History of Artist Expression in Comic Books

History of Artist Expression in Comic Books Comic books, like many art forms, have been co-opted by a hungry consumer capitalist economy which makes a Faustian bargain with its artistic meals: give me your subversive art forms and ideas, this economy says, and I will communicate them to a mass audience beyond your wildest dreams; however, in exchange, your art forms and ideas will often simultaneously be stripped of their dignity and uniqueness by becoming products of no less ubiquity and no more value than toothpaste – mere tools to sell, sell, sell, and make more, more, more money for gigantic multinational corporations. This phenomenology is the ultimate in postmodern recontextualization, the stripping of an objects original meaning and significance, and its endowment with a new purpose either heretofore considered or deemed ethically, morally, or artistically acceptable. We shall explore the unique nature and popularity of comic books, and the themes presented in their narratives and characters, as a quasi-underground phenomenon whose ever-increasing popularity from the 1940s to the 1980s left them perfectly positioned to be gobbled and turned into movies and merchandise by giant corporations eager to both exploit the devotees of comic books and expand their numbers. What has been the big deal, historically, about comic books? Though they are primarily a postmodern phenomenon localized in the latter half of the 20th century through to the present, their roots go as far back as the 17th century, when the English mass-produced woodcuts depicting ghastly public executions. Comics first reached mass popularity in the United States in the 1930s in the form of newspaper comics; then, the comic book as a separate, thriving, and sophisticated art form began to evolve from there. â€Å"The comic book has been one of our most familiar, yet least appreciated, popular art forms. As vehemently criticized as it is passionately defended†¦ [it is] a graphically sophisticated and culturally revealing medium.† (Sabin, 1996, p.1). After roughly a decade of occupying a comfortable place in the American pop culture mainstream, comics, and then comic books, began to take to reflect a less sanguine view of American society. Violent crime comics began to appear, and the more squeaky-clean comics of the 1930s and during World War II absorbed some of these same themes. In the so-called Silver Age of Comic Books, the 1950s through the 1970s, most characters and narratives began to take on a darker and more complex tone, mostly in response to plummeting sales after World War II that reflected an unsettled cultural undercurrent brewing in America. In this initial countercultural heyday of the 1950s and 1960s, comic books were sometimes dismissed, much like rock-and-roll music, as the juvenile, unsophisticated, and pulpy fantasies of hormone-addled adolescents. Sometimes, however, comic books were labeled as cultural filth that was an ongoing threat, destructive to teenage minds. In 1954, right-wing American psychiatrist Dr. Frederic Wertham published a book called Seduction of the Innocent, which was an all-out assault on the ostensible delinquency-inducing content of comic books, and which singled out Batman for special criticism, claiming â€Å"a subtle atmosphere of homoeroticism.† (Wertham, 1954, p. 189). Werthams criticism of comic book content led to the establishment of a censor organization known as the Comic Code Authority that same year, whose heavy-handed influence forced comic book writers and artists to go somewhat underground with their subversive themes. However, Batman (and Robin, whatever his relationship with Batman may or may not have been) has far outlived both Dr. Wertham and the chilling effect of his book, and in fact, the longevity and deceptively complex content of comic books have proven them to be much more powerful than anyone ever dreamed. They have for decades embodied striking artistic expressions of artists and authors, who collectively spoke for countless millions of young people who did not quite fit in to the mainstream of society. These millions were given voice by comic books such as The X-Men, The Incredible Hulk, The Amazing Spider-Man, from the Marvel Comics Company, and Batman and Superman from the DC Comics Company. Each of the aforementioned titles tells an extended set of stories about a character or characters who are misfits of some kind, whether it be physical, psychological, or emotional, and who take on a variety of preternatural and/or superhuman characteristics which allow them to not only address their own personal struggles with their differences from others in society, but to aid society itself in coming to better accept those who are different; or, alternately, the characters are either born with or afflicted by a condition which makes them a misfit and therefore different from others in society, and must adapt to life as such. These comic book stories generally involve a variety of morality plays, ranging from simple good vs. evil, to the exploration of antiheros, that enable the characters to attempt to effect positive change in the world, and provide both catharsis and inspiration for the readers. The X-Men, for example, were created by legendary comic book author Stan Lee and artist Jack Kirby in 1963. They were /are a group of teenagers born with genetic mutations that have endowed them with a variety of superhuman characteristics, not all of which are necessarily constructive. In the Lee/Kirby universe, the X-Men are widely ostracized and discriminated against not only because they are different, but because non-mutant humans fear the X-Men are the next logical, superior step in human evolution and therefore could render normal humans obsolete. The teenagers stories often involved them attempting to come to terms with their powers and how to fit into the so-called normal human society. The X-Men were comprised of such characters as Iceman, a young man who could freeze objects at will; Wolverine, a foul-tempered young man whose skeleton is laced with a nearly indestructible metal alloy, including metal knives which he could extend and retract from his hands at will, albeit with considerable pain; Storm, a young black female who could control the weather, including the ability to summon storms at will; Nightcrawler, a young male born with blue fur who could become virtually invisible at night and teleport short distances; Cyclops, who could shoot beams of pure solar energy from his eyes, but not always control this power; Rogue, a young female possessing the hyper-empathic ability the feelings, memories, and abilities of other beings she touches —unfortunately, however, prolonged contact with others can weaken or kill them; Magneto, an older male survivor of the Nazi death camps who can manipulate magnetic forces, but whose psyche was so twisted by his experience at the hands of the Nazis that he has become an arch-nemesis of the X-Men; and Professor Xavier, an older male paraplegic with amazing telepathic abilities and a world-class intellect, who has dedicated his life to mentoring other mutants and defending them from themselves, unsympathetic humans, and the perennial machinations of Magneto. The X-Men and their stories were unabashedly allegorical and subversive in nature, content, and theme. Professor Xavier was modeled after civil rights activist Martin Luther King, Jr. and Sir Francis Xavier, Catholic missionary and founder of the Jesuit order. The sense of loneliness and isolation experienced by Rogue was a reflection of the near-universal teenage experience. The bigotry and intolerance of homosexuals is another allegorical component featured with the X-Men narratives, particularly in the film adaptations directed by openly gay Bryan Singer. In X-Men 2, the character of Bobby Drake characters comes out of the closet as a mutant to his parents, prompting them to ask if he has tried not being a mutant, parodying the oft-heard question of parents directed their gay children. Anti-Semitism, personal alienation, anti-Communist paranoia, and racism are also allegorical themes that X-Men comic narratives have explored in detail. And like The X-Men, Batman, Spiderman (also a Stan Lee creation), The Incredible Hulk and Superman all were dependent upon and explored the themes of what it meant for a person to be forced to hide or to be ashamed of a component of his or her true self, or to lead a dual existence – one private and personal, one public. Superman (created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster), known by millions as a mild-mannered reporter, socially maladroit nerd, and bearer of an unrequited love for Lois Lane, who happens to be a near-omnipotent superhero when called upon in extraordinary circumstances, is the perfect embodiment of both teenage reality and teenage wish fulfillment. The Incredible Hulk (another Stan Lee creation) gets angry like all of us, but has real power – scary power, often – to do something about it thanks to hi s green steroidal transformation. Batman (created by Bob Kane and fleshed out by Bill Finger and Jerry Robinson) lives a quiet, dark life of solitude contrasted with public works of enviable nobility and good. These feelings of powerlessness and awkwardness, combined with empowerment fantasies, were and continue to be direct reflections of the collective concerns of millions of young people, and perhaps many adults, as well – how to fit into a society that demanded conformity without losing the uniqueness that embodies ones individuality. Ironically, the collective popularity of all of these comic book titles has historically been so striking in terms of sales that it would