The Theatrical Play About Venice Writing Sample

Theater brings the past to life and helps us understand historical developments. This is an extremely powerful statement that helps people to go back in time for a while and look at past events. The meaning of theatrical productions and plays is to convey emotions and facts. This art is popular in all ages, including because the theater makes it possible to immerse yourself in the atmosphere of the era. It helps to show events in all their glory and convey not only the emotional, but the historical, social, political and cultural context of a given century.

From this point of view, writing a play about a historical event in Venice in the 1700s was a challenge. This required a study of the life of wealthy families of that time, their habits and elements of ballroom clothing. In order to convey the necessary contrast and division between the members of the sect and Matilde’s family, it was important to carry out a long creative work, including the search for differences and comparisons. In the process, the team needed to delve into the social life of the city to better understand the hierarchy. Each member of the group had their own search tasks, and then everyone discussed the information they found. This simplified the work and contributed to well-coordinated work, where no one felt superfluous.

In matters of social life, the team was tasked with studying the aristocracy in Venice during the 18th century. This era was marked by a period of splitting of the Venetian nobility into rich and poor strata. Since the difference was striking and poor aristocrats often did not have money and education, the choice was made in favor of a wealthy family. The main reason for this is the need to show the masquerade that Matilde’s family puts on and the gloss of social life in Italy in the 1700s.

The masquerade is the hallmark of the city and its main cultural attraction. Masquerade balls and carnivals are a centuries-old tradition, which at one time was not interfered with by plague, famine or war. The team chose the ball as the central place of the action in order to show a little of the historical event that took place in Venice of those years everywhere. The 18th century in the history of Italy is marked by the flourishing of masquerade festivities (Yamboliev and Panciera 23). Thus, the act in the play can be regarded as a kind of prism of the transmission of the historical era. At the same time, all team members had to study outfits, masks and costumes in order to create the image of a wealthy family. It is thanks to this detailed elaboration at the end of the piece that Gioacchino is easily distinguished among the lower class due to his mask.

Additionally, the team’s central task was to uncover the legend of the butcher who committed the murders. With the help of a legend, one can easily convey the spirit of the times. This is due to the fact that the legend is a genre of folklore art, transmitted orally. According to beliefs, he killed children to obtain a stew, which was a great success. However, one day, his atrocities were revealed and he was executed. All his property was destroyed and the river on which the tavern stood is called la Riva de Biasio (Toffolo 31). Before settling on the legend of the butcher, the team members searched for different options and stories, but by all accounts, they came to the conclusion to settle on Biagio. This allowed us to listen to each other’s opinions and take an active part in writing the play.

To write the play, it was important for us to understand the political life of the city. Venice was a separate administrative city and had political problems. First of all, this is due to the fact that the city authorities did not bear responsibility for what was happening. Thus, the sect led by the butcher manages to easily plan and steal the children. At the same time, Gioacchino understands that he will not be protected and decides to look for a stronghold from the convicts of the crusade.

As part of the crusade, our group tried to convey the events to which Venice was related. According to historical facts, the role of the organizer of the event belongs to one of the Popes of Rome – Innocent III (Latin 10). Venice in those days bore the title of Queen of the Seas and hired the ships on which the crusade was conducted (Latin 11). This required effort and careful study of historical events. However, thanks to this mention, the play reflects the power and grandeur of Venice.

In conclusion, it should be said that the creative and intellectual work carried out was a difficult but interesting task. All of the above facts led to the opinion that the theater really helps to understand the past. This can be viewed not only from the point of view of viewers who plunge into the atmosphere of the era. The playwrights will conduct numerous searches and comparisons for the most accurate rendering of events.

Works Cited

Latin, Irena Benyovsky. “Topography of Power: Venice and the Eastern Adriatic Cities in the Century Following the Fourth Crusade.” The City and History, vol. 10, no. 1, 2021. pp. 6-47.

