Biography of John W. Young

John Watts Young (September 24, 1930 - January 5, 2018), was one of the best-known of NASAs astronaut corps. In 1972, he served as commander of the Apollo 16  mission to the moon and in 1982, he served as commander of the first-ever flight of the space shuttle Columbia. As the only astronaut to work aboard four different classes of spacecraft, he became known throughout the agency and the world for his technical skill and calm under pressure. Young was married twice, once to Barbara White, with whom he raised two children. After their divorce, Young married Susy Feldman. Personal Life John Watts Young was born in San Francisco to William Hugh Young and Wanda Howland Young. He grew up in Georgia and Florida, where he  explored nature and science as a Boy Scout. As an undergraduate at Georgia Institute of Technology, he studied aeronautical engineering and graduated in 1952 with highest honors. He entered the U.S. Navy straight out of college, eventually ending up in flight training. He became a helicopter pilot, and eventually joined a fighter squadron where he flew missions from the Coral Sea and the USS Forrestal. Young then moved to become a test pilot, as so many astronauts did, at Patuxent River and the Naval Test Pilot School. Not only did he fly a number of experimental aircraft, but he also set several world records while flying the Phantom II jet. Joining NASA In 2013, John Young published an autobiography of his years as a pilot and astronaut, called Forever Young. He told the story of his incredible career simply, humorously, and humbly. His NASA years, in particular, took this man—often referred to as an astronauts astronaut—from the Gemini missions of the early to mid-1960s to the Moon aboard Apollo, and eventually to the ultimate test pilot dream: commanding a shuttle to orbital space. Youngs public demeanor was that of a calm, sometimes wry, but always professional engineer and pilot. During his Apollo 16 flight, he was so laid-back and focused that his heart rate (being tracked from the ground) barely rose above normal. He was well-known for thoroughly examining a spacecraft or instrument and then zeroing in on its mechanical and engineering aspects, often saying, after a blizzard of questions, Im just asking... Gemini and Apollo John Young joined NASA in 1962, as part of Astronaut Group 2. His classmates were Neil Armstrong, Frank Borman, Charles Pete Conrad, James A. Lovell, James A. McDivitt, Elliot M. See, Jr, Thomas P. Stafford, and Edward H. White (who died in the Apollo 1 fire  in 1967). They were referred to as the New Nine and all but one went on to fly several missions over the next decades. The exception was Elliot See, who was killed in a T-38 crash. Youngs first of six flights to space came in March 1965 during the early Gemini era, when he piloted Gemini 3 in the first manned Gemini mission. The next year, in July 1966, he was the command pilot for Gemini 10 where he and teammate Michael Collins did the first double rendezvous of two spacecraft in orbit. When the Apollo missions began, Young was immediately tapped to fly the dress rehearsal mission that led to the first Moon landing. That mission was Apollo 10 and took place in May 1969, not quite two months before Armstrong and Aldrin made their historic trip. Young didnt fly again until 1972 when he commanded Apollo 16 and achieved the fifth human lunar landing in history. He walked on the Moon (becoming the ninth person to do so) and drove a lunar buggy across its surface. The Shuttle Years The first flight of the space shuttle Columbia required a special pair of astronauts: experienced pilots and trained space fliers. The agency chose John Young to command the maiden flight of the orbiter (which had never been flown to space with people aboard) and Robert Crippen as the pilot. They roared off the pad on April 12, 1981. The mission was the first manned one to use solid-fuel rockets, and its objectives were to get to orbit safely, orbit Earth, and then return to a safe landing on Earth, as an airplane does. Young and Crippens first flight was a success and made famous in an IMAX movie called Hail Columbia. True to his heritage as a test pilot, Young descended from the cockpit after landing and did a walk-around of the orbiter, pumping his fist in the air and inspecting the craft. His laconic responses during the post-flight press briefing were true to his nature as an engineering and pilot. One of his most-quoted lines answers was to a question about ejecting from the shuttle if there were problems. He simply said, You just pull the little handle. After the successful first flight of the space shuttle, Young commanded only one other mission—STS-9 again on Columbia. It carried the Spacelab to orbit, and on that mission, Young stepped into history as the first person to fly into space six times. He was supposed to fly again in 1986, which would have given him another space flight record, but the Challenger explosion delayed the NASA flight schedule for more than two years. In the aftermath of that tragedy, Young was very critical of NASA management for its approach to astronaut safety. He was removed from flight duty and assigned a desk job at NASA, serving in executive positions for the rest of his tenure. He never flew again, after logging more than 15,000 hours of training and preparations for nearly a dozen missions for the agency. After NASA John Young worked for NASA for 42 years, retiring in 2004. He had already retired from the Navy with the rank of captain years earlier. Yet, he remained active in NASA affairs, attending meetings and briefings at the Johnson Space Flight Center in Houston. He made occasional public appearances to celebrate important milestones in NASA history and also made appearances at specific space gatherings and a few educators meetings but otherwise remained largely out of the public eye until his death. John Young Clears the Tower for the Final Time Astronaut John W. Young died from complications of pneumonia on January 5, 2018. In his lifetime, he flew more than 15,275 hours in all kinds of aircraft, and nearly 900 hours in space. He earned many awards for his work, including the Navy Distinguished Service Medal with Gold Star, the Congressional Space Medal of Honor, the NASA Distinguished Service Medal with three oak leaf clusters, and NASA Exceptional Service Medal. He is a fixture in several aviation and astronaut halls of fame, has a school and planetarium named for him, and received Aviation Weeks Philip J. Klass award in 1998. John W. Youngs fame extends well beyond his flight time to books and movies. He will always be remembered for his integral role in space exploration history.

