various industries and a host of measures that were developed to measure and evaluate complexity. There are also a few methods of minimizing complexity presented along with case studies illustrating the means in which these measures were applied to real-time manufacturing and designing processes. Complexity: â€Å"What is complexity?† could be one of the most complex questions tube answered. The very definition of complexity from dictionary would suggest the following: Æ’ËÅ" Consisting of interconnected or interwoven parts Æ’ËÅ" Composed of two or more units Æ’ËÅ" Offers great difficulty in understanding, solving, or explaining Æ’ËÅ" The interlacing of parts so as to make it nearly impossible to follow or grasp them separately Æ’ËÅ" Extreme complication and often disorder; complication and entanglement that make solution or understanding improbable The first two meanings are not too related to our present context so I will ignore them, but the rest suggest the exact meaning of what complexity is. As we can see, if I do not understand something properly or am not capable enough to understand it, ‘that’ thing is complex tome. Does this mean it is really complex? The answer again is very simple, NO and that is the very reason why complexity is so hard to define. Complexity of anything is dependent on many factors and one very important factor is human understanding. A subject complex to me could be a piece of cake for someone else and this very behaviour of complexity makes it very hard to measure and evaluate it. An important and interesting question that may arise in reader’s minds, â€Å"Does the very same meaning of complexity stand in industry standards too?† The answer could be both a YES and a NO. It does stand the same thing in some cases, but in rest, the definition of complexity is completely modified. A best example would be industries involved in computer sciences and engineering. There complexity of a code does not really mean it is hard to understand, it rather means that it takes a lot of time for computer to calculate and give the results. In most of the mechanical and electronic designs, complexity would mean systems with multiple interacting parts, the behaviour of which cannot be related with respect to individual parts. That is their collectivebehavior is completely different and /or unpredictable from their individual behaviour. Again this unpredictability can be related to just the static structure of these components or dynamic nature, thus the differentiation between static complexity and dynamic complexity. Now Avery good question to answer is â€Å"What exactly are these static and dynamic complexities?† Static Complexity: Given a particular system (could be any system like manufacturing plant with different manual and automated equipment or just a small network with multiple servers/ clients ), there is always some complexity involved with the static structure of these components, could be just their physical shapes/ sizes or their alignment with other objects or with environment. This complexity which is made up as a function of various parameters like physical shapes, structures, connectivity, variety and strengths of components is called static complexity. Dynamic complexity: Dynamic complexity is more related towards the behaviour of these components as a unit. As mentioned earlier, the pattern of behaviour for a group of components is almost always different than the pattern for individual components; this behaviour measured over a period of time is a major parameter in dynamic complexity. A very important form of complexity that is normally taken as constant or zero while evaluating static or dynamic complexities is complexity arising because of control; that is, given a particular system, there could be many ways in which it can controlled and each one of these methods can result in a different static / dynamic complexity measure, thus to really evaluate a system, we should also consider this parameter and measure a control complexity too. But for most practical purposes, it is assumed that there is only one way to control, thus ignoring control complexity. Measuring and evaluating dynamic complexity is highly dependent on the industry and its specific design, thus forming generic measures for dynamic complexity is not only complicated but also inapplicable invest majority of other designs. Thus research is more focused towards static complexity and its measures. Though there are papers which concentrate only on dynamic complexity, they are very much oriented towards a specific industry and its related fields. Does this mean that static complexity is similar for all industries and designs? No, but a particular measure calculated for static complexity could be easily expanded to other designs too, which is not the same for dynamic complexity. In this paper, I will give measurements of both static and dynamic complexities with respect to manufacturing environment. Before we go any further into measurement of complexity, it is a good idea to understand why and how complexity arises in systems? There is general belief that complexity arises due to many random factors. It could be true in some sense, but that only indicates a very bad design. For systems which are well designed, manufactured and maintained, randomness is not a major factor; it is rather the fact that the system cannot be easily described which causes more complexity. According to Axelrod and Cohen describe systems as comprising of agents and artifacts. The artefacts are just physical (or virtual) objects that comprise the system where as the agents who have attributes like location, memory, ability to interact with other agents, ability to manipulate and change functions, control these objects. The agents may not have to be people alone; they can be computer programs, groups, political entities etc. that may affect the system directly or indirectly. Another important and very interesting concept of complexity comes from Wolfram, in which he states that complexity in a system comes from randomness produced because of three sources. Æ’ËÅ" The first source is the environment and its intervention, either directly or indirectly, on the system. Æ’ËÅ" The second source is the initial conditions that the system was in, before being used. These initial conditions could be random thus adding more weight to the complexity. Æ’ËÅ" The third and most important one is the internal or intrinsic complexity of the system. That is the complexity of the system when there is no external influence or affect. With all these different views of complexity, we are now ready to go ahead and describe what complexity in design is? But before that, let us see what exactly design means. Design and Why is it done? In this section, let us see what exactly design means and as in every case, let us start with the exact dictionary definition of design. Æ’ËÅ" To conceive or fashion in the mind; invent Æ’ËÅ" To formulate a plan for; devise Æ’ËÅ" To plan out in systematic, usually graphic form Æ’ËÅ" To create or contrive for a particular purpose or effect Æ’ËÅ" To have as a goal or purpose; intend Æ’ËÅ" To create or execute in an artistic or highly skilled manner These, may be with little twists here and there, are the exact definitions of ‘Design’ that you see in dictionaries and they almost suggest what precisely designing means in industry standards. Basically designing involves â€Å"making things better and more useful to customers (or people)†. Almost every single thing that we use is (/was)designed at some point of time; things that we take for granted were once designed and engineered. Design is an integral part of us and our society and is united in almost everything and anything we do and we use. Designing anything starts with an idea, any idea good or bad. The main job of designers is to reform this idea so that it is understandable for the people who need to work on it and manufacture