Toffolo, Sandra. Describing the city, describing the state: representations of Venice and the Venetian terraferma in the Renaissance. Brill, 2020.

Yamboliev, Kalina, and Walter Panciera. The Republic of Venice in the 18th century. Viella, 2021.

Canada’s Economy: CUSTFA And NAFTA

Introduction

Reform strategies, including abolishing price restrictions, deregulation of capital markets, reduction of trade-based barriers, and commercialization and austerity, are examples of neoliberalism today. Mexico, Canada, and the U.S. came into agreement with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994. The free-based trade agreement went into effect on January 1st, 1994, intending to remove all investments and international trade barriers between the three countries mentioned above. Besides being among the most comprehensive trade deals ever, NAFTA established the world’s most extensive free-trade zone (Villarreal & Fergusson, 2020). The United States and Canada were joined by a somewhat lesser developed state called Mexico and two affluent, developed nations. This paper will argue how the CUSFTA exemplified an overall emerging neoliberal-based consensus regarding the function of trade throughout Canada’s economy.

The CUSFTA (the Canada-United States Free Trade Deal) was the foundation for this agreement, which took effect on January 1st, 1989. Despite NAFTA’s rapid expansion regarding trade and investments, political-based cooperation between the three nations remained poor. NAFTA remained a hot-button issue, particularly in North America, so did the debate. President Trump of the United States vowed to effectively renegotiate or terminate the agreement as recently as last year. CUSMA, termed (the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement) emerged more than once or a year from discussions as the new name for NAFTA (CUSMA). On July 1st, 2020, CUSMA came into operation effectively.

NAFTA was formed due to several prevailing economic and political circumstances in the late 1980s and early 1990s. At the time of his presidential announcement in November of 1979, Ronald Reagan raised the prospect of a North American-based Free Trade Area (NAFTA). Neither Canada (under the leadership of Prime Minister Trudeau) nor Mexico (under the supervision of President López Portillo) was interested in that agreement because they were concerned about American domination in the region (Villarreal & Fergusson, 2020). Nevertheless, in 1984, when Brian Mulroney was elected Prime Minister for Canada and was able to negotiate the CUSFTA agreement. Resistance toward CUSFTA remained strong within Canada’s New and Liberal Democratic parties and the general public.

However, there was little pushback from labour unions and the general public throughout the United States. As a result of NAFTA, trade relations across North America have been profoundly changed, resulting in unprecedented interconnectedness between the industrialized neoliberal economies of North America and Canada in connection to the overall developing economy within Mexico. Throughout the United States, the NAFTA was initially supported by both Republicans and Democrats; it was proposed by Republican-based President Bush, enacted by an overall Democratic-controlled House, and enforced by Democratic President Clinton during his administration.

Neoliberalism as a Break with Postwar Keynesianism

In the post-World War II period, a sequence of incidents started in the later periods of the 1940s, which mostly went unnoticed until the early 1980s. These incidents happened when they culminated in substituting Keynesian-based economics as an overall dominant theoretical impact on overall economic output in the modern era. A related field termed development-based economics has mainly been superseded as the dominant influence upon economic-based policies enacted by developing economies in the same way (Villarreal & Fergusson, 2020). Those nations favored actual free market-based policies instead of mixed economies, which need a significant function for government interventions. They were the driving force behind the demise of Keynesian ideology.

Their overall motivations would include a disdain for larger governments, something that they perceived as being particularly susceptible to interfering exceedingly with the lifestyles of their inhabitants. In certain instances, an intelligent choice for Neoclassical or Classical economics and associated school systems is critical. A presumption that boosting a restricted role for the state was their most significant advantage (Brown, 2019). Anti-Keynesianism campaigns got waged on three major dimensions: throughout the academic-based and political realms and outside of academia in the fields of business states and popular opinion.