Use of Allegory and Symbols in William Goldgings Lord of...

Use of Allegory and Symbols in William Goldgings Lord of the Flies William Goldings Lord of the Flies allegorically shows the good and evil that co-exists in every human being. Each character and symbol renders this possible by what it represents. Ralph and Jack allegorically represent opposing political forces: Jack as the dictator or fascist and Ralph as the prototype of a democratic leader. The island represents the archetypal garden and the conch shell represents power. Golding uses British schoolboys to show progressive degeneration and to prove that a little bit of evil exists in all of us. Each of these symbols aid in proving that we all have some evil in our hearts. Ralph begins the story as a carefree†¦show more content†¦The lamp of knowledge or fires of inspiration are familiar expressions throughout literature. Once Ralph realizes that he has the welfare of others to think about, he also realizes that the rational procedure, (which Piggy represents) has become a necessary and valuable tool. Piggy, the corpulent sidekick, symbolically allies himself to the leader of the boys. Simon plays only one, but very important, allegorical figure. He takes on the form of a Christ-figure and resembles characters in many biblical stories and events. At the beginning of the story, we see him picking fruit for the littluns and resembling a carpenter by building huts. The other boys see Simon as queer or funny, but he has no offensive traits. He remains the one person on the island who seems to commune with the elements. For him the island represents a paradise. Goldings descriptions of Simon are lyrical and poetic. They are in stark contrast to the harsh passages that tell of the clashes between Ralph and Jack. We can also contrast the gaudy bird, the harsh cry and the abyss of ages found in Jacks jungle to the honey-colored sunlight and bright, fantastic birds of Simons jungle. With the possibility of evil or a beastie on the island, Simons judgments on the whereabouts of the beast conclude: perhaps we are it. When Simon

Lifestyle Changes for School Age Children at Risk for Type 2 Diabetes. Free Essays

Nurse’s Role in Identifying High-Risk groups, and Promoting Lifestyle changes for School Age Children at Risk for Type 2 Diabetes. March 24, 2013 Abstract Type 2 diabetes mellitus among school age children has increased drastically just in the past several years and is becoming and ever growing trend. Family history, obesity, and lifestyle are risk factors that play a major role in the onset of type 2 diabetes. We will write a custom essay sample on Lifestyle Changes for School Age Children at Risk for Type 2 Diabetes. or any similar topic only for you Order Now Among these, obesity is the greatest risk factor, followed by physical inactivity. The main purpose of this research is to examine the nurse’s role in identifying high-risk groups, and promoting lifestyle change for school age children at risk for Type 2 diabetes. In reviewing and studying various peer-reviewed articles, and journals from different databases, it was determined that the nurse plays a big role in health promotion, and education. Nurses are able to do this by taking holistic approaches, and forming individualized care plans to suit each child’s lifestyle. An individualized plan motivates the child to meet goals, and gives them a visual guide in which to note progress. Keywords: Diabetes, Type 2, Children, Nurses Nurse’s Role in Identifying High-Risk groups, and Promoting Lifestyle Changes Carbohydrates are the body’s main energy source. The role of the digestive system is to break carbohydrates down into blood sugar glucose so it can be used for energy; in addition, glucose is needed for all body cells to maintain homeostatic balance. When the body loses its ability to maintain stable glucose levels, diabetes develops. In type 2 diabetes, cells in the body become increasingly resistant to the effects of insulin, and glucose levels gradually rise in the bloodstream. Eventually, these dangerous levels of glucose in the body can cause serious complications such as heart disease, blindness, and kidney failure. Type 2 diabetes mellitus among school age children has increased drastically just in the past several years and is becoming and ever growing trend. This chronic condition formally rare among children has become increasingly common as a result of sedentary lifestyle, diet, and lack of health promotion. Fortunately, type 2 diabetes can be prevented through awareness, and education. Nurses in particular can play a big role in bringing awareness to this epidemic, especially among school age children. Building a solid foundation can prevent the onset of this chronic illness in adulthood, and mostly likely will promote healthy lifestyle choices in the future. The purpose of this paper is to examine the nurse’s role in identifying high-risk groups and promoting lifestyle change for school age children