it, sort of able print. Whether it is a multibillion dollar dam or a small fashion hair pin, the process of creating them is all the same and involves almost the same basic general steps. Before we discuss these steps, it’s important for us to understand why designing is done on the first place? Designing is a very important and basic step in any product. To deliver product, there are many steps involved. There are scientists who invent new technologies, engineers who use these technologies to develop various components, manufactures that use these components in manufacturing different products and finally marketers who take the prime role behind delivering the product. But who is going to coordinate their efforts to produce a desirable and successful product, no one else but the designers. They are the people who understand what the customer want and deliver a mechanism to make it happen. Designing is not just what we read in magazines which depict it as mostly involved with fashion industry. No that is not at all the case it involves a lot of insight into the way customer thinks and wants his product. As I mentioned earlier, everything that we use was designed at some point of time. There are some very important things that every design is supposed to follow, a brief list of which is as follows: Æ’ËÅ" User requirements: The very first and most important aspect designer has to consider is user. In this world where the number of competitors for a product is more than the product itself, there are very few designs which are being accepted into user community. The main reason behind their success being complete satisfaction of customers. The very first step of any design process is to know â€Å"what exactly customers want?† Æ’ËÅ" Creativity: Next comes creativity. When the designer knows what the customer wants, he has to create something new; he just can’t give the same old stuff which just satisfies the needs. If I am buying a camera, being a picky customer I wouldn’t buy any camera that can take a snap of me, NO, I want so many other things which may be I will not even dream of using, but still I want them in my camera. That is how customers think and that is what exactly designers provide. Innovation has to be there in a product without which t here is no value to it.Designers explore all the different combinations in which a product can be designed and seek new methods in doing so. The stranger it is the better. Now that there are so many simulation tools and other devices that provide so much insight into the product even before it is made, this work is simplified a lot. Æ’ËÅ" Business process: the other very important consideration a designer has to go through is the business process both from company perspective and user perspective. The overall price of the product may depend on the design and considering this is a very important thing. The best examples are the products from Microsoft, take for example PowerPoint, though costing only 50-100 dollars, it’s overall revenue may be grater than some very big software companies whose products cost millions of dollars. Why? The design was so done that there are millions of satisfied customers to PowerPoint or excel who can afford it easily than to products that co st millions of dollars. Æ’ËÅ" Manufacturing overview: it is also very important for a designer tube thoroughly aware of what exactly his company is capable of and at what capacity. I can design a magnificent product in a technology that my company is not even aware of, there is no use to it. A designer should be completely knowledgeable in the manufacturing processes and principles of his company so that whatever he does is not counter tithe existing mechanism, but only increase its productivity by using it in a better way. Now that we considered the basic aspects of design, let us now look at the design process. Being a designer is not such a simple job, you will have to consider so many discrete and varied things, a small list of which was provided above. There is a lot of trial and error involved. Till you get the right one, there could be thousand rejected designs. Though most of the design process is done by designers, there is a lot of contribution from most of the other departments involved in getting that product out like manufacturing people, engineers, business analysts, managers etc. The following are the basic but general steps I mentioned earlier that any designer follows: Æ’ËÅ" Understanding and evaluating Requirements: The very first step involved in design process is to understand and evaluate the user requirements. This involves defining the objectives, setting deadlines, targets and parameters. The design team is involved right from the beginning to the end as they have to understand the business process both from the company’s point of view and the customer’s point of view. The idea being creating an ideal project which will satisfy both the business processes and optimize them. A very important question to answer at this level is why are we creating / modifying this product? Once this question is properly answered, the rest of the process becomes simpler and logical. Æ’ËÅ" Research: Research is one of the most important aspects of the whole process. This is an ever going process, especially in the case of longer project. Research typically includes a variety of areas like Technology, Economy, User Satisfaction, Competitor products, trends, risks etc. Every one among them will affect the product and its design. A simple example would be the conversion from analogy to digital. May bee decade or two ago, there were some systems which were still concentrating on analogy devices. Now they are hardly seen. When such drastic change is happening (a decade would not be drastic for us, but for large scale manufacturing plants to change their whole technology from analogy to digital would cost millions of dollars even though it is spread over multiple years), it would be highly beneficial to a company to be well informed beforehand rather than changing at the spur of moment. Research is more concentrated on the customer / user than anything else. Whatever user wants has to be done and it would be much more preferable to know the user choices beforehand doing our own research, rather than getting a dissatisfied comment from him. Æ’ËÅ" Planning: planning is another significant part of the whole process. As I mentioned earlier, it is always good for the designers to know the internal business processes of the company beforehand rather than knowing them later on and trying to modify the design. Planning takes care of this step. With participation from wide variety of areas all across the board, it becomes simpler for the designer to know and understand different views and angles about a manufacturing process so that the overall design is acceptable and enjoyable by everyone. Æ’ËÅ" Communication: In a business process, there are always instances when the customer thinks of something, the designer understand something else and the manufacturing guys create something completely different. Why does this happen? Lack of communication. Whose mistake is this? Nobody’s. It is very important for a designer and his team to keep inconstant touch with both the customers and the manufacturing guys at the same time. Designers are the only bridge between customers and manufacturers and they should be completely aware of the business process from both the sides. It is client’s responsibility that he conveys the proper requirements to the designers so that they care-convey them to their manufacturing guys, a small leak here and there can result in disaster. But does the client do this always? NO. So it becomes an additional burden on the designer to keep in constant touch with the customer and keep him posted of what is going on with the product, so that if there is some discrepancy, then the message is obtained instantly, same is the case with