Red BAron essays

Red BAron essays World War 1s leading fighter pilot for Germany was Manfred Freiherr von Richthofen. During his two years of fighting for Germany he shot down eighty enemy planes. Richthofen painted his plane bright red so everyone that saw him coming would be in fear of, THE RED KNIGHT, or better known as the RED BARON. Most of the planes the Richthofen shot down were British. Most of the people that Richthofen defeated burned to death after the bullets form his machine gun hit the gas tanks, as for the pilots who were able to eject before the plane went down or exploded Richthofen would fly by giving them a friendly wave or land to shake hands. IN 1918 Richthofen was 25 and the commander of Pursuit Squadron 1 of the German Air Force. The squadron that Richthofen was in charge of was nick named the Flying Circus. His squadron flew Fokkers. The squadron painted their planes in gaudy colors but no one was aloud to copy the all red design of the red barons plane. On the morning of April 21, 1918 Richthofen led two-dozen warplanes over the Somme river Valley of France. Richthofen was eager and hoping to gain air control so they could launch an offensive attack on the British forces below. As thy were chasing a few Australian photo reconnaissance planes they encountered some ROYAL AIR FORCE FIGHTERS. They commenced the air battle, which was quite a show for the men down in the ditches. Richthofen chose his one victim, which was LT. (Lieutenant) Wilfred May from Canada. Wilfred was a novice fighter pilot. He did not notice that he had Richthofen on his tail until he saw tracer bullets begin to arc past the stays on the wings. Wilfred looked behind him to see the big red plane chasing behind him with the machine guns spitting fire. Wilfred then took risky actions to avoid being hit and downed he pulled h ...

Summary and Analysis of David Mamets Play Oleanna

Summary and Analysis of David Mamets Play Oleanna Oleanna, a powerful two-character drama by David Mamet, explores the destructiveness of miscommunication and excessive political correctness. It is a play about academic politics, student/teacher relationships, and sexual harassment. Plot Overview Carol, a female college student, privately meets with her male professor. She is concerned about failing the class. She is frustrated because she doesn’t understand the professor’s overly verbose lectures. At first, the professor (John) is callous with her, but when she explains that she feels incompetent, he expresses empathy for her. He â€Å"likes her† so he bends the rules and decides to give her an â€Å"A† if she agrees to meet with him to discuss the material, one-on-one. Act One During most of Act One, the teacher is abrupt, interruptive, and distracted by continual phone calls about real estate problems. When the student does get a chance to speak, it is difficult for her to express herself clearly. Their conversation becomes personal and sometimes upsetting. He touches her shoulder on several occasions, urging her to sit down or to remain in the office. Finally, she is about to confess something deeply personal, but the phone rings yet again and she never discloses her secret. Act Two An unknown amount of time passes (probably a few days)  and John meets with Carol again. However, it is not to discuss education or philosophy. The student has written a formal complaint about the professor’s behavior. She feels that the instructor was lewd and sexist. Also, she claims that his physical contact was a form of sexual harassment. Interestingly, Carol is now very well spoken. She criticizes him with great clarity and mounting hostility. The teacher is astounded that his previous conversation was interpreted in such an offensive way. Despite John’s protests and explanations, Carol is unwilling to believe that his intentions were good. When she decides to leave, he holds her back. She becomes scared and rushes out the door, calling for help. Act Three During their final confrontation, the professor is packing up his office. He has been fired. Perhaps because he is a glutton for punishment, he invites the student back to make sense out of why she destroyed his career. Carol has now become even more powerful. She spends much of the scene pointing out her instructor’s many flaws. She declares she is not out for revenge; instead she has been prompted by â€Å"her group† to take these measures. When it is revealed that she has filed criminal charges of battery and attempted rape, things get really ugly! (But this article won’t spoil the ending for the reader.) Who Is Right? Who Is Wrong? The genius of this play is that it stimulates discussion, even arguments. Is the professor attracted to her in Act One?Does he behave inappropriately?Does he deserve to be denied tenure?What are her motives?Is she doing this simply out of spite?Is she right to claim her professor is sexist? Or is she merely over-reacting? That’s the fun of this drama; it all about the perspective of each audience member. Ultimately, both characters are deeply flawed. Throughout the play, they rarely agree or understand each other. Carol, the Student Mamet designed her character so that most of the audience will ultimately loath Carol by Act Two. The fact that she interprets his touch on the shoulder as sexual assault shows that Carol may have some issues that she does not reveal. In the final scene, she tells the professor not to call his wife â€Å"Baby.† This is Mamet’s way of showing that Carol has truly crossed a line, prompting the enraged professor to cross a line of his own. John, the Teacher John may have good intentions in Act One. However, he doesn’t seem to be a very good or wise instructor. He spends most of his time waxing eloquently about himself and very little time actually listening. He does flaunt his academic power, and he does unintentionally demean Carol by shouting, â€Å"Sit down!† and by physically trying to urge her to stay and finish their conversation. He doesn’t realize his own capacity for aggression until it is too late. Still, many audience members believe that he is completely innocent of the charges of sexual harassment and attempted rape. Ultimately, the student possesses an underlying deviousness. The teacher, on the other hand, is overtly pompous and foolish. Together they make a very dangerous combination.