at risk for Type 2 diabetes. In order to address this issue, and effectively promote change nurses must have a clear understanding of this chronic illness. So what is the nurse’s role in identifying high-risk groups, and promoting lifestyle changes, for school age children at risk for type 2 diabetes? Method This is a review of the literature to answer the research question. The following databases and websites were used: Academic Search Complete, CINAL, and American Diabetes Association website. Findings: Identifying high risk group Identifying and targeting high risk groups is crucial to promoting lifestyle change for children at risk for type 2 diabetes. This is the first step the nurse should take in order to implement change. Targeting the high-risk group is probably a more applicable way and is recommended by the American Diabetes Association† (Jung-Nan, W et al. , 2009, p. 259). Nurses can quickly identify children at risk for type 2 diabetes by looking at these three areas which include family history, obesity and lifestyle. Family history is important in addressing the epidemic. It was proven in a research study do ne by Jung-Nan that â€Å"Children with more family members having diabetes were more likely to have T2D† (Jung-Nan, W et al. 2009, p. 260). Although family history is a non-modifiable risk factor, recognizing patterns in a child’s immediate and extended family is an important task the nurse must complete before promoting lifestyle change. Second, it is important to address the issue of obesity and lifestyle. Obesity is the leading cause of type diabetes and many other long term chronic health conditions. The development of childhood obesity is due largely in part to lifestyle, which includes diet and physical inactivity. Children often consume foods high in fat, sugar, and calories, and do not engage in any sort of physical activity. As a result increased input and little energy expenditure, eventually causes steady weight gain. Fortunately, childhood obesity and unhealthy lifestyle are modifiable risk factors, which can be largely prevented with proper diet and exercise. Therefore, the ability to identify these three risk factors can aid the nurse in developing plans, and ultimately motivate school age children to adopt healthy lifestyles. Promoting lifestyle change When particular risk factors have been properly identified the nurse can begin promoting lifestyle change by formulating individualized plans for the school age child. Because obesity is the leading cause of type 2 diabetes among children, nutrition and exercise plans should be included in all individualized care plans. The nurse should promote a healthy diet by making the nutritional plan suitable for the child’s developmental level, incorporating healthful foods that the child will enjoy. In addition, the nurse should get feedback from the child about what foods he or she dislikes. This can valuable in developing a personalized nutritional plan. Also, attention should also be given to portion sizes, calories, and the amount of vitamins and minerals provided in each meal. In the same way, the exercise plan should also be tailored to the developmental level of the child, and should include satisfying, and rewarding activities. Plans should be holistic in nature, focusing on all areas of the child’s life, familial influences taking top priority. Parent’s influence dietary habits and the amount of physical activity the child chooses to engage in. As a consequence, if parent’s engage in little physical activity, and put no emphasizes on proper nutrition the child will eventually adopt this behavior and view it as â€Å"healthy†. Understanding the parent’s views on diet and exercise, can help the nurse better assess and develop a proper care plan. However, when parents are hesitant about changing their lifestyle, it can be a major setback for the nurse when developing an individualized plan. In this situation, the nurse should be patient, and willing to tailor the plan to meet the needs of each individual in the family. Lastly, in order for oals and desired outcomes to be successfully met the nurse must be through in organizing and gathering data by following a certain sequence during assessment, piecing together subjective data from both parents and child, and validating it with objective data. Conclusion Type 2 diabetes in children continues to rise and has become an epidemic. Consequently, preventative m easures must be taken to prevent the onset of type 2 diabetes in school age children; emphasis on awareness and health promotion is necessary and must be taken seriously by nurses to motivate children to make positive lifestyle changes. The nurse must be able to correctly identify risk factors associated with type 2 diabetes. The nurse can then promote lifestyle changes by successfully developing individual plans to meet the needs of each child. The nurse should be holistic in approach, and must be sensitive to the needs of both parent and