manufacturing people. Æ’ËÅ" Implementation: the last step is implementation, mostly done by the manufacturing people but involves a little contribution from design team too. First of all, they may have to monitor the whole process and may be even test it thoroughly. Being the only people with complete knowledge of client’s business requirements, they are also responsible for quality. This is how a generic design process goes, let me stress the word generic again. Depending on industry, this process may change here and there, but the changes would be nominal. Now let us consider the different contexts of complexity in different industries and their detailed analysis, the major difference between the following topic and the one presented earlier being that the following one is description of complexity from design perspective. Different Contexts of complexity in different industries: I already mentioned while explaining the definition of complexity that its basic meaning may change from industry to industry. In this section let me highlight some key industries and illustrate the meaning of complexity with respect to that particular industry. In the very same process let us also try to combine the design process into the contexts that we can start concentrating more on complexity in design more than complexity in general. Let us start with the software industry where the definition of complexity is very fundamental but very useful. Complexity in Design for Software industries: What exactly does complexity in software design mean? IEEE standard 729gives the following definition for complexity in software, â€Å"The degree of complication of a system or system component, determined by such factors as the number and intricacy of interfaces, the number and intricacy of conditional branches, the degree of nesting, the types of data structures, and other system characteristics. Though very extensive, this definition still doesn’t cover all the aspects ofcompelxity in software. There are many things to be considered while stating complexity in software a few of which are the operating system, programming language , database, interface being used etc. and etc. Now popular question could be, â€Å"Does all this matter, a complexity has tube related to the way you design an algorithm more than the way you program it?†. Actually it does. There is a popular notion of measuring complexity in software industry where in they compare a particular language (for example) with another one and decide what is more complex. Though theoretically perfect, practically this is totally wrong. How can one compare an algorithm written in Java to the same algorithm written in C, their applications and usages are completely different. Similarly you cannot compare a program using Oracle as its database to a program using Microsoft Access. Now can we measure complexity taking all these into consideration? Not really. For measurement purposes again everything falls back to algorithm level. Whatever be the programming basis you are using, underneath it there is only a single algorithm being used. Thus in this context measurmentof complexity has to be done with a lot of risk. Later in the dissertation Aim going to suggest some popular methods of complexity measurements used in software industry. In general, complexity in software comprises mainly of the following components (apart from the algorithm): Æ’ËÅ" Component Reuse (so called Object Oriented Programming): This is Avery important component of complexity measurement these days. Given a particular algorithm, if you can reuse a piece of code again and again, thus avoiding redundancy, the complexity would decrease by a lot. Hence this factor is a very important component of software complexity. Æ’ËÅ" Control Flow: This takes into consideration the whole control structure of the program. Æ’ËÅ" Data Structures: The number of data structures being used and their size (in bits and bytes) Æ’ËÅ" Size: the overall length of the code (also including the commented lines and documentation as even they are considered in compilation process) From the above description, we can conclude that software complexity depends a lot on the algorithm being used, but many other factors contribute a lot too. Thus a good designer would first of all consider the algorithm and once the algorithm is decided, he / she would spend more time looking into various other considerations, trying to decrease the length of code, number of hits to the database, number of requests from the server etc. Complexity in Manufacturing: Let me clarify what I mean by Manufacturing before I go any further, it includes almost every single sector of consumer product industry starting from auto industry to small electronic components. Why am I including them of all into a single concept? Because the way they function is almost similar with the difference in size. Thus in this section, I will try to distinguish them whenever necessary, but otherwise they are all the same. Majority of these industries involve many moving parts and each one of these parts are again designed and manufactured, either in the same company of in a different one. Thus there is complexity involved in designing each one of them, and then comes the complexity of assembling them into one single system, normally carried out by various automated and / or manual methods. Consider for example an auto industry. With thousands of components going into the assembly line, the whole process becomes highly complex; similar is a case with electronic devices wherein minute parts has to placed and soldered on a PCB with utmost precision. Normally complexity of a manufacturing process is dependent on many parameters, a brief list of which is as follows: Æ’ËÅ" Similarity in processing requirements: the complexity of manufacturing process is highly dependent on the processing requirements and their similarity. Any process would be much simpler when it has similar methods being used across various modules. Thus with variance in processing requirements, the complexity increases. Complexity also increases due to changing consumer demand, which directly affects the whole setup. Æ’ËÅ" Yield: Manufacturing yield is another important factor that determines the complexity. There is always a constant effort to increase the yield but without proper planning and automation, this could result in huge complexities. Æ’ËÅ" Miniaturization: With the latest trend of miniaturization, all the components are being made as small as possible thus increasing their overall complexity. We can easily say that a laptop or as a matter of fact a palm top is much more complex than a desktop. A similar trend is being observed in many of the electronic sectors and thus enhancing the complexity of design. Æ’ËÅ" Energy Efficiency: More applicable in automobile than anywhere else, this parameter is affecting the complexity a lot. With modern vehicles(hybrid electrical and gasoline based engines), the energy efficiency is being increased a lot, but along with it, the complexity is also increasing at a similar rate. Why do we need Complexity Measures? Till now I discussed the basic definitions and detailed meanings of complexity and design. Now let me consider on measurement of complexity. The very first question to be answered in this regard is, Why do we need complexity Measures for? The answer for this question cannot be given in all technical fashion; we need some philosophy for this. As can be seen from the trends in the past two decades, the population is rising at a huge rate and along with it the technology is improving at an exponential rate. We are living in the period where Moore’s law is still being maintained and the devices that we use daily are being made more and more sophisticated and user friendly. But what if someone wants to understand the concepts behind any of these devices, though the modern communication is fast and very knowledgeable, it