How NAFTA Fitted into the Bigger Picture

Mexico’s integration into the high-waged economies of North America and Canada seems to have been a critical objective for the three nations when NAFTA discussions started around 1991. Trade liberalization hoped to boost Mexico’s economy by creating opportunities and jobs for the country’s rapidly expanding labor force and encouraging illegal immigration. As a potential export industry and a low-cost investment destination, Mexico was considered a boon for the productivity of American and Canadian businesses alike. Although North America and Canada had signed a free trade-based agreement (FTA) earlier in 1988, Mexico’s inclusion was unusual.

An important argument against NAFTA was the pay disparity between the United States and Mexico, whose per income scales per capita were just 30% higher (Villarreal & Fergusson, 2020). Perot campaigned against trade openness in 1992, saying that it would result in a “great sucking sound” involving American employment exported to Canada. Many argued that the deal could generate tens of thousands of new employment opportunities annually. Mexican President Salinas de Gortari would see it as a chance to revamp Mexico’s economy to export commodities, not people.

Implementation of a Continental Free Trade Agreement

The overall implementation of the continental free trade-based agreement marked a shift towards a neoliberal economic approach to Canadian development. Neoliberalism is characterized by policies that promote fiscal austerity. The openness of the market, privatization of public assets, and a reduction in overall government expenditure are fundamental to neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is frequently related to economic measures that have expanded the entire Canadian economy. Economies accessible to cross-continental trade grow more swiftly, are more innovative, and are more productive, resulting in greater wages for their population. Open trade benefits lower-income households because more affordable goods and services are offered.

Outcomes for Canada

As a result of NAFTA, Canada has seen significant increases in cross-border investments. Investments from the United States and Mexico in Canada have significantly increased greatly since 1993. 50% of Canada’s foreign-based direct investments originate from North America, which jumped from $71b in 1993 to $367B in 2013 (Van Haren & Masferrer, 2022). As more than just a result of the entire Canadian U.S. Free-based Trade-based Agreement signed in 1989, North America became Canada’s economic powerhouse (Chatzky et al., 2020). There was a rise in agricultural output within Canada due to the agreement. From 1994, Canadian-based agricultural commerce with the entire United States has witnessed an increase by more than thrice, as have the country’s overall agricultural shipments to NAFTA member states (Chatzky et al., 2020). As a result, Canada’s exports to North America accounted for 76% of its total exports (Van Haren & Masferrer, 2022). Most other high-income nations have a far more diverse economy, with no single partner contributing upwards of 21% of their total GDP.

Outcomes for Mexico

sEver since the pact’s adoption, Mexican farm-based exports to North America have tripled. Since the deal, hundreds and thousands more automotive manufacturing jobs have been created throughout Mexico, improving efficiency and reducing consumer costs. The deal aided Mexico’s transformation from overall trade protectionism to an entire open economy (Chatzky et al., 2020). Mexico’s economic changes were seen as a chance to expedite and secure them through NAFTA. Additionally, Mexico’s government decreased public debt, instituted a balance-of-payments norm, stabilized hyperinflation, and developed the nation’s forex reserves. According to some analysts, a rise in joblessness or unemployment could be attributed to NAFTA’s exposure of Mexican farmers to competitiveness from highly subsidized American agriculture and its impact on the Mexican economy.

Outcomes for the U.S.

Commerce between the U.S. and its North American-based neighbors has over tripled after NAFTA, outpacing the growth of U.S. trading deals with other countries. The United States exports overseas to Canada and Mexico account for upwards of one-third of overall export sales. It is estimated that the pact boosted GDP by far less than 0.5%, adding up to $81B to the overall U.S. economic system upon complete implementation, or perhaps several billions of dollars for significant growth annually (Van Haren & Masferrer, 2022). Trade between Mexico and Canada is estimated to sustain 14 million American employees, and the almost 250,000 export-related employments created each year by NAFTA compensate 16% to 21% more than lost positions (Van Haren & Masferrer, 2022). Opponents claim that NAFTA is responsible for rising unemployment and pay stagnation throughout the United States due to low-wage competitiveness and a growing trade imbalance (Chatzky et al., 2020). They also claim that the agreement adversely affects manufacturing jobs in Mexico. The new North American-based trade pact (CUSMA, 2020) greatly continues the overall neoliberal period.