child. And lastly, the nurse should be through and accurate to successfully meet goals and desired outcomes for each child. Through doing this, the nurse can promote lifestyle change, prevent type 2 diabetes, and ultimately influence children to make healthy choices for life. References American Diabetes Association Home Page – American Diabetes Association. (n. d. ). American Diabetes Association Home Page – American Diabetes Association. Retrieved March 25, 2013, from http://www. diabetes. org Beckwith, S. (2010). Diagnosing type 2 diabetes in children and young people. British Journal Of School Nursing, 5(1), 15-19. Retrieved from http://search. ebscohost. com/login. aspx? direct=truedb=c8hAN=2010607580site= Coe, S. (2010). Clinical focus. Nutrition related to obesity and diabetes as a public health issue. Nurse Prescribing, 8(8), 376. Retrieved from http://search. ebscohost. com/login. aspx? direct=truedb=c8hAN=2010758805site=ehost-live Jung-Nan, W. , Hung-Yuan, L. , Yi-Chia, W. , Lee-Ming, C. , Mao-Shin, L. , Cheng-Hsin, L. , Fung-Chang, S. (2010). Detailed family history of diabetes identified children at risk of type 2 diabetes: a population-based case-control study. Pediatric Diabetes, 11(4), 258-264. doi:10. 1111/j. 1399-5448. 2009. 00564. x Rabbitt, A. , Coyne, I. (2012). Childhood obesity: nurses’ role in addressing the epidemic. British Journal How to cite Lifestyle Changes for School Age Children at Risk for Type 2 Diabetes., Papers

Utilitarianisms Sacrificial Lamb free essay sample

Talents are put to waste that if fostered would have blossomed into exceptional skills. The greatest example of this present within Hard Times is Louisa Gradgrind. Louisa is brought up in a house headed by a Utilitarian school teacher, her father Thomas Gradgrind Sr. , and with a quite and docile mother, Mrs. Gradgrind, who is unable to convey her own emotions, let alone foster any in her children. Due to her father ’s suppression of her emotions and Utilitarian society, Louisa-who held so much potential- is quelled and left as an empty and hollow device. When Louisa is introduced in Chapter three, she is described as a â€Å"fire with nothing to burn, a starved imagination keeping life in itself somehow. † (12). This description Louisa depicts her as a cold vacant nothingness, void of all emotion. Louisa’s father, Thomas Gradgrind was not a strong paternal figure being distant and not allowing Louisa any thing from life but facts. However, Louisa has somehow kept her inner thirst for knowledge and fancy alive, still able to recognize that she has been wronged by her father and the Utilitarian system. On a less metaphorical level, fire is also what keeps the factories running, and produces all of Bounderby’s money. In Hard Times, fire represents both the good that Louisa has within her, and the evil that is Bounderby and the Utilitarian system’s prosper. The manner in which Gradgrind runs his schoolhouse demonstrates the type of environment in which Louisa grew up. David Lodge categorizes the way in which Gradgrind teaches into three categories, â€Å"(1) It is authoritarian, fanatical and bullying in its application, (2) It is rigid, abstract and barren in quality, (3) It is materialistic and commercial in its orientation. (Lodge) When Gradgrind notices Sissy, a new pupil, he automatically tries to remove her individuality and puts his method of teaching into effect. He demands that she never refer to herself as Sissy, but rather Cecelia and promptly begins referring to her as â€Å"girl number twenty. † Gradgrind is attempting to remove Sissy’s indiv iduality by making her name conform to that of a normal victorian society, and furthers this process of removing her individuality by referring to her in class as girl number twenty, demonstrating the bullying and authoritarian nature of his teaching. Gradgrind is turning Sissy, the name that embodies the life of fancy of the circus within which Sissy grew up, into girl number twenty. The name â€Å"girl number twenty† an attempt to turn Sissy into a faceless, nameless, and emotionless utilitarian pawn, just another one of the masses, just a number in line to the emotional slaughter house. But Sissy has grown up in a society unlike that of the other children and Louisa and she is able throughout the novel to keep her emotions and individuality in tack. Gradgrind, with another attempt to batter Sissy’s being, asks her to define a horse. Growing up on the circus with horses, Sissy is unable to define that animal that has played such a role in her life. Asking Sissy to define a horse is comparable to one being asked to define air. Sissy, unlike the other children, has stood face to face with a horse, stroked it, and watch her father or even herself ridden upon a horse in the circus ring. Asking Sissy for a simple definition is impossible and she is baffled. Gradgrind calls on another student, Bitzer, to finish the task for her, he answers: â€Å"Quadruped. Graminivorous. Forty teeth, namely, twenty-four