is vast too. Most of the information provided is random, not relevant, redundant and sometime inaccurate. This provides more confusion than clarity. As Simon says in his paper Creativity, Innovation, and Quality, â€Å"Today, complexity is a word that is much in fashion. We have learned very well that many of the systems that we are trying to deal with in our contemporary science and engineering are very complex indeed. They are so complex that it is not obvious that the powerful tricks and procedures that served us for four centuries or more in the development of modern science and engineering will enable us to understand and deal with them. We are learning that we need a science of complex systems, and we are beginning to construct it†, it is becoming more and more painful for common men to understand or evaluate systems becaus e of their complexity. This complexity is increasing day by day rather than taking a downward step. Not only in manufacturing processes but also in other industries like software, electronics, even social, political, religious, medical, biological hectare also vastly affected. The only way out of this confusion is to do proper designing so as to minimize the complexity involved, (note the work minimize. It is impossible to eliminate complexity). Are these the only reasons of measuring complexity? No way. None of the industrialists would ever invest in research for complexity measures for the above mentioned reasons. There is a huge economic advantage by doing proper complexity measurement and then taking proper steps to minimize it. I will mention a small list of these benefits here, and then explain them in detail as we go on to subsequent sections. List of advantages for measuring, evaluating and finally minimizing complexity from financial point of view: Æ’ËÅ" The operational strategy could be improved a lot. Æ’ËÅ" Processing speed and thus information transfer is much faster and smoother. Æ’ËÅ" System performance is better. Æ’ËÅ" Increased autonomy. Æ’ËÅ" More customer satisfaction and thus higher profit. Æ’ËÅ" Easier to maintain, modify or redesign. Statistics involved in Complexity measurement: Before we can go ahead and derive some formulae for complexity measures, it is a good idea to brush up some basic concepts of information theory and other related statistical engineering subjects. So this section is dedicated for a brief overview of some of these important concepts. Ensemble: An ensemble X is a random variable x with a set of possible outcomes, Vex = {v1,v2,..vi, †¦ VI), having probabilities {p1,p2,†¦pi,..pie} with P(x=vi)=pi, pi >0 and Conditional Probability: Product rule: Sum rule: Bayes’ Theorem: Stationary Process: A random process where the various statistical qualities or properties do not vary with time is called a stationary random process. That is for a stationary process, the parameters like Mean, Variance, Standard Deviation etc. are constant across time.(Example White Noise) Erotic Process: Random process in which the time series produced are the same in statistical properties. That is a set of random processes are considered as time shifts of an original stationary process. Entropy: A very popular term in Information Theory, entropy means the lowest amount of bit rate needed for representing a particular symbol. The exact value of Entropy is . It is also called as uncertainty of x. With this definition of Entropy and following the probability rules defined earlier, joint and conditional entropies can be defined as follows: Joint Entropy: Conditional Entropy: This information should be sufficient for us to go ahead and derive our formulae; if anything is needed I will provide it at that instant. Different methods of Complexity Measures, their Evaluation and Analysis: As indicated above, different industries use the term ‘Complexity’ indifferent aspects, thus there are varied meanings and definitions of it. With so many differences involved in just defining complexity, we can imagine how difficult it would be to measure and find methods to reduce complexity for all these manufacturing units. Taking into consideration this vastness, normally research is done only in those fields where there is some sort of existing mathematical background, using which new complexity measures and evaluations can be done. Ones these are formed, then the same measures could be used for relating complexity of any related industry. A popular area where there is a lot of mathematical background existing is algorithmic complexity, mostly for software related industries but applied in general to a vast area of other industries too. For beginners, let me start with describing few methods in software industry and we shall proceed to manufacturing plants later on. Fan-In Fan-out complexity: One of the most basic complexity formulae to be derived is Fan-Infant-Out complexity formed by Sallie Henry and Dennis kauri. Let us define the following parameters, L = length of the code in lines Fanon = the number of functions that call a particular function Fan-out= how many functions are called by a given function is calledfanout. Then the complexity of the code by this method is given as Complexity = L* (Fanon*Fan-out)2 In overall essence what exactly this formula does is, it counts the number of data counts from a particular unit of code and number of data counts into that unit or into a data structure to measure the complexity. Not so useful in real time applications with millions of lines of code and very complex algorithms. Software Science: This method was started by Maurice H. Halstead. Again this is a very simple and quite useless sort of algorithm to calculate complexity of program code. The formula for complexity that Halstead proposed was as follows: N=n1logn1 + n2logn2 Where N is the implementation length of the code, n1 is the number of unique distinct operators appearing in the implementation, n2 is the number of unique distinct operands appearing in the implementation. Now he defines the program volume as V =N log(n1 + n2) Where log is logarithm to the base of 2. Then he suggests that more the volume of the program code, more complexity is. As I said the above two measures were quite useless for modern programs involving very complicated algorithms. McCabe’s Cyclamate Complexity: To measure the amount of decision logic that is loops like for loop, while loop etc. or breaks like if, case etc., for a simple software module, we can use McCabe’s Cyclamate Complexity. An example formula that

Commentary on Women Beware Women Essay

Beware Women is a Jacobean tragedy, which has a complex plot and deals with corrupted characters. This tragedy is about corruption in the court and life in general, love by money and how women can lead other women to destruction. As Tricomi states about the characters, they ‘are not wholly the product of their circumstances, but their circumstances condition their choices and propel them toward their destiny’. Middleton, as other Jacobean playwrights before him, has managed to point out that ‘aristocratic life is brutal and corrupt’. 