Conclusion

Neoliberalism’s current reform methods include removing price controls, regulating capital markets, reducing trade barriers, and promoting commercialization and austerity. 1994 saw the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which brought together the three nations of North America: Canada, Mexico, and North America. On January 1st, 1994, efforts began to eliminate all impediments to commerce and investment between the three countries stated above. NAFTA became the largest free-trade area globally and one of the most comprehensive trade agreements ever. The United States and Canada were joined by Mexico, a less developed country, and two more developed countries.

References

Brown, W. (2019). In the ruins of neoliberalism. In In the Ruins of Neoliberalism. Columbia University Press.

Chatzky, A., McBride, J., & Aly Sergie, M. (2020). NAFTA and the USMCA: Weighing the impact of North American trade. Web.

Van Haren, I., & Masferrer, C. (2022). Mexican migration to Canada: Temporary worker programs, visa imposition, and NAFTA shape flows.

Villarreal, A. M., & Fergusson, I. F. (2020). NAFTA and the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

Nutrition Diary And Self-Reflection

Throughout my diet diary, attention was drawn to three elements that were under-percentage in my diet. The shortfall was in the fiber department, which regularly missed a few grams to reach the Daily Standard. To an even greater extent, I did not receive sodium, which was consumed every day in the amount of only one-third of the DRI. I also routinely missed 25-30 percent of my required daily intake of carbohydrates, which is recommended in the amount of 130 per day (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2022). On two out of five days, I was getting 125 percent excess protein from food. Oversupply also refers to excessive amounts of sugars, except for one day out of five. The protein content of my daily food also exceeded the norm by more than one-third on several of the five days.

Fiber is useful for its low-calorie content and normalizes blood sugar levels, which is especially valuable considering that I get a slight overabundance of it. In order to increase the level of fiber, it is recommended to consume grains and legumes, which include white rice, beans, and peas. Sodium maintains the body’s balance of fluids and salts, which has a strengthening effect on the nervous system, which otherwise becomes vulnerable to damage. Sources of sodium are table salt, canned meat, olives, smoked meats, and cheese. The lack of carbohydrates is fraught for the body with exhaustion and loss of energy, refusing to produce glucose that feeds the human nervous system (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services., 2022). One can increase your carbohydrate levels by eating carrots and white flour foods like bread, raisins and brown rice.

An excess of proteins triggers excessive work of the kidneys for their digestion, which complicates the work of the body. A lack of fiber risks leading to gastrointestinal problems and pain and swelling. Reduce the consumption of protein-containing foods, in particular red meat. On the other hand, sugar can upset the balance of substances, leading to the accumulation of fats in the body, raising blood pressure and causing problems with the liver. To prevent this, you need to give up instant drinks and sugary bars. For preventive purposes, it seems to me that lowering the consumption of fats would make sense. There is no specific recommended daily dose of fats, but the tendency to oversaturate them is fraught with obesity and vascular disease. Abandoning avocados, which are nutritious but overly fatty, appear like the right thing to do.

As a change to the menu, an attempt was made to increase the number of carbohydrates and sodium and reduce the fat and sugar content of my food. The fiber balance was evened out by adding beans and rice to the diet. The sodium level was raised by adding tomato soup but was greatly exceeded as a result. Also, the problem is an overabundance of carbohydrates, which are now almost twice the daily allowance. It was planned to equalize the level of carbohydrates to the recommended level by keeping carrot salad, also rich in fiber, on the menu. According to the daily nutritional recommendations, the resulting menu is still far from perfect, and some of the nutritional parameters are grossly overstated.

Reference

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2022). Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 

error: Content is protected !!