grinders, four eye-teeth, and twelve incisive. Sheds coat in the spring: in marshy countries sheds hoofs, too. Hoofs hard, but requiring to be shod with iron. Age known by marks in mouth. † Within the first five pages Dickens is able to demonstrate an extreme, emotionless, and perfect utilitarian individual in Bitzer. Bitzer is the embodiment of utilitarianism. He relies only upon facts to run his life, casting out anything that is not self bettering, this including all â€Å"useless† emotions. Bitzer is an extremists view of utilitarianism however, this being the way Dickens wished to portray Utilitarianism. In regards to a family, Bitzer scorns the subject, it having no self fulfilling purpose in is utilitarian society. Having a family requires some small amount of emotions that Bitzer is not capable of comprehending, and also requiring money, taking away from himself. When asked about families, Bitzer states he does not care at all that he is alone, â€Å"I have only one mouth to feed, and that’s the person I most like to feed. † (90). Bitzer as described by Edgar H. Johnson, is the â€Å"ultimate product of the system,† being boring, soulless, and basing every aspect of his life upon â€Å"bargain and sale, controlled by self-interest. Bitzer demonstrates what Gradgrind would want all of his school children to become including Sissy, rather than what his daughter Louisa had become. Louisa, unlike Bitzer is unable to void herself entirely of fancy, but has not been taught how to control and use her emotions that have remained through her utilitarian up bringing. S issy, being Louisa’s foil, embodies what was seen as the perfect woman of the era. Sissy is warm, loving, nurturing and gentle. Louisa is unfeeling, depressing, and dark. By creating such characters Dickens is not attempting to emphasize Louisa’s foul nature, but trying to draw precedence to the fact that Louisa’s upbringing, void of human connection, has molded her to this person. Louisa has been given nothing in life but facts. When Louisa is told about Bounderby’s marriage proposal, she cannot express how she feels, so she states, â€Å"There seems to be nothing there but languid and monotonous smoke. Yet when the night comes, Fire bursts out. † (96). Louisa cannot simply express to her father that she detests bounderby because she is what would best be described as the â€Å"languid and monotonous smoke. This fact however, is an expression of her true emotions. Louisa is expressing how she is this dreary, disgusting, poisoned smoke, but when the â€Å"fire bursts out† at night, there is something more to this smoke than would appear before. This fire to these smokestacks represents the passion and the creativity that is present within Louisa, that if nurtured could become the change from the utilitarian shell that she has been forced to embody. Due to her inability to understand her own emotions, and without any paternal or maternal figure in her life, Louisa channels all of her love to her brother Tom. Louisa is unable to â€Å"distinguish sensual passion from fraternal affection,† (Fabrizio) and there for is forced into what Richard Fabrizio describes in his essay -Wonderful No-Meaning: Language and the Psychopathology of the Family in Hard Times- as â€Å"unmanageable† thoughts that both children foster, as these are the only feelings they are able to have. Their relationship is â€Å"abnormal† in terms of a normal sibling love and is turned into one that is much more romantic than that common to siblings. Tom is effected by Utilitarian society for the worse, however and is completely engrossed with his own self fulfillments. Tom appreciates Louisa’s affections, but is not able to return them entirely as he is much more passionate towards money and gambling. Tom apprentices at Josiah Bounderby’s bank, and when Bounderby proposes the idea of marriage to Mr. Gradgrind, although Mr. Gradgrind pressures Louisa into this marriage, it is in fact Tom who sways his sister most greatly into this horrific marriage. Fabrizio describes this perverse and twisted relationship between the two siblings as this: â€Å" Tom actively uses Louisa while passively accepting her love, while she passively accepts his usage while actively loving him. (Fabrizio). Tom abuses Louisa, the only person to ever attempt to give him love, and â€Å"knowingly trades Louisa to secure his pleasure,† (Fabrizio) that he has found in money. By accepting this marriage, and the betrayal from Tom, Louisa has committed a figurative and emotional suicide. She has given up and is turned into a hollow and broken individual. When Louisa returns home and attempts to express her emotions to her father, Mr. Gradgrind, they come out in somewhat of a jumbled mess, but she is still able to get her point across, screaming at her father, And I so young. In this condition, father for I show you now, without fear or favour, the ordinary deadened state of my mind as I know it you proposed my husband to me. I took him. I