2] The focus of this commentary will be concentrated on marriage and to what can lead one to fall apart. The first scene (Act I), deals with the characters of the play’s main plot: Leantio, Bianca and the Mother. In this scene, the readers come across with the insulting behaviour towards Bianca, where she is treated as an object. Leantio speaks of his wife with words of business, to him she is â€Å"the most unvalued’st purchase†.He describes her as if she was a dangerous object that must stay hidden and safe, away from the sight of men. When he talks about her, it is obvious that Bianca is for him a treasure and he is the thief that now has to hide his â€Å"best piece of theft† (I. ii) in a safe place so no one will steal it from him. Such words describing a human being are rather cruel, especially when Leantio is talking about a person for whom he is supposed to have true and pure feelings of love. Leantio is aware that Bianca’s family is rich, but he also knows that by marrying Bianca in secrecy and taking her away from them, Bianca will lose all of the property and money that belongs to her. He has also written over to her his house and put his mother in jeopardy. Although his act seems a romantic one and, even though he speaks of that relationship and feelings as being pure, his love is not mature; rather, it is one filled with jealousy. In the beginning of the play Bianca could be characterised as the victim because she has a mother-in-law who is not fond of her and does not approve their marriage and she is now imprisoned in poverty and in home. However, Bianca is ‘as much a victim as perpetrator, and she is to be judged as a tragic protagonist with a vexing mix of virtues and flaws’. [3] As seen in the plot, the Mother aids and abets in Bianca’s meeting with the Duke. The Mother and Livia hatched up a plan for Bianca’s rape and she falls into the trap, as Isabella did, but the rape was almost enticed on her part. ‘The attitude towards Bianca is one of dehumanizing possession and manipulation’. [4] But Bianca, after that, changes drastically and soon enough she becomes one of the most corrupted characters, who along with others, brings about the downfall and the final bloodshed in the play. Bianca chose money over her marriage, although, she blames the other women for her disaster. ‘Treachery and betrayal [†¦ ] are Bianca’s terms of explanation for her downfall’. [5] Bianca is seen by her mother-in-law as an added burden to her son’s finances. The Mother’s interest is focused only on money. For the Mother, Bianca as a wife has nothing to offer, she will only demand and receive. The Mother is sizing up the economics of their situation now that there are three members in the family. Leantio can barely support himself, and up until now he had to support his mother as well. The Mother doubts that her son is able to support a family of three. She claims that nothing can save him from this financial dead end by saying â€Å"My life can give you But little helps, and my death lesser hopes† (I. i). The Mother thinks of Bianca, as for every other wife, that she will require from Leantio â€Å"maintenance† (I. ii) fitting to her â€Å"birth and virtues† (I. ii), but also gratification of her desire for â€Å"affections, wills, and humours† (I. ii). [6] Leantio then expresses his intentions towards Bianca, by replying to his mother’s words, pleading with her not to â€Å"teach her to rebel† (I. ii) now that â€Å"she’s in a good way to obedience† (I. ii). Leantio’s â€Å"assurance† (I. ii), of keeping his â€Å"jewel† (I. ii) locked away â€Å"from all men’s eyes† (I. ii), is his mother. She is the one who holds the â€Å"key† (I. i) to his â€Å"treasure† (I. ii), and â€Å"old mothers† (I. ii) are â€Å"good to look to keys† (I. ii) when â€Å"sons lock chests† (I. ii). However, the irony here is that later on, it’s the Mother herself who pushes Bianca towards rape with the Duke, first to get rid of her, but then to accrue some of the benefits from the court life for herself and her son. Bianca is to Leantio nothing but an object of â€Å"great value† (I. ii), a â€Å"matchless jewel† (I. ii) that he has stolen. Because â€Å"temptation is a devil will not stick to fasten upon a saint† (I. ii), Leantio’s â€Å"gem† (I. ii) must stay hidden and locked. This is the â€Å"great policy† (I. i) for Leantio in order to never lose a treasure; never â€Å"show thieves our wealth† (I. ii). Bianca is the â€Å"treasure† (I. ii), Leantio is the â€Å"thief† (I. ii), and the â€Å"key† (I. ii) to his happiness holds his mother, thus, it could be said that the chest with the key is symbolic of Leantio and Bianca’s relationship. To conclude, this tragedy proves that women should beware women. Women lead other women to destruction, and are even responsible for another woman’s rape. Corruption and enemies are present everywhere but, as Bianca says in her dying breath, â€Å"Like our own sex, we have no enemy†.

Comparism of an everyday text with a literary text Essay

Choose one every day and one literary text. Using at least two analytical techniques from E301, analyze and compare your two texts in terms of their creativity and literariness, drawing on material from both parts of the module. In this paper I will analyze and compare a literary text and an everyday text, in terms of their creativity and literariness. I chose Philip Larkin’s (1964) poem, ‘Self’s the man’ (see Appendix, Text 1), as the literary text for analysis because it is not only smooth and pleasing to the eye and mind that it seems effortless to read and contain within one’s self but also because it arouses so many emotions which makes it ideal for analysis. In ‘Self’s the man’ Larkin (1964), is being cynical towards relationships and through the satirization of marriage; he contrasts himself with a mythical other, Arnold, with a view of talking about who is more selfish, claiming that married people are as selfish as single ones, that is, for their own comfort as well as fear that they will be left alone for the rest of their lives, people jump into marriage. The everyday text that I have chosen to analyze and compare with the poem, is an advertisement by DEBEERS (see Appendix, Text 2), targeting men, persuading them to buy a diamond ring for their lady, since diamonds, just like marriage, are an investment. Diamonds are a symbol of eternal love and devotion and men are aware of this symbolism, hence, DE BEERS exploits that in the advertisement by ingraining in the minds of men that if they want to stop ‘a woman getting away’ (Larkin, 1964), they should make their ‘two months’ salary last forever’ (DE BEERS, 2004). Although at first glance the two texts seem completely different, they are seemingly connected by the same theme of ‘relationships’, however, from two different contrasting contexts, with Text 1, being a poem by Philip Larkin (1964), and Text 2, being an advertisement by DE BEERS (2004). In order to evaluate the creativity and literariness of a text, a thorough analysis of the language the writer has used is of supreme importance. However, before analyzing the texts, it is necessary to have a broad interpretation of creativity and literariness. According to Sternberg (1999:3), ‘Creativity is the ability to produce work that i s both novel (i.e. Original, unexpected) and appropriate (i.e. Adaptive concerning task constraints). Furthermore, Swann (2006: 7) asserts that ‘creativity is not restricted to literary texts but is a common aspect of our interactions with others’, which links closely to Papen’s and Tusting’s (2006:315) claim  that ‘all meaning making processes have a creative element’. Hence, it can be said that creativity can be found in all literacy practices, in the way that texts are constructed, read and interpreted. Creativity has textual, socio-cultural and cognitive aspects (Carter, 2004) and in this paper both chosen texts will be analyzed in terms of all three. Literariness, on the other hand, is defined by the Russian Formalists as a sum of special linguistic and formal ‘properties that could be located in literary texts’ (Maybin & Pearce, 2006:6). The Formalists elucidate the observable ‘devices’ by which literary texts, especially poems, foreground their own language, in rhyme, and other patterns of sound and repetition . Hence, literariness is to be perceived in terms of defamiliarization, as a series of deviations from ‘ordinary’ language, ‘in which our routine ways of seeing and thinking are disrupted; our perceptions freshened; and our awareness of the world heightened’ (Shklovsky, in Hawks, 1997:62). Cook (1994) asserts that literariness is based on the notion of schema disruption where the reader’s views and perspectives are challenged in some way. He proposes that literariness results when a text and linguistic deviation cause schema disruption, refreshment or even