not be an unfair question to wonder if it fact the teenage misfits who bought them were in fact the majority, not the minority in society. Comic book sales peaked in 1993 at a staggering $850 million (U.S. dollars) and are still very healthy, though currently, the popularity of comic book characters is as likely to be manifest in movie ticket and DVD sales of film adaptations of comic books as it is in comic book purchases. More on this later. The character archetypes and narrative themes of most of these original and ongoing comic book series were produced in the crucible of the fairly conformist sociocultural pressures of the modernist era in the United States. The teenagers of each successive decade, beginning with the 1950s and continuing to the present, have been characterized by isolation, disaffection, rebellion, disillusionment, all combined with the pressure to adapt without question to the relatively monolithic mores of the generation which preceded them, a generation for whom belonging to a larger social group, for whom the values of unquestioning self-sacrifice and acceptance of authority figures and establishment power structures were the norm. Men were called to duty, whether in World War II or in the burgeoning post-war corporate universe; many made the ultimate sacrifice – their lives, or worse, their souls. Women, too, had their duty – to support their men in discreet, subservient lives of quiet domestic efficiency. But as American young people began to question the assumptions behind the Cold War, and question the rational and wisdom behind the interminably bloody Vietnam War, their uncertainty on these issues led to a greater wholesale questioning of the mechanisms and assumptions of societys very foundations. (Even Batman, whose creation in 1940 arguably predates postmodernism, eventually took on countercultural subject matter and themes, to say nothing of the suggestion of a taboo homoeroticism in the relationship between Batman and Robin.) This rebellion was met with heavy disapproval and disappointment by parents, representing the previous generation. The ongoing schism between these two generations has caused huge cultural, social, and political conflicts that continue to be played out even in 2005. These conflicts have been vividly reflected in the artistic expressions of the times – literature, music, and films. From the standpoint of the older generations, comic books were perhaps never adequately understood, respected, or even recognized for the potent and unusual artistic and cultural forces that they have always represented certainly as potent as more conventional and commonplace means of artistic expression, high art and classical music, just to name two ossified examples. (And, incidentally, these generational clashes were not limited to the United States in terms of understanding the rise of the superhero comic books. The country of Japan, tiny as it is, has become its own powerhouse in terms of churning out groundbreaking styles of comics, such as Katsuhiro Otomo of Akira fame, reflecting generational struggles unique to the Japanese youth culture.) The artistic expressions that arose out of the clash between generations also represented an evolution in classifications and mechanisms of art itself – the evolution from modern art forms to postmodern art forms. Modern art, reflective of the cultures from which it sprung, was generally conformist, and adhered to classic rules of form, function, and design, and either explicitly or implicitly supported the symbols of establishment paradigms by exploiting binary oppositions of us vs. them (i.e., Americans vs. Communists). Postmodern art rejected the methodology of modern art on every level, deconstructing it to such an extent as to even question the basic psychological definitions of symbolism in human art forms. The discarding and combination of genres and forms, the pastiche of styles, the toying with unorthodox symbolism, and an active interest in subversion and smashing of establishment systems – rebellion itself are all manifestations of art evolving to postmodern form. And instead of existing to analyze, but ultimately reinforce the paradigms of patriarchal establishments, postmodern art analyzed and often sought to undermine these establishments and their conventions, if not destroy them altogether. As noted by postmodernism scholar Andreas Huyssen, â€Å"†¦contemporary postmodernism operates in a field of tension between tradition and innovation, conservation and renewal, mass culture and high art, in which the second terms are no longer automatically privileged over the first.† (Huyssen, 1986, p. 267). As such, any art form that has enjoyed longevity has internalized and incorporated this revolutionary and evolutionary process, or been discarded or fossilized. Comic books are no exception to this rule, and their staying power has manifested itself in the last 20 or so years by their translation to and eventual dominance of the genre of film. In fact, comic books in their Silver Age forms were arguably inherently post-modern in nature, as they combined complex and detailed visual artistry with complex and serialized narratives, an intermixing pastiche of separate genres which had never before been combined in such a unique form. Books had, of course, often featured illustrations in the past, but they were only to provide occasional support and dimensionalization of the narrative, as opposed to being as important a component of the medium as the narrative itself. The fantastical and stylized nature of many of the illustrations featured in comic books were often postmodern artistic explorations in their own right, seeking to push the boundaries of conventional illustrations. Their explorations of anti-heroes helped deconstruct the notion of simple constructs of good and evil. American consumer capitalism, which is inherently (though not necessarily benignly) postmodern in its relentless desire to commodify anything and everything, particularly that which can be packaged as new, hip, and edgy – and thus desirable – has hungrily devoured comic books and the films which come from them. In doing so, the artistic and societal merit of comic books, in particular their subversive characteristics, have become themselves subverted by the deity of consumer capitalist commodification. The ultimate dream, for example, of fans of the X-Men comic books, that their beloved misfit characters would reach movie theatres and therefore a larger audience for their collective angst, has come true but that dream has also become a nightmare for some fans, as these same subversive misfit X-Men have also become action figures, clothing lines, cartoons on the side of fast food lunch bags and boxes all mass marketed to mass audiences in order to maximize profits for corporations that are more interested in shareholder earnings than they are the artistic merit of airing the collective voices of disaffected teen angst. If the phenomenology of disaffected teen angst can be appropriated to make a profit from teenagers, then corporations will be chasing the teens and their money incessantly. However, corporate interest in teenagers as a demographic generally has little to do with sociocultural altruism. In fact, cultural observers should take heed – â€Å"ventilation of genuinely alternative social visions collide directly with the underpinnings of power in the economy at large. (Schiller, 1986, p. 152) The trade-off is as follows: as long as such ventilation of alternative social visions makes a profit, it will be tolerated. But in the consumer capitalist corporate universe of today, art for arts sake, particularly if the art does not reinforce the machinery of consumer capitalism, will never generate much more than limited enthusiasm, and is more likely to meet with insidious hostility. The primary perpetrators in this arena are the behemoth corporate conglomerates that own the media, and the acquisitive way in which they manage their film and television divisions. In the 1960s and 1970s, film studios and television networks existed as independent business entities whose sole focus was the creation of films and television shows – nothing more, nothing less. While these companies were undisputedly interested in profits, the process was far more artist-centered and quality-driven than they are today. The presumption was that quality films would result in box-office successes, though the expectations of profit were relatively modest compared to todays standards. Then, in 1977, a watershed moment in film history arrived in the form of the blockbuster Star Wars, a comic-bookish story in its own right despite being an original creation of writer/director George Lucas. The film was not only the most financially successful phenomenon in movie history, but it alerted movie studios to a whole new economic model, centered around the notion of ancillary profits. Most notably in the case of Star Wars, the ancillary profits came in the form of merchandising. Inexplicably, before the films release, executives at 20th Century Fox, the films distributor, were convinced the film would be a flop, and in contract negotiations with Lucas, acceded to his unusual request to receive 100% of profits derived from sales of merchandise inspired and/or derived from the film, for example action figures and lunchboxes. The Fox executives surely rued the day they signed over these rights to Mr. Lucas, as Star Wars merchandise generated $1 billion in profits for the shrewd filmmaker. Another lesson learned by Fox, and other studios hungry to recreate the fiscal orgy of Star Wars, was that films targeted directly at children could be extremely lucrative at the box office, beyond profit