never made a pretence to him or you that I loved him. I knew, and, father, you knew, and he knew, that I never did. I was not wholly indifferent, for I had a hope of being pleasant and useful to Tom. I made that wild escape into something visionary, and have slowly found out how wild it was. But Tom had been the subject of all the little tenderness of my life; perhaps he became so because I knew so well how to pity him † (209). Even though Louisa is unable to fully understand her emotions, she is more capable of feeling than her father had previously thought. Louisa agreed to marry Mr. Bounderby because her father convinces her that it is a rational decision, and so broken by facts she does not appear to care at first. Mr. Gradgrind, to convince Louisa even uses statistics to entice her, stating that the difference of their ages does not inevitably effect their happiness. Louisa is miserable as Bounderby’s wife, and this inclusion of statistics might have been included as part of his â€Å"war on statistics,† showing that statistical data does not always apply well to real life situations. Louisa is distraught in this quote and is expressing whatever tangled emotions she is able to express to Her father. Louisa is married to Josiah Bounderby, who although he proposed the marriage, is not able to give Louisa any sort of love. Bounderby is so consumed by his money, his factories, and by his own arrogance that he cannot engage in any true relationship with Louisa. She is left broken emotionally by this forced marriage that is built upon nothing but her brothers greed and her fathers blindness due to his utilitarian facts and rationality. Louisa’s life is composed of suppression by her father, betrayal by her brother, and a loveless marriage from Bounderby. It is not until James Harthouse, a London gentleman studying politics under Mr. Gradgrind, comes into the picture that Louisa first meets a man that has anything beneficial to offer her. Although she is married to Bounderby, Harthouse is entered by Louisa and sets off to seduce her. But Harthouse is more than just a romantic lover to Louisa, â€Å" chance then threw into my way a new acquaintance; a man such as I had had no experience of; used to the world; light, polished, easy; making no pretences conveying to me that he understood me, and read my thoughts (209). Harthouse offers a splash of color into the dark, black, and oppressive atmosphere of Coketown that had been prior to his arrival, all that Louisa had known. With only simple conversation, Louisa feels as though Harthouse can â€Å"read† her thoughts, the only way that she is able to describe the instant connection that she was able to make with Harthouse. Louisa also explains to her father that Harthouse made â€Å"no pretences,† meaning that he did not pretend to be caring and actually be coldhearted, as everyone else in her life had prior. Louisa also say that Harthouse understood her, which appears actually to be little more than Harthouse simply letting her say what she felt, and in truth listened to her, never telling her that the expression of her emotions was ludicrous or senseless in the manner that her father had. Louisa’s cold nothingness, along with her brother Tom’s cruel and guiltless betrayal to her can be associated if not completely linked to the children’s upbringing. Thomas Gradgrind Sr. ran his home in the exact same mechanical and emotionless way that he ran his school house. Mr. Gradgrind never allowed his children to feel a human connection, and never encouraged any learning besides the drilling of facts. Dickens demonstrates to the reader the way in which the children were raised by showing one the fact the children’s lives were based upon: â€Å"No little Gradgrind had ever had ever associated a cow in a field with that famous cow with the crumpled horn who tossed the dog who worried the cat who killed the rat who ate the malt, or with that yet more famous cow who swallowed Tom Thumb: it ad only been introduced to a cow as a graminivorous ruminating quadruped with several stomachs. † (9). Louisa was never allowed to foster her most basic needs for creativity. Her natural yearnings for a human connection, for love, or for any expression of emotion being instantly quelled by the oppressive Mr. Gradgrind turning her into this ver y confused and empty â€Å"individual. † Louisa was never encouraged to view a cow as an animal with feelings, or a cow personified in a classic fairy tale. The little Gradgrind’s had never had toys, had never been read or given books containing any sort of fancy, and had never been allowed to think. Louisa’s inability to interpret emotions or to have even a single free thought in her head are due to her poor upbringing. Her weak mother, Mrs. Gradgrind, unhappy in her own marriage and a sickly person, was never able to foster any humanity within her children. Dicken’s also used Mrs. Gradgrind to portray the perfect victorian woman. Mrs. Gradgrind had little to say within the