change, however, whether a text generates schema refreshment ultimately depends on the reader’s desire for it to happen. Therefore, who the reader is, how he approaches and perceives the text with distinct background knowledge and expectations, ultimately determines the literary value of a text. In my analysis, I will first apply Jakobson’s (1960) methodology, stylistics approach and Carter’s (1997) criteria of literariness to the two texts and then contrast them with illustrations in terms of interpretative schemata. My intention in doing so is to highlight some of the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches and also modes in which they interact to better comprehend the nature of cre ativity and literariness. On the graphological level, in Text 1, the noticeable attributes are the traditional lineation, stanza divisions of poetry, and the presence of standard punctuation. The poem has 8 stanzas in all and each stanza consists of 4 lines. This creates a set rhythmic pattern, particularly in conjunction with the rhyme scheme. Text 2, on the other hand, on a graphic level, uses full capitalization in order to emphasize every letter in the ad and make it  look trim and tidy. The headline uses larger, capital and bold letters to draw readers’ attention and make them curious about what the advertisement mainly has to say, leading them to continue on reading unconsciously by arousing their curiosity and desire to know more about the product and subsequently persuading them to buy it. Moreover, Text 2, illustrates graphological deviation, by using solid background colors, and a brilliant diamond ring to focus all the reader’s attention to. On the phonic level, Text 1 has little ir regularity. The rhyme scheme of the poem is AABB, CCDD, where lines 1 & 2 and 3 & 4, rhyme in every verse with an exception of half-rhyme in the 3rd (supper/paper) and 4th (houses/trousers; mother/summer) stanzas. The use of rhyme creates an ‘end stop’, whereby the reader pauses slightly, emphasizing the words that rhyme. In Jakobson’s methodology (1960), when phonemes rhyme in a text and/or alliteration is present together with other sound effects of verse, ‘it is at once both a deviation from the code and an imposition of order upon it’ (Cook, 1994:396). Presuming that rhyming of phonemes is unique, literary, and an attribute of text, it can be said that, Text 1, is both creative and literary. In Text 2, on the other hand, the nine-word headline also contains linguistic exploitation, in a way that highlights and depicts the message which makes it an interesting Carpe diem poem urging the reader to seize the day by making his two months’ salary last forev er. Although, Text 2 is an advertisement and attention of the reader is traditionally supposed to be on the meaning rather than the sound, it is interesting to see how the headline, ‘HOW CAN YOU MAKE TWO MONTHS’ SALARY LAST FOREVER?’ contains phonological parallelism with an inline-rhyme (You/Two: both words come from a paradigm of one syllable words containing the sound /uË /) which as mentioned above makes it, both, creative and literary. The lexis in Text 1 is ‘ordinary’ rather than ‘poetic’. Larkin’s (1964) deviation from Standard English by using colloquial lexis: ‘perk’, ‘nippers’, ‘kiddies’ clobber’; interests the reader and familiarizes them with the situation, which is effective in that it is easy to read if one can relate to the poet. Moreover, the constant use of the conjunction ‘and’, in the 2nd, 3rd and 7th stanzas highlights the bare, repetitive and boring lifestyle of Arnold which is reduced to mundane tasks. Text 2, on the other hand, exploits lexical ambiguity at the semantic level. Thus, the slogan â€Å"A Diamond Is Forever,†Ã‚  means both that ‘a diamond is a never-ending sign of love’ (that is, the diamond is not merely seen as a rock but rather as a sign of eternal love, hence, the diamond, in Text 2, is made to produce love and comes to mean ‘love’) and that ‘a diamond would always hold its value’. Additionally, affirmative and commendatory words and phrases (‘perfect’, ‘she’ll cherish’, ‘she’ll love’, ‘surprise her’, ‘diamond experts since 1888’) are widely used in, Text 2, to impress the potential customer of the quality of the diamond ring, to form positive image in their minds, win their trust and arouse their desire to buy it. Moreover, in Text 2, the use of second person addressee â€Å"you† tends to shorten the distance between the reader and the advertiser, making the advertisement more like a face-to-face conversation where the advertiser speaks to the readers in a tender tone, making sincere promises and honest recommendations. In so doing, the advertisement moves the reader to action since the reader feels he is being thought of and plays an important role for the manufacturer. Hence, it can be said that, Text 2, has an obvious conative function, since it is supposed to address and influence the reader to buy a product, unlike, Text 1, where the poetic function dominates, making it self-referential (Thornborrow, 2006). Turning to the grammatical characteristics of the texts, Text 1, just like its lexis, seems pointedly ‘unpoetic’. Apart from Short’s (1996) idea of cohesion which can be identified in the poem since it contains logical and clear links between sentences through the use of words such as ‘and’ (‘And when he finishes supper’), ‘but’ (‘But wait not too fast’) and in form of personal reference, that is, through the use of personal pronouns where Arnold is named at the beginning to introduce him as a topic and then onwards the pronouns ‘he’ and ‘his’ are employed anaphorically for subsequent reference , there are only a few glimpses of patterning or ‘poetic’ syntax. One grammatical deviance in Text 1 is found in line 18 (‘Makes me feel a swine’), where the writer’s omission of the word ‘like’ draws particular attention to itself by deviating from what is expected. Imagery, a stylistic device, is used in Text 1, in the 3rd and 4th stanzas, where the poet invites the readers to imagine Arnold wheeling the ‘nippers’†¦round the  houses’(L.13) as well as painting the hall ‘in his old trousers’ (L.14) obviously at the command of his wife. Furthermore, the stylistic device, diction, which is the choice of distinct words used in a text to not only communicate meaning but also emotions, is being cleverly used in Text 1. The diction of ‘Self’s the man’ is accurate, vivid, expressive and chosen wisely by the poet. For instance, in the following sentence, ‘She takes as her perk’ (L.6), the ‘speediness’ and ‘brusqueness’ of the verb ‘takes’ insinuates a sense of forced snatching possibly even before Arnold has counted his money. The noun ‘perk’ promotes a negative view of women, suggesting that Arnold’s wife is a gold digger who expects to be paid for being there. Moreover, Larkin’s use of the colloquial idiom, ‘having a read at†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ instead of ‘read’, insinuates Arnold’s chronic fatigue, robbing him of the power of serious concentration. The phrase ‘Put a screw in this wall’ (L11) highlights how Arnold’s wife has the upper hand in the relationship, that she nags and controls him and ‘He has no time at all’ (L12), for he has given his life to marriage. Through his diction, one can perceive the poet’s sarcastic and cynical tone in Text 1, portraying Arnold as being trapped, unhappy and unfulfilled since he is enslaved, dominated and directed by his wife and children. The last stanza is an indecisive finishing statement that shows that the poet has reached the conclusion that he has a superior strategy in playing the game of life, however, by saying ‘Or – I suppose I can’ in Line 32, he lets the readers interpret and decide for themselves who i s more selfish. On the other hand, the grammatical style marker of significance in, Text 2, is the extensive use of present tense which demonstrates not only the positive features of the diamond ring, satisfying the consumer’s desire to know the present state of the product he wants but also makes the advertisement easier to comprehend without transferring to other tenses. But there is another aspect of the simple present in, Text 2, and that is its implication of universality and timelessness. Moreover, the use of interrogative sentences, in Text 2, such as, ‘How often will you give her something she’ll cherish for the rest of her life?’ and ‘How can you make two months’ salary last forever?’ arouses the reader’s attention since they are, both, captivating and thought provoking. Carter’s (1997) criteria of literariness, assists in confirming the general  opinion that both texts have a relatively high degree of literariness. The first criterion of Carter (1997) which is evident in, Text 1, is medium dependence. ‘Self’s the man’ creates a world of internal reference where the reader’s attention is ultimately ‘drawn into the text itself’ (Maybin & Pearce, 2006:16). Perceptibly, a lack of direct referential communication exists with the reader’s concerns, which results in an ‘enclosing effect’ proposed by Widdowson (1975) as being an attribute of literature. Carter (1997) asserts that such a text, which exclusively depends on itself, throws the reader’s expectations and emotions into turmoil, making them ‘feel insecure thus adding intensity to the meaning of the text’ (Carter, 1997:67). However, he elucidates that ‘no text can be so entirely autonomous that it refers only to itself nor so rich that a reader’s own experience†¦cannot extend the world it creates’ (Carter, 1997:82) which relates to Widdowson’s (1975:36) theory that ‘literary interpretation†¦is not concerned with what the writer meant by the text, but what the text means, or might mean, to the reader’. On the other hand, Text 2, points towards an external, verifiable reality which if required, could be reordered or reformed without altering the meaning. Moreover, Text 2, communicates with the reader in such a way that he/she is bound by cooperative conditions of conventional communication. It also relies on another medium, the employment of an image, to assist in reinforcing the promotional and persuasive effect, which when combined, shows aspects of literary creativity. The next criterion proposed by Carter (1997), genre mixing, is a type of deviation which demonstrates how all language can be employed to generate a literary effect by this process. Text 1 shows examples of deviation at the level of words and meaning as it includes colloquial words and phrases which stand out from the surrounding text (perk’, ‘nippers’, ‘kiddies’ clobber’, ‘having a read at’) while Text 2, exploits the language typically associated with advertising which could be subtly redeployed for literary purposes. Text 2, also employs graphological deviation, through the use of different layout, size and typeface. Polysemy, the use of words or phrases that have more than one meaning, is another criterion of Carter’s (1997) which can be seen in the following sentence in Text 2: ‘A Diamond is Forever’. These words as mentioned earlier carry the meaning that ‘a diamond  is a symbol of eternal loveâ₠¬â„¢ and that ‘a diamond would always remain valuable’. Moreover, the headline in Text 2, ‘How can you make two months’ salary last forever?’ is also polysemous, telling men that ‘they should invest their two months’ salary in buying a diamond ring for their lady which will make their love last forever’ and that ‘since diamonds are rare, a symbol of success and the most valuable possession, its value will only increase with time’, hence they are an ideal investment for their money. Carter’s (1997) criterion of text patterning expatiates on Jakobson’s (1960) concept of parallelism, nevertheless, on a much broader textual scale. Texts get their meaning from their context and what meaning the writer desires to establish depends to a larger extent on the reader. By looking at the structure of Text 1 and the way it is presented, one can say that it was written for no distinct purpose other than to entertain, whereas, Text 1 has a definite pragmatic function, for it is written f or a particular purpose which is to inform and persuade the reader to buy a diamond ring. So far, I have followed Jakobson (1960), Carter (1997) and the stylistics point of view, to analyze the formal features of the texts. However, in order for a text to serve as a coherent communicative act, certain schemata of the reader must be activated to make sense of what they read by applying the text to significant and authentic experiences. Text 1, activates the reader’s ‘married life’, ‘single life’ and ‘selfishness VS selflessness’ schema and as a result, judgments are made which go beyond the text. In Text 1, I interpret the relevant reader (depending on the reader) schemata to be as follows: Script: selfishness VS unselfishness of married and single people Script: marriage is an act of selflessness Script: married life has the bliss of being a husband and father Script: single people are inferior to married people Script: stay single since marriage is a form of entrapment Script: married people are as selfish as singles In Text 2, I interpret the relevant reader schemata (depending on the reader) as follows: Script: buy a diamond ring Plan: give a diamond ring Plan: show love and devotion Plan: impress the woman Goal: marry the woman Or Script: buy a diamond ring Goal: perfect investment for money since a diamond’s worth will increase with time No obvious mention of these schemata was made by the writers of the texts and I have only come to these cognitive conclusions with my own cultural background influencing my intuition. It can be said that, Text 1, ultimately results in schema reinforcement since it corroborates the stereotypical presumptions about people and the world. Text 2, also results in schema reinforcement since the advertisers assume that readers share and recognize their plans and are persuadable to the recommendation and will purchase a diamond ring. The analyses manifest how Jakobson’s and Carter’s methodology operates only at the linguistic level and not at the schematic and discoursal level. The literariness of both texts cannot be represented in simple Stylistics, Carter’s or Jakobson’s approach. Only with reference to the reader’s distinct schemata, can one argue for their literar iness or lack of it. In conclusion, the analyses demonstrate the weaknesses of Stylistics, Jakobson’s and Carter’s inherency approach in isolation, highlighting the importance of the reader’s unique interpretative schemata. However, one should not cast aside Jakobson’s, Stylistics and inherency approach but rather supplement them with the pivotal role of the reader. The significance of a reader to determine the literariness of a text was neglected by Jakobson, although, interestingly, his philosophy strongly insinuates the presence of the reader. In order for a text to have a poetic function, it has to have an effect on the person reading the text, which is, the reader. Stylistics and Carter’s inherency focus, on the other hand, are only beneficial in showing that ‘there are no sharp cut-offs between literary and non-literary texts and that prototypical literary texts, even if not poems, contain poetic elements’ (Thornborrow, 2006:65). Hence, Text 1, with its few glimpses of linguistic patterning and deviation, may still be regarded as literary by many readers, whereas, Text 2, with its density of patterning and deviation will hardly be regarded as being literary only because it is classified as an advertisement. This, however, depends upon individual  readers since point of views and approaches present in the texts will arouse particular judgments in particular readers. These judgments will differ according to the schemata of the reader, and the extent to which their valued expectations and emotions are thrown into turmoil. Moreover, it can