margins to which they had become accustomed. Movies were no longer mostly the artistic or escapist purview of an audience comprised largely of adults. Their children came to be seen as a previously under-exploited source of bonanza profits. Lastly, movie studios began to rethink their conventional economic model, which was to produce modestly-budgeted films and reliably make modest profits. What Star Wars ignited was a phenomenon known as the blockbuster mentality, a hunger for epic profits from so-called event films, on which the studios became willing to gamble heretofore-unprecedented sums of money in hopes of hitting the proverbial jackpot. George Lucas, who began his career as a subversive filmmaker of eccentric tastes with critically acclaimed films such as THX-1138 and American Graffiti, unwittingly created a perfect storm that turned the film industry on its head. Star Wars was no fluke, as it turned out, and it was not long before the greedy capitalistic corporate culture of the 1980s began entertaining, no pun intended, the notion that film studio and television networks could be glamorous cash cows. In short order, huge companies whose core business usually had nothing to do with the entertainment industry were battling it out to see who could get into show business the fastest. Coca-Cola acquired movie studio Columbia/Tri-Star, which was later sold to Japanese electronics giant Sony; General Electric acquired the NBC television network; Capital Cities acquired the ABC Television network, and News Corporation acquired 20th Century Fox and the Fox Broadcasting Company; Gulf + Western acquired Paramount Pictures, etc. The unfortunate side effect of these mergers was the infusion of bottom-line, short-term profit-hungry thinking, as well as corporate models of branding and marketing products. These large corporations viewed films and television shows, and the intellectual properties that underlied them, as products, pure and simple, no different from mouthwash, shoes, soda drinks, or cosmetics. They expected their new acquisitions to transition from being art-focused and letting profits flow from quality, to simply making whatever sold the most tickets and had the most lucrative ancillary market potential. There was no single identifiable point, such a historical date or a press conference, when the critical link between art and commerce was separated, or the historical deference of profit to art was inverted (themselves postmodern phenomena, incidentally), but the entrà ©e of comic books into the world of film and television, which has become a powerful, dominating presence of comic books in film and television, followed and was directly related to this paradigm shift in the economics of the entertainment industry. The adaptation of comic books into film and television properties has been an exercise in creative cannibalism in some sense. Increasingly, film and television studios have taken on the risk-averse mentality of their corporate masters, and one of the effects of this has been to seek out intellectual property that might guarantee the fiscal success of a film or television show adaptation of said property. To the extent that a wildly successful book was often adapted for films geared towards adults, wildly successful comic book series were seen as a surefire way to guarantee a teen audience and the disposable income purchasing power of them and their parents. Movie executives sought to acquire the rights to comic book characters and stories which they could exploit – actual film industry terminology – and build into franchises – also actual film industry terminology, particularly creepy given the obvious parallels to McDonalds or Gap store franchise business models. For the most part, these franchises have been wildly successful from a financial point of view, though perhaps not from an artistic standpoint. There have been six Batman films made by Warner Brothers movie studio (owned by corporate behemoth AOL Time Warner, who not coincidentally own DC Comics, the original home of the Batman characters and comic books): 1989s Batman, 1992s Batman Returns, 1995s Batman Forever, 1997s Batman and Robin, 2004s Catwoman, and 2005s Batman Begins. Each film sported star casting of the highest caliber; however, perhaps with the exception of the first film, were special effects showcases first and artistically ambitious second, if at all. Nor were they particularly true to the time-honored complexities and lingering darkness of the comic books. Iconic film critic Roger Ebert (a devoted fan of the Batman comic books), in his review of Batman and Robin, took a forlorn swipe at each of the films to date: †¦ my delight began to fade at about the 30-minute mark when it became clear that this new movie, like its predecessors, was not *really* going to explore the bizarre world of its heroes, but would settle down safely into a special effects extravaganza. Batman Robin, like the first three films in the series, is wonderful to look at, and has nothing authentic at its core†¦ Watching it, I realized why it makes absolutely no difference who plays Batman: Theres nobody at home†¦ Give the foreground to the characters, not the special effects. And ask the hard questions about Bruce Wayne. (Ebert, 1997) Eberts last line refers to the perennial rumors that perennial bachelor Bruce Wayne might actually be a homosexual, or failing that, possess some unusual sexual fetishes that might not comprise the sort of fare that young children should be seeing at the movie theatre or on DVD. But this topic, as well as any serious exploration of Bruce Waynes psyche, was not been considered particularly lucrative by the marketing machines at Warner Brothers until the franchise was on the verge of death after the box office mediocrity of Batman and Robin and the outright box office disaster of Catwoman, which cost $85 million (U.S.) to produce and only made $40 million (U.S.) at the box office. 2005s Batman Begins was an unapologetically dark and complex film. Roger Eberts review may well have spoken for many Batman fans who ached for more substance and less pure style: The character resonates more deeply with me than the other comic superheroes, perhaps because when I discovered him as a child, he seemed darker and more grown-up than the cheerful Superman. He has secrets. As Alfred muses: Strange injuries and a nonexistent social life. These things beg the question, what does Bruce Wayne do with his time? (Ebert, 2005) Apparently, the moviegoing audiences agreed with Mr. Ebert, rewarding Warner Brothers with $205 million (U.S.) in box office receipts in the United States alone, and a similar – and still increasing – tally worldwide. The lesson here is that while an artistically unambitious and shallow film like Batman and Robin, which is more childish cartoon and marketing machine than serious filmmaking, can certainly turn a modest profit, it is entirely possible to be artistically ambitious and make plenty of money at the same time. One wonders why the latter is more often the exception rather than the rule, to the detriment of the integrity of comic books and their rich characters. In theory, the adaptation of comic books to the film and television arenas could have been a boon to not only the comic book industry, but a force for cultural good in the sense of spreading the subversive word to a larger audience. While there is no question that American and Western teenagers are far more aware of Batman and The X-Men than they were 30 years ago, the expansion of the audience has come at a price. First of all, the structures of film and television do not generally lend themselves well to the sort of narrative complexity that is a hallmark of comic books ongoing multi-character storylines. While the two X-Men films to date were generally well-received by fans of the comic books, many fans vociferously complained that many characters were either simply not included in the storylines, or they were altered to suit Hollywood norms in order to maximize audience appeal. While a third X-Men film is in the works, the simple truth is that 20th Century Fox, the movie studio that produced the films, simply cannot make any more than one X-Men film every two to three years and the complicated narrative history of over a dozen characters unspoiled over the course of 40 years of storytelling simply cannot be done adequate justice by a two-hour movies – as good as they may be – which get released only periodically. Secondly, for many young people, seeing an X-Men or Batman film may be their very first exposure to these universes, and depending on their reaction to the quality of the films and their natural consumer predilections, it is not certain that these teenagers are going to seek out the more dimensionalized, rich, and complex narrative universes to be found within the comic book series. In fact, given the immense popularity of video games among teenagers, who as a general rule spend as much, if not more time transfixed by their Playstations and Xboxes than they do reading, it is more likely that teenagers who see X-Men films will buy the video game adaptations of the X-Men comic books instead of investing in the comic books themselves. The statistics bear this out: in 2004, sales of comic books in the U.S. totaled $300 million – a considerable sum of money, but a far cry from the $850 million sum reached ten years earlier. Comic book money had, for better or for worse, flowed away from the comic books themselves and into the reinventions of the comic books – the movies, the video games. It is unfair, perhaps, to dismiss video games as worthless, but also difficult to avoid the conclusion that the X-Men video game, which is simply a violent combat simulation featuring the various mutant characters, carries more artistic and social worth than the comic books to which the video game owes its digital existence. Lastly, the value of ancillary X-Men merchandise, such as T-shirts, lunchboxes, and plastic soda cups from Burger King adorned with X-Men characters, is fleeting and thus fairly dubious in comparison to the lasting collectors item value of the comic books themselves, to say nothing of the inherent worth of the content of the books, and the visual and narrative artistry contained within them. Ultimately, and sadly, the postmodern machinery of consumer capitalism has appropriated comic book visuals and narratives and separated them from their inherent artistic value in order to make them both more appealing to a mainstream audience, usually children and younger teens, and more exploitable in terms of ancillary markets such as merchandising. The positive side of this equation is that the subversive art and storytelling found in comic books was brought to a larger audience, but may well have been eviscerated of its soul in the process. Films like Batman Begins, with its dark exploration of the recesses of Bruce Waynes psychology, and X-Men 2, with its unapologetic homosexual allegories, do their source material adequate justice and make their corporate masters a lot of money in the process. What can be hoped for the future is that movie studios see fit to release more films such as these and less of the vapid, lowest-common denominator special effects orgies that tend to predominate the box office landscape. Hellraiser and Constantine were met with outright hostility by fans of their comic book source material and performed poorly at the box office. It is no longer enough to simply adapt a comic book to guarantee success. Many audience members have grown more shrewd and sophisticated, and demand quality in storytelling. In the words of Nightcrawler in the film X-Men 2, â€Å"Most people will never know anything beyond what they see with their own two eyes.† If this is true in a world where what is put before the eyes of teenagers is predominated by movies and video games, it is imperative that the content not merely reflect the status quo desired by consumer capitalism, but the thought-provoking stories and characters, daring and subversive thoughts, first brought to us decades ago in the best comic books. BIBLIOGRAPHY Sabin, Roger. Comics, Comix Graphic Novels A History of Comic Art. Phaidon Press, 1996. Robinson, Jerry. The Comics: An Illustrated History of Comic Strip Art. Putnam Publishers, 1974. Wertham, Fredric. Seduction of the Innocent. Amerion Publishers, 1954 (Reprint 1996). Tuzi, Marino. â€Å"Individualism and Marginality: From Comic Book to Film: Marvel Comics Superheroes† College Quarterly, Spring 2005 Volume 8 Number 2. Taken from: htt History of Artist Expression in Comic Books History of Artist Expression in Comic Books Comic books, like many art forms, have been co-opted by a hungry consumer capitalist economy which makes a Faustian bargain with its artistic meals: give me your subversive art forms and ideas, this economy says, and I will communicate them to a mass audience beyond your wildest dreams; however, in exchange, your art forms and ideas will often simultaneously be stripped of their dignity and uniqueness by becoming products of no less ubiquity and no more value than toothpaste – mere tools to sell, sell, sell, and make more, more, more money for gigantic multinational corporations. This phenomenology is the ultimate in postmodern recontextualization, the stripping of an objects original meaning and significance, and its endowment with a new purpose either heretofore considered or deemed ethically, morally, or artistically acceptable. We shall explore the unique nature and popularity of comic books, and the themes presented in their narratives and characters, as a quasi-underground phenomenon whose ever-increasing popularity from the 1940s to the 1980s left them perfectly positioned to be gobbled and turned into movies and merchandise by giant corporations eager to both exploit the devotees of comic books and expand their numbers. What has been the big deal, historically, about comic books? Though they are primarily a postmodern phenomenon localized in the latter half of the 20th century through to the present, their roots go as far back as the 17th century, when the English mass-produced woodcuts depicting ghastly public executions. Comics first reached mass popularity in the United States in the 1930s in the form of newspaper comics; then, the comic book as a separate, thriving, and sophisticated art form began to evolve from there. â€Å"The comic book has been one of our most familiar, yet least appreciated, popular art forms. As vehemently criticized as it is passionately defended†¦ [it is] a graphically sophisticated and culturally revealing medium.† (Sabin, 1996, p.1). After roughly a decade of occupying a comfortable place in the American pop culture mainstream, comics, and then comic books, began to take to reflect a less sanguine view of American society. Violent crime comics began to appear, and the more squeaky-clean comics of the 1930s and during World War II absorbed some of these same themes. In the so-called Silver Age of Comic Books, the 1950s through the 1970s, most characters and narratives began to take on a darker and more complex tone, mostly in response to plummeting sales after World War II that reflected an unsettled cultural undercurrent brewing in America. In this initial countercultural heyday of the 1950s and 1960s, comic books were sometimes dismissed, much like rock-and-roll music, as the juvenile, unsophisticated, and pulpy fantasies of hormone-addled adolescents. Sometimes, however, comic books were labeled as cultural filth that was an ongoing threat, destructive to teenage minds. In 1954, right-wing American psychiatrist Dr. Frederic Wertham published a book called Seduction of the Innocent, which was an all-out assault on the ostensible delinquency-inducing content of comic books, and which singled out Batman for special criticism, claiming â€Å"a subtle atmosphere of homoeroticism.† (Wertham, 1954, p. 189). Werthams criticism of comic book content led to the establishment of a censor organization known as the Comic Code Authority that same year, whose heavy-handed influence forced comic book writers and artists to go somewhat underground with their subversive themes. However, Batman (and Robin, whatever his relationship with Batman may or may not have been) has far outlived both Dr. Wertham and the chilling effect of his book, and in fact, the longevity and deceptively complex content of comic books have proven them to be much more powerful than anyone ever dreamed. They have for decades embodied striking artistic expressions of artists and authors, who collectively spoke for countless millions of young people who did not quite fit in to the mainstream of society. These millions were given voice by comic books such as The X-Men, The Incredible Hulk, The Amazing Spider-Man, from the Marvel Comics Company, and Batman and Superman from the DC Comics Company. Each of the aforementioned titles tells an extended set of stories about a character or characters who are misfits of some kind, whether it be physical, psychological, or emotional, and who take on a variety of preternatural and/or superhuman characteristics which allow them to not only address their own personal struggles with their differences from others in society, but to aid society itself in coming to better accept those who are different; or, alternately, the characters are either born with or afflicted by a condition which makes them a misfit and therefore different from others in society, and must adapt to life as such. These comic book stories generally involve a variety of morality plays, ranging from simple good vs. evil, to the exploration of antiheros, that enable the characters to attempt to effect positive change in the world, and provide both catharsis and inspiration for the readers. The X-Men, for example, were created by legendary comic book author Stan Lee and artist Jack Kirby in 1963. They were /are a group of teenagers born with genetic mutations that have endowed them with a variety of superhuman characteristics, not all of which are necessarily constructive. In the Lee/Kirby universe, the X-Men are widely ostracized and discriminated against not only because they are different, but because non-mutant humans fear the X-Men are the next logical, superior step in human evolution and therefore could render normal humans obsolete. The teenagers stories often involved them attempting to come to terms with their powers and how to fit into the so-called normal human society. The X-Men were comprised of such characters as Iceman, a young man who could freeze objects at will; Wolverine, a foul-tempered young man whose skeleton is laced with a nearly indestructible metal alloy, including metal knives which he could extend and retract from his hands at will, albeit with considerable pain; Storm, a young black female who could control the weather, including the ability to summon storms at will; Nightcrawler, a young male born with blue fur who could become virtually invisible at night and teleport short distances; Cyclops, who could shoot beams of pure solar energy from his eyes, but not always control this power; Rogue, a young female possessing the hyper-empathic ability the feelings, memories, and abilities of other beings she touches —unfortunately, however, prolonged contact with others can weaken or kill them; Magneto, an older male survivor of the Nazi death camps who can manipulate magnetic forces, but whose psyche was so twisted by his experience at the hands of the Nazis that he has become an arch-nemesis of the X-Men; and Professor Xavier, an older male paraplegic with amazing telepathic abilities and a world-class intellect, who has dedicated his life to mentoring other mutants and defending them from themselves, unsympathetic humans, and the perennial machinations of Magneto. The X-Men and their stories were unabashedly allegorical and subversive in nature, content, and theme. Professor Xavier was modeled after civil rights activist Martin Luther King, Jr. and Sir Francis Xavier, Catholic missionary and founder of the Jesuit order. The sense of loneliness and isolation experienced by Rogue was a reflection of the near-universal teenage experience. The bigotry and intolerance of homosexuals is another allegorical component featured with the X-Men narratives, particularly in the film adaptations directed by openly gay Bryan Singer. In X-Men 2, the character of Bobby Drake characters comes out of the closet as a mutant to his parents, prompting them to ask if he has tried not being a mutant, parodying the oft-heard question of parents directed their gay children. Anti-Semitism, personal alienation, anti-Communist paranoia, and racism are also allegorical themes that X-Men comic narratives have explored in detail. And like The X-Men, Batman, Spiderman (also a Stan Lee creation), The Incredible Hulk and Superman all were dependent upon and explored the themes of what it meant for a person to be forced to hide or to be ashamed of a component of his or her true self, or to lead a dual existence – one private and personal, one public. Superman (created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster), known by millions as a mild-mannered reporter, socially maladroit nerd, and bearer of an unrequited love for Lois Lane, who happens to be a near-omnipotent superhero when called upon in extraordinary circumstances, is the perfect embodiment of both teenage reality and teenage wish fulfillment. The Incredible Hulk (another Stan Lee creation) gets angry like all of us, but has real power – scary power, often – to do something about it thanks to hi s green steroidal transformation. Batman (created by Bob Kane and fleshed out by Bill Finger and Jerry Robinson) lives a quiet, dark life of solitude contrasted with public works of enviable nobility and good. These feelings of powerlessness and awkwardness, combined with empowerment fantasies, were and continue to be direct reflections of the collective concerns of millions of young people, and perhaps many adults, as well – how to fit into a society that demanded conformity without losing the uniqueness that embodies ones individuality. Ironically, the collective popularity of all of these comic book titles has historically been so striking in terms of sales that it would not be an unfair question to wonder if it fact the teenage misfits who bought them were in fact the majority, not the minority in society. Comic book sales peaked in 1993 at a staggering $850 million (U.S. dollars) and are still very healthy, though currently, the popularity of comic book characters is as likely to be manifest in movie ticket and DVD sales of film adaptations of comic books as it is in comic book purchases. More on this later. The character archetypes and narrative themes of most of these original and ongoing comic book series were produced in the crucible of the fairly conformist sociocultural pressures of the modernist era in the United States. The teenagers of each successive decade, beginning with the 1950s and continuing to the present, have been characterized by isolation, disaffection, rebellion, disillusionment, all combined with the pressure to adapt without question to the relatively monolithic mores of the generation which preceded them, a generation for whom belonging to a larger social group, for whom the values of unquestioning self-sacrifice and acceptance of authority figures and establishment power structures were the norm. Men were called to duty, whether in World War II or in the burgeoning post-war corporate universe; many made the ultimate sacrifice – their lives, or worse, their souls. Women, too, had their duty – to support their men in discreet, subservient lives of quiet domestic efficiency. But as American young people began to question the assumptions behind the Cold War, and question the rational and wisdom behind the interminably bloody Vietnam War, their uncertainty on these issues led to a greater wholesale questioning of the mechanisms and assumptions of societys very foundations. (Even Batman, whose creation in 1940 arguably predates postmodernism, eventually took on countercultural subject matter and themes, to say nothing of the suggestion of a taboo homoeroticism in the relationship between Batman and Robin.) This rebellion was met with heavy disapproval and disappointment by parents, representing the previous generation. The ongoing schism between these two generations has caused huge cultural, social, and political conflicts that continue to be played out even in 2005. These conflicts have been vividly reflected in the artistic expressions of the times – literature, music, and films. From the standpoint of the older generations, comic books were perhaps never adequately understood, respected, or even recognized for the potent and unusual artistic and cultural forces that they have always represented certainly as potent as more conventional and commonplace means of artistic expression, high art and classical music, just to name two ossified examples. (And, incidentally, these generational clashes were not limited to the United States in terms of understanding the rise of the superhero comic books. The country of Japan, tiny as it is, has become its own powerhouse in terms of churning out groundbreaking styles of comics, such as Katsuhiro Otomo of Akira fame, reflecting generational struggles unique to the Japanese youth culture.) The artistic expressions that arose out of the clash between generations also represented an evolution in classifications and mechanisms of art itself – the evolution from modern art forms to postmodern art forms. Modern art, reflective of the cultures from which it sprung, was generally conformist, and adhered to classic rules of form, function, and design, and either explicitly or implicitly supported the symbols of establishment paradigms by exploiting binary oppositions of us vs. them (i.e., Americans vs. Communists). Postmodern art rejected the methodology of modern art on every level, deconstructing it to such an extent as to even question the basic psychological definitions of symbolism in human art forms. The discarding and combination of genres and forms, the pastiche of styles, the toying with unorthodox symbolism, and an active interest in subversion and smashing of establishment systems – rebellion itself are all manifestations of art evolving to postmodern form. And instead of existing to analyze, but ultimately reinforce the paradigms of patriarchal establishments, postmodern art analyzed and often sought to undermine these establishments and their conventions, if not destroy them altogether. As noted by postmodernism scholar Andreas Huyssen, â€Å"†¦contemporary postmodernism operates in a field of tension between tradition and innovation, conservation and renewal, mass culture and high art, in which the second terms are no longer automatically privileged over the first.† (Huyssen, 1986, p. 267). As such, any art form that has enjoyed longevity has internalized and incorporated this revolutionary and evolutionary process, or been discarded or fossilized. Comic books are no exception to this rule, and their staying power has manifested itself in the last 20 or so years by their translation to and eventual dominance of the genre of film. In fact, comic books in their Silver Age forms were arguably inherently post-modern in nature, as they combined complex and detailed visual artistry with complex and serialized narratives, an intermixing pastiche of separate genres which had never before been combined in such a unique form. Books had, of course, often featured illustrations in the past, but they were only to provide occasional support and dimensionalization of the narrative, as opposed to being as important a component of the medium as the narrative itself. The fantastical and stylized nature of many of the illustrations featured in comic books were often postmodern artistic explorations in their own right, seeking to push the boundaries of conventional illustrations. Their explorations of anti-heroes helped deconstruct the notion of simple constructs of good and evil. American consumer capitalism, which is inherently (though not necessarily benignly) postmodern in its relentless desire to commodify anything and everything, particularly that which can be packaged as new, hip, and edgy – and thus desirable – has hungrily devoured comic books and the films which come from them. In doing so, the artistic and societal merit of comic books, in particular their subversive characteristics, have become themselves subverted by the deity of consumer capitalist commodification. The ultimate dream, for example, of fans of the X-Men comic books, that their beloved misfit characters would reach movie theatres and therefore a larger audience for their collective angst, has come true but that dream has also become a nightmare for some fans, as these same subversive misfit X-Men have also become action figures, clothing lines, cartoons on the side of fast food lunch bags and boxes all mass marketed to mass audiences in order to maximize profits for corporations that are more interested in shareholder earnings than they are the artistic merit of airing the collective voices of disaffected teen angst. If the phenomenology of disaffected teen angst can be appropriated to make a profit from teenagers, then corporations will be chasing the teens and their money incessantly. However, corporate interest in teenagers as a demographic generally has little to do with sociocultural altruism. In fact, cultural observers should take heed – â€Å"ventilation of genuinely alternative social visions collide directly with the underpinnings of power in the economy at large. (Schiller, 1986, p. 152) The trade-off is as follows: as long as such ventilation of alternative social visions makes a profit, it will be tolerated. But in the consumer capitalist corporate universe of today, art for arts sake, particularly if the art does not reinforce the machinery of consumer capitalism, will never generate much more than limited enthusiasm, and is more likely to meet with insidious hostility. The primary perpetrators in this arena are the behemoth corporate conglomerates that own the media, and the acquisitive way in which they manage their film and television divisions. In the 1960s and 1970s, film studios and television networks existed as independent business entities whose sole focus was the creation of films and television shows – nothing more, nothing less. While these companies were undisputedly interested in profits, the process was far more artist-centered and quality-driven than they are today. The presumption was that quality films would result in box-office successes, though the expectations of profit were relatively modest compared to todays standards. Then, in 1977, a watershed moment in film history arrived in the form of the blockbuster Star Wars, a comic-bookish story in its own right despite being an original creation of writer/director George Lucas. The film was not only the most financially successful phenomenon in movie history, but it alerted movie studios to a whole new economic model, centered around the notion of ancillary profits. Most notably in the case of Star Wars, the ancillary profits came in the form of merchandising. Inexplicably, before the films release, executives at 20th Century Fox, the films distributor, were convinced the film would be a flop, and in contract negotiations with Lucas, acceded to his unusual request to receive 100% of profits derived from sales of merchandise inspired and/or derived from the film, for example action figures and lunchboxes. The Fox executives surely rued the day they signed over these rights to Mr. Lucas, as Star Wars merchandise generated $1 billion in profits for the shrewd filmmaker. Another lesson learned by Fox, and other studios hungry to recreate the fiscal orgy of Star Wars, was that films targeted directly at children could be extremely lucrative at the box office, beyond profit margins to which they had become accustomed. Movies were no longer mostly the artistic or escapist purview of an audience comprised largely of adults. Their children came to be seen as a previously under-exploited source of bonanza profits. Lastly, movie studios began to rethink their conventional economic model, which was to produce modestly-budgeted films and reliably make modest profits. What Star Wars ignited was a phenomenon known as the blockbuster mentality, a hunger for epic profits from so-called event films, on which the studios became willing to gamble heretofore-unprecedented sums of money in hopes of hitting the proverbial jackpot. George Lucas, who began his career as a subversive filmmaker of eccentric tastes with critically acclaimed films such as THX-1138 and American Graffiti, unwittingly created a perfect storm that turned the film industry on its head. Star Wars was no fluke, as it turned out, and it was not long before the greedy capitalistic corporate culture of the 1980s began entertaining, no pun intended, the notion that film studio and television networks could be glamorous cash cows. In short order, huge companies whose core business usually had nothing to do with the entertainment industry were battling it out to see who could get into show business the fastest. Coca-Cola acquired movie studio Columbia/Tri-Star, which was later sold to Japanese electronics giant Sony; General Electric acquired the NBC television network; Capital Cities acquired the ABC Television network, and News Corporation acquired 20th Century Fox and the Fox Broadcasting Company; Gulf + Western acquired Paramount Pictures, etc. The unfortunate side effect of these mergers was the infusion of bottom-line, short-term profit-hungry thinking, as well as corporate models of branding and marketing products. These large corporations viewed films and television shows, and the intellectual properties that underlied them, as products, pure and simple, no different from mouthwash, shoes, soda drinks, or cosmetics. They expected their new acquisitions to transition from being art-focused and letting profits flow from quality, to simply making whatever sold the most tickets and had the most lucrative ancillary market potential. There was no single identifiable point, such a historical date or a press conference, when the critical link between art and commerce was separated, or the historical deference of profit to art was inverted (themselves postmodern phenomena, incidentally), but the entrà ©e of comic books into the world of film and television, which has become a powerful, dominating presence of comic books in film and television, followed and was directly related to this paradigm shift in the economics of the entertainment industry. The adaptation of comic books into film and television properties has been an exercise in creative cannibalism in some sense. Increasingly, film and television studios have taken on the risk-averse mentality of their corporate masters, and one of the effects of this has been to seek out intellectual property that might guarantee the fiscal success of a film or television show adaptation of said property. To the extent that a wildly successful book was often adapted for films geared towards adults, wildly successful comic book series were seen as a surefire way to guarantee a teen audience and the disposable income purchasing power of them and their parents. Movie executives sought to acquire the rights to comic book characters and stories which they could exploit – actual film industry terminology – and build into franchises – also actual film industry terminology, particularly creepy given the obvious parallels to McDonalds or Gap store franchise business models. For the most part, these franchises have been wildly successful from a financial point of view, though perhaps not from an artistic standpoint. There have been six Batman films made by Warner Brothers movie studio (owned by corporate behemoth AOL Time Warner, who not coincidentally own DC Comics, the original home of the Batman characters and comic books): 1989s Batman, 1992s Batman Returns, 1995s Batman Forever, 1997s Batman and Robin, 2004s Catwoman, and 2005s Batman Begins. Each film sported star casting of the highest caliber; however, perhaps with the exception of the first film, were special effects showcases first and artistically ambitious second, if at all. Nor were they particularly true to the time-honored complexities and lingering darkness of the comic books. Iconic film critic Roger Ebert (a devoted fan of the Batman comic books), in his review of Batman and Robin, took a forlorn swipe at each of the films to date: †¦ my delight began to fade at about the 30-minute mark when it became clear that this new movie, like its predecessors, was not *really* going to explore the bizarre world of its heroes, but would settle down safely into a special effects extravaganza. Batman Robin, like the first three films in the series, is wonderful to look at, and has nothing authentic at its core†¦ Watching it, I realized why it makes absolutely no difference who plays Batman: Theres nobody at home†¦ Give the foreground to the characters, not the special effects. And ask the hard questions about Bruce Wayne. (Ebert, 1997) Eberts last line refers to the perennial rumors that perennial bachelor Bruce Wayne might actually be a homosexual, or failing that, possess some unusual sexual fetishes that might not comprise the sort of fare that young children should be seeing at the movie theatre or on DVD. But this topic, as well as any serious exploration of Bruce Waynes psyche, was not been considered particularly lucrative by the marketing machines at Warner Brothers until the franchise was on the verge of death after the box office mediocrity of Batman and Robin and the outright box office disaster of Catwoman, which cost $85 million (U.S.) to produce and only made $40 million (U.S.) at the box office. 2005s Batman Begins was an unapologetically dark and complex film. Roger Eberts review may well have spoken for many Batman fans who ached for more substance and less pure style: The character resonates more deeply with me than the other comic superheroes, perhaps because when I discovered him as a child, he seemed darker and more grown-up than the cheerful Superman. He has secrets. As Alfred muses: Strange injuries and a nonexistent social life. These things beg the question, what does Bruce Wayne do with his time? (Ebert, 2005) Apparently, the moviegoing audiences agreed with Mr. Ebert, rewarding Warner Brothers with $205 million (U.S.) in box office receipts in the United States alone, and a similar – and still increasing – tally worldwide. The lesson here is that while an artistically unambitious and shallow film like Batman and Robin, which is more childish cartoon and marketing machine than serious filmmaking, can certainly turn a modest profit, it is entirely possible to be artistically ambitious and make plenty of money at the same time. One wonders why the latter is more often the exception rather than the rule, to the detriment of the integrity of comic books and their rich characters. In theory, the adaptation of comic books to the film and television arenas could have been a boon to not only the comic book industry, but a force for cultural good in the sense of spreading the subversive word to a larger audience. While there is no question that American and Western teenagers are far more aware of Batman and The X-Men than they were 30 years ago, the expansion of the audience has come at a price. First of all, the structures of film and television do not generally lend themselves well to the sort of narrative complexity that is a hallmark of comic books ongoing multi-character storylines. While the two X-Men films to date were generally well-received by fans of the comic books, many fans vociferously complained that many characters were either simply not included in the storylines, or they were altered to suit Hollywood norms in order to maximize audience appeal. While a third X-Men film is in the works, the simple truth is that 20th Century Fox, the movie studio that produced the films, simply cannot make any more than one X-Men film every two to three years and the complicated narrative history of over a dozen characters unspoiled over the course of 40 years of storytelling simply cannot be done adequate justice by a two-hour movies – as good as they may be – which get released only periodically. Secondly, for many young people, seeing an X-Men or Batman film may be their very first exposure to these universes, and depending on their reaction to the quality of the films and their natural consumer predilections, it is not certain that these teenagers are going to seek out the more dimensionalized, rich, and complex narrative universes to be found within the comic book series. In fact, given the immense popularity of video games among teenagers, who as a general rule spend as much, if not more time transfixed by their Playstations and Xboxes than they do reading, it is more likely that teenagers who see X-Men films will buy the video game adaptations of the X-Men comic books instead of investing in the comic books themselves. The statistics bear this out: in 2004, sales of comic books in the U.S. totaled $300 million – a considerable sum of money, but a far cry from the $850 million sum reached ten years earlier. Comic book money had, for better or for worse, flowed away from the comic books themselves and into the reinventions of the comic books – the movies, the video games. It is unfair, perhaps, to dismiss video games as worthless, but also difficult to avoid the conclusion that the X-Men video game, which is simply a violent combat simulation featuring the various mutant characters, carries more artistic and social worth than the comic books to which the video game owes its digital existence. Lastly, the value of ancillary X-Men merchandise, such as T-shirts, lunchboxes, and plastic soda cups from Burger King adorned with X-Men characters, is fleeting and thus fairly dubious in comparison to the lasting collectors item value of the comic books themselves, to say nothing of the inherent worth of the content of the books, and the visual and narrative artistry contained within them. Ultimately, and sadly, the postmodern machinery of consumer capitalism has appropriated comic book visuals and narratives and separated them from their inherent artistic value in order to make them both more appealing to a mainstream audience, usually children and younger teens, and more exploitable in terms of ancillary markets such as merchandising. The positive side of this equation is that the subversive art and storytelling found in comic books was brought to a larger audience, but may well have been eviscerated of its soul in the process. Films like Batman Begins, with its dark exploration of the recesses of Bruce Waynes psychology, and X-Men 2, with its unapologetic homosexual allegories, do their source material adequate justice and make their corporate masters a lot of money in the process. What can be hoped for the future is that movie studios see fit to release more films such as these and less of the vapid, lowest-common denominator special effects orgies that tend to predominate the box office landscape. Hellraiser and Constantine were met with outright hostility by fans of their comic book source material and performed poorly at the box office. It is no longer enough to simply adapt a comic book to guarantee success. Many audience members have grown more shrewd and sophisticated, and demand quality in storytelling. In the words of Nightcrawler in the film X-Men 2, â€Å"Most people will never know anything beyond what they see with their own two eyes.† If this is true in a world where what is put before the eyes of teenagers is predominated by movies and video games, it is imperative that the content not merely reflect the status quo desired by consumer capitalism, but the thought-provoking stories and characters, daring and subversive thoughts, first brought to us decades ago in the best comic books. BIBLIOGRAPHY Sabin, Roger. Comics, Comix Graphic Novels A History of Comic Art. Phaidon Press, 1996. Robinson, Jerry. The Comics: An Illustrated History of Comic Strip Art. Putnam Publishers, 1974. Wertham, Fredric. Seduction of the Innocent. Amerion Publishers, 1954 (Reprint 1996). Tuzi, Marino. â€Å"Individualism and Marginality: From Comic Book to Film: Marvel Comics Superheroes† College Quarterly, Spring 2005 Volume 8 Number 2. Taken from: htt

The Lost Duke of Wyndham Chapter Nine

Jack staggered out of bed at precisely fourteen minutes before seven. Waking had been an elaborate undertaking. He had, after Miss Eversleigh had departed the night before, rung for a maid and given her strict orders to rap on his door at fifteen minutes past six. Then, as she was leaving, he thought the better of it and revised his directive to six sharp raps at the appointed time, followed by another twelve fifteen minutes later. It wasn't as if he was going to make it out of bed on the first attempt, anyway. The maid had also been informed that if she did not see him at the door within ten seconds of the second set of raps, she was to enter the room and not depart until she was certain he was awake. And finally, she was promised a shilling if she did not breathe a word of this to anyone. â€Å"And I'll know if you do,† he warned her, with his most disarming smile. â€Å"Gossip always makes its way back to me.† It was true. No matter the house, no matter the establishment, the maids always told him everything. It was amazing how far one could travel on nothing but a smile and a puppy-dog expression. Unfortunately for Jack, however, what his plan boasted in strategy, it lacked in eventual execution. Not that the maid could be blamed. She carried out her part to the letter. Six sharp raps at fifteen minutes past six. Precisely. Jack managed to pry one eye about two-thirds of the way open, which proved to be just enough to focus upon the clock on his bedside table. At half six he was snoring anew, and if he only counted seven of the twelve raps, he was fairly certain the fault was his, not hers. And really, one had to admire the poor girl's adherence to plan when faced with his somewhat surly No, followed by: Go away; Ten more minutes; I said, ten more minutes; and Don't you have a bloody pot to scrub? At fifteen minutes before seven, as he teetered on his belly at the edge of his bed, one arm hanging limply over the side, he finally managed to get both eyes open, and he saw her, sitting primly in a chair across the room. â€Å"Er, is Miss Eversleigh awake?† he mumbled, rubbing the sleep from his left eye. His right eye seemed to have shut again, trying to pull the rest of him along with it, back into sleep. â€Å"Since twenty minutes before six, sir.† â€Å"Chipper as a bloody mockingbird, too, I'm sure.† The maid held her tongue. He cocked his head, suddenly a bit more awake. â€Å"Not so chipper, eh?† So Miss Eversleigh was not a morning person. The day was growing brighter by the second. â€Å"She's not so bad as you,† the maid finally admitted. Jack pushed his legs over the side and yawned. â€Å"She'd have to be dead to achieve that.† The maid giggled. It was a good, welcome sound. As long as he had the maids giggling, the house was his. He who had the servants had the world. He'd learned that at the age of six. Drove his family crazy, it did, but that just made it all the sweeter. â€Å"How late do you imagine she would sleep if you didn't wake her?† he asked. â€Å"Oh, I couldn't tell you that,† the maid said, blushing madly. Jack did not see how Miss Eversleigh's sleep habits might constitute a confidence, but nonetheless he had to applaud the maid for her loyalty. This did not mean, however, that he would not make every attempt to win her over. â€Å"What about when the dowager gives her the day off?† he asked, rather offhandedly. The maid shook her head sadly. â€Å"The dowager never gives her the day off.† â€Å"Never?† Jack was surprised. His newfound grandmother was exacting and self-important and a host of other annoying faults, but she'd struck him as, at the heart, somewhat fair-minded. â€Å"Just afternoons,† the maid said. And she leaned forward, looking first to her left and then her right, as if there might actually be someone else in the room who could hear her. â€Å"I think she does it just because she knows that Miss Eversleigh is not partial to mornings.† Ah, now that did sound like the dowager. â€Å"She gets twice as many afternoons,† the maid went on to explain, â€Å"so it does even out in the end.† Jack nodded sympathetically. â€Å"It's a shame.† â€Å"Unfair.† â€Å"So unfair.† â€Å"And poor Miss Eversleigh,† the maid went on, her voice growing in animation. â€Å"She's ever so kind. Lovely to all the maids. Never forgets our birthdays and gives us gifts that she says are from the dowager, but we all know it's her.† She looked up at him then, so Jack rewarded her with an earnest nod. â€Å"And all she wants, poor dear, is one morning every other week to sleep until noon.† â€Å"Is that what she said?† Jack murmured. â€Å"Only once,† the maid admitted. â€Å"I don't think she would recall. She was very tired. I think the dowager had her up quite late the night before. Took me twice as long as usual to rouse her.† Jack nodded sympathetically. â€Å"The dowager never sleeps,† the maid went on. â€Å"Never?† â€Å"Well, I'm sure she must. But she doesn't seem to need very much of it.† â€Å"I knew a vampire bat once,† Jack murmured. â€Å"Poor Miss Eversleigh must adhere to the dowager's schedule,† the maid explained. Jack continued on with the nodding. It seemed to be working. â€Å"But she does not complain,† the maid said, clearly eager to defend her. â€Å"She would never complain about her grace.† â€Å"Never?† If he had lived at Belgrave as long as Grace, he'd have been complaining forty-eight hours a day. The maid shook her head with a piety that would have been quite at home on a vicar's wife. â€Å"Miss Eversleigh is not one for gossip.† Jack was about to point out that everyone gossiped, and despite what they might say, everyone enjoyed it. But he did not want the maid to interpret this as a critique of her current behavior, so he nodded yet again, prodding her on with: â€Å"Very admirable.† â€Å"Not with the help, at least,† the maid clarified. â€Å"Maybe with her friends.† â€Å"Her friends?† Jack echoed, padding across the room in his nightshirt. Clothing had been laid out for him, freshly washed and pressed, and it did not take more than a glance to see that they were of the finest quality. Wyndham's, most probably. They were of a similar size. He wondered if the duke knew that his closet had been raided. Probably not. â€Å"The Ladies Elizabeth and Amelia,† the maid said. â€Å"They live on the other side of the village. In the other big house. Not as big as this, mind you.† â€Å"No, of course not,† Jack murmured. He decided that this maid, whose name he really ought to learn, would be his favorite. A wealth of knowledge, she was, and all one had to do was let her get off her feet for a moment and into a comfortable chair. â€Å"Their father's the Earl of Crowland,† the maid went on, nattering away even as Jack stepped into his dressing room to don his clothing. He supposed some men would refuse to wear the duke's attire after their altercation the day before, but it seemed to him an impractical battle to pick. Assuming he was not going to succeed in luring Miss Eversleigh into a wild orgy of abandon (at least not today), he would have to dress. And his own clothes were rather worn and dusty. Besides, maybe it would irk his dukeliness. And Jack had judged that to be a noble pursuit, indeed. â€Å"Does Miss Eversleigh get to spend time with the Ladies Elizabeth and Amelia very often?† he called out, pulling on his breeches. Perfect fit. How fortunate. â€Å"No. Although they were here yesterday.† The two girls he'd seen her with in the front drive. The blond ones. Of course. He should have realized they were sisters. He would have realized it, he supposed, if he'd been able to tear his eyes away from Miss Eversleigh long enough to see beyond the color of their hair. â€Å"Lady Amelia is to be our next duchess,† the maid continued. Jack's hands, which were doing up the buttons on Wyndham's extraordinarily well-cut linen shirt, stilled. â€Å"Really,† he said. â€Å"I did not realize the duke was betrothed.† â€Å"Since Lady Amelia was a baby,† the maid supplied. â€Å"We'll be having a wedding soon, I think. We've got to, really. She's getting long in the tooth. I don't think her parents'll stand for much more delay.† Jack had thought both girls had looked youthful, but he had been some distance away. â€Å"Twenty-one, I think she is.† â€Å"That old?† he murmured dryly. â€Å"I'm seventeen,† the maid said with a sigh. Jack decided not to comment, as he could not be sure whether she wished to be seen as older or younger than her actual years. He stepped out of the dressing room, putting the finishing touches on his cravat. The maid jumped to her feet. â€Å"Oh, but I should not gossip.† Jack gave her a reassuring nod. â€Å"I won't say a word. I give you my vow.† She dashed toward the door, then turned around and said, â€Å"My name is Bess.† She bobbed a curtsy. â€Å"If you need anything.† Jack smiled then, because he was quite certain her offer was completely innocent. There was something rather refreshing in that. A minute after Bess left, a footman arrived, as promised by Miss Eversleigh, to escort him down to the breakfast room. He proved not nearly as informative as Bess (the footmen never were, at least not to him), and the five-minute walk was made in silence. The fact that the trip required five minutes was not lost on Jack. If Belgrave had seemed unconscionably huge from afar, then the inside was a positive labyrinth. He was fairly certain he'd seen less than a tenth of it, and already he'd located three staircases. There were turrets, too; he'd seen them from the outside, and almost certainly dungeons as well. There had to be dungeons, he decided, taking what had to be the sixth turn since descending the staircase. No self-respecting castle would be without them. He decided he'd ask Grace to take him down for a peek, if only because the subterranean rooms were probably the only ones that could be counted upon not to have priceless old masters hanging on the walls. A lover of art he might be, but this – he nearly flinched when he brushed past an El Greco – was simply too much. Even his dressing room had been hung wainscot to ceiling with priceless oils. Whoever had decorated there had an appalling fondness for cupids. Blue silk bedroom, his foot. The place ought to be renamed Corpulent Babies, Armed with Quivers and Bows Room. Subtitled: Visitors Beware. Because, really, there ought to be a limit on how many cupids one could put in one small dressing room. They turned a final corner, and Jack nearly sighed in delight as the familiar smells of an English breakfast wafted past his nose. The footman motioned to an open doorway, and Jack walked through it, his body tingling with an unfamiliar anticipation, only to find that Miss Eversleigh had not yet arrived. He looked at the clock. One minute before seven. Surely that was a new, postmilitary record. The sideboard had already been laid, so he took a plate, filled it to heaping, and chose a seat at the table. It had been some time since he'd breakfasted in a proper house. His meals of late had been taken at inns and in rented rooms, and before that on the battlefield. It felt luxurious to sit with his meal, almost decadent. â€Å"Coffee, tea, or chocolate, sir?† Jack had not had chocolate for more time than he could remember, and his body nearly shuddered with delight. The footman took note of his preference and moved to another table, where three elegant pots sat in a row, their arched spouts sticking up like a line of swans. In a moment Jack was rewarded with a steaming cup, into which he promptly dumped three spoonfuls of sugar and a splash of milk. There were, he decided, taking one heavenly sip, some advantages to a life of luxury. He was nearly through with his food when he heard footsteps approaching. Within moments Miss Eversleigh appeared. She was dressed in a demure white frock – no, not white, he decided, more of a cream color, rather like the top of a milk bucket before it was skimmed. Whatever the hue was, it matched the swirling plaster that adorned the door frame perfectly. She needed only a yellow ribbon (for the walls, which were surprisingly cheerful for such an imposing home) and he would have sworn the room had been decorated just for that moment. He stood, offering her a polite bow. â€Å"Miss Eversleigh,† he murmured. He liked that she was blushing. Just a little, which was ideal. Too much, and that would mean she was embarrassed. A bare hint of pale pink, however, meant that she was looking forward to the encounter. And perhaps thought she ought not to be. Which was even better. â€Å"Chocolate, Miss Eversleigh?† the footman asked. â€Å"Oh, yes, please, Graham.† She sounded most relieved to get her beverage in hand. And indeed, when she finally sat across from him, her plate nearly as full as his, she sighed with delight. â€Å"You don't take sugar?† he asked, surprised. He'd never met a woman – and very few men, for that matter – with a taste for unsweetened chocolate. He couldn't abide it himself. She shook her head. â€Å"Not in the morning. I need it undiluted.† He watched with interest – and, to be honest, a fair bit of amusement – as she alternately sipped the brew and breathed in the scent of it. Her hands did not leave her cup until she'd drained the last drop, and then Graham, who obviously knew her preferences well, was at her side in an instant, refilling without even a hint of a request. Miss Eversleigh, Jack decided, was definitely not a morning person. â€Å"Have you been down long?† she asked, now that she had imbibed a full cup. â€Å"Not long.† He gave a rueful glance to his plate, which was almost clean. â€Å"I learned to eat quickly in the army.† â€Å"By necessity, I imagine,† she said, taking a bite of her coddled eggs. He let his chin dip very slightly to acknowledge her statement. â€Å"The dowager will be down shortly,† she said. â€Å"Ah. So