text, being seen but not heard, an â€Å"angel in the house. † This angel would be out of place if she had attempted to step into her childrens lives and correct a mistake her fact driving husband had made. Louisa’s distant father and weak mother are what turn her from person to a hollow shell. Utilitarianism, and her fathers devotion to this philosophy wrecked havoc on Louisa’s life and emotions. His obsession with facts left room for nothing else to enter into Louisa and Tom’s lives. When Louisa returns home after being brutalized emotionally by her loveless marriage to Bounderby, and after having her eyes opened by Harthouse, she is able to make a realization about her father, stating in a factual manner, â€Å" What you have never nurtured in me, you have never nurtured in yourself † (208). It is not only that Mr. Gradgrind did not support Louisa’s use of her mind or her embracing of her emotions, but rather that Mr. Gradgrind had never been taught to express his emotions himself. When pelted by Louisa with painful criticism of his fathering, Mr. Gradgrind is left speechless. He is unable to swallow the vast amount of emotion that Louisa is thrusting upon him and is left to sort through all the guilt that he was the one to destroy his daughter. Gradgrind is unable to do so however, never having experienced nor needing to access such emotions while engrossed with his strict Utilitarian facts. Louisa is furious, and within this scene, Dickens truly allows Louisa to let go off all the pent up and suppressed emotions that had been forced to remain stagnant within her person for so many years. This release of Louisa’s inner fire to an external one shows an abandonment of Utilitarian society within Louisa, as she is finally able to express herself, declaring, â€Å"How could you give me life, and take from me all the inappreciable things that raise it from a conscious death? What are the graces of my soul? Where are the sentiments of my heart? What have you done, oh, Father, what have you done, with the garden that should have bloomed once, in this great wilderness here? † (208). Louisa’s inner flame bursts from within her, expressing all the hateful feelings she held towards her father for transforming her into such a hollow shell. Without any limitations, Louisa finally is able to reciprocate the misery that her father had thrust upon her. Dickens uses this scene to compare the two Louisa’s, the Louisa that held reservations against her emotions, and the Louisa that is finally able to let go. Prior to this rebirth, when confronted by her Father with Bounderby’s marriage proposal, Louisa is not able to convey her revulsion on the matter and is not able to express her emotions. Louisa is simply able to state a fact, having been so drilled upon her, stating of Coketown,â€Å"There seems to be nothing there but languid and monotonous smoke. Yet when the night comes, Fire bursts out. † (96). This fire that Louisa speaks of in her factual description of Coketown is an attempt of Louisa’s to describe how she wishes her to describe herself. Louisa wants to be the same change in her own life that the fire has on Coketown, she wishes to set free her emotions. Louisa is finally able to eturn to her father ’s house and state in an outward eruption of feelings how he had ruined her, how he had ruined all the potential which she had held. The majority of Louisa’s life was spent in this state of â€Å"conscious death† and her father removed all traces of any humanity. Louisa is finally able to renew herself as a person, disowning her father and Utilitarianism completely. However, Louisa’s talents, potential, and most importantly her happiness all had to be victimized by Utilitarianism before Mr. Gradgrind was able to realize the mistake in his ways. Louisa’s life is dominated by her father ’s suppression of her emotions and Utilitarian society, all the potential for greatness that she had once had quelled by facts. Louisa is left as an empty and hollow device, but the sacrifice of herself is able to bring realization to her father about his ways. This realization however -that Utilitarianism and a life based solely upon facts cannot bring happiness- is not enough to make up for the guilt that Mr. Gradgrind is left to deal with for the rest of his dreary life. After the breakthrough of her emotions, Louisa collapses at her fathers feet, laying upon the floor: â€Å" e laid her down there, and saw the pride of his heart and the triumph of his system lying, an insensible heap, at his feet. † (211). Dickens finally allows one to see the emergence of cracks of doubt appearing within the strict character of Mr. Gradgrind. Through his daughters heart ache and confusion, Gradgrind is able to make the realization tha t the system of Utilitarianism has failed him, and seeing his daughter heaped upon the floor, he is able to feel the emotions of failure as a father and regret for not nurturing within his daughter the emotions that had never been given to him.