be said that both texts are wide open to recategorization as readers change for different readers will categorize a text differently. REFERENCES Carter, R (1997) in Goodman, S & O’Halloran, K. (2006) The art of English: Literary creativity, Open University, Milton Keynes, pp. 60-89 Carter, R (2004) Language and Creativity: The Art of Common Talk, London, Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, pp. 1-226. Cook, D. (1994) in in Goodman, S & O’Halloran, K. (2006) The art of English: Literary creativity, Open University, Milton Keynes, pp. 37-43, 396-413 DeBeers, (2004) ‘How Can You Make Two Months Salary Last Forever’, [online], http://lessisabore.com/main_files/writing/04_diamond.html (Accessed on 2 April 2012) Grice, P. (1975) in Goodman, S & O’Halloran, K. (2006) The art of English: Literary creativity, Open University, Milton Keynes Jakobson (1960) in Goodman, S & O’Halloran, K. (2006) The art of English: Literary creativity, Open University, Milton Keynes, pp. 6-24, 49-74 Larkin, P (1964), The Whitsun Weddings, Faber & Faber Ltd, London, UK, p. 26 Maybin, J. & Pearce, M. (2006) in Goodm an, S & O’Halloran, K. (2006) The art of English: Literary creativity, Open University, Milton Keynes, p.6 Papen, U. & Tusting, K. (2006), in Maybin, J & Swann, J. (2006) The art of English: everyday creativity, Open University, Milton Keynes, pp. 312-331 Short, M. (1996) Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays and Prose, Addison Wesley Longman Ltd., Essex, UK Sternberg, R.J. (1999) in Carter, R. (2004) Language and Creativity: The Art of Common Talk, London, Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, p.47 Thornborrow, J. (2006) in Goodman, S & O’Halloran, K. (2006) The art of English: Literary creativity, Open University, Milton Keynes, pp.50-74 Widdowson, H. (2006) in Goodman, S & O’Halloran, K. (2006) The art of English: Literary creativity, Open University, Milton Keynes, pp. 30-37

Difficulties Placed on Women by American Society Expectations - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 3 Words: 932 Downloads: 2 Date added: 2018/12/26 Category Society Essay Type Research paper Level High school Tags: Gender Roles Essay Responsibility Essay Women Essay Did you like this example? The world revolves around demeaning women through the depiction of gender roles as fixed and irrefutable. Most women around the world feel that they are suffering an assault from conservative minds that try to keep them insignificant. In the United States, the restrictions imposed on women in regards to birth control and abortion is a clear indication of the struggle that American still face. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Difficulties Placed on Women by American Society Expectations" essay for you Create order American women continue to meet challenges that threaten their rights and dignity leading to the formation of movements such as Women in the World Foundation. Such actions seek inspiration from outside countries that are less developed than the US thus putting them to shame. Societal expectations caused by assumed roles for women tend to create challenges for women as they try to fulfill the cultural norms expected of them. Gender stereotyping resulting from differentiation of genders may seem ordinary to some while offensive to others. Gender being a cultural concept created by ones culture tends to dictate the behavioral patterns, norm characteristics, and cultural expectations. From the moment a child is born, gender stereotyping clouds their world and they adapt to these American cultural expectations. When an expectant mother finds out that she is expecting a baby girl, the nursery is painted in pink, and Barbie dolls flood the room. As she grows up, she is supposed to be an emotional and sentimental person who is far from what a boy child is allowed to grow up to become. Career choices for her are determined by their ability to balance with her role as a mother, wife, and homemaker. Unlike a boy who can pursue careers in defense forces and civil service, she is already limited by society to professions such as counseling and teaching which are deemed to be flexible career options. Any woman deviat ing from this American societal construct brings to them a lifetime of criticism and discouragement. The assumption that the different gender roles are equal is misleading as it the necessity and importance of gender roles. Each gender is relevant, and the characters they play are significant for the growth of the society. This line of thought assumes that women are comfortable with just the private functions of raising children and keeping their homes clean while men should venture out and conquer the world. These gender roles are far from the reality on the ground and limit people to specific boxes. Some men are more comfortable cleaning and cooking for their families while some women are very good at repairing cars. Women should be given a chance to choose what comes naturally to them rather than to be pushed into societal or cultural expectations. History proves that women are not weak creatures as evidenced by leadership and power roles that some of them played. Some Native American cultures had women as rulers and not men. The notion that men should be visible in the public spheres while the women should only occupy the private areas of life came to be in the 1800s. During the colonial times, women engaged in trading activities as much as men involved in the primary role of the moral and religious upbringing of the children at home. Royal women such as Queen Victoria in Britain, Cleopatra, and Queen Nefertiti of Egypt prove that women are powerful once they take charge of leading roles. Limiting women to specific roles and specific jobs robs them of their personalities and their freedom. Allowing them to explore their talents and strengths rather than forcing them into prescribed boxes helps in growing the American society. The American community needs to become aware of the bias that it has created for the American women and how negatively it affects them. The glorification of gender differences makes it hard to appreciate individual differences that could create opportunities for many American women. Women still get paid less compared to their male counterparts in the same job descriptions. Despite the existence of the Equal Pay Act for over five decades, women get underpaid by about 30%. The conversation about income inequality still goes unheard or with little effect to eliminate this income gap. There are far more similarities between men and women compared to the differences and such should be appreciated. The presence of an American male is double that of an American female in the film industry. To make it worse, those women who venture into the film industries get lesser roles compared to the men who get significant roles. There are fewer women producers, film critics, and directors who are the determinant jobs in the film industry. Recent reports and allegations of sexual violence against women in the media and film industry prove the difficulties that women face. Most women have come out to show how their male superiors took or tried to take advantage of them sexually. Most of these cases are reported at the entry point when the women try to enter these extremely competitive industries. Even when an American woman finds a way to get into employment and earn equal pay, she still faces discrimination in the workplace. Some workplaces are uncomfortable with pregnancy and do not accommodate the needs of a pregnant woman or a new mother. The schedule of a pregnant woman or a new mother should be less hectic to help them to accommodate the new life they are taking care of, but most employers deem this period as an inconvenience. Other women face body shaming as a result of pregnancy or weight gain. All these difficulties serve to increase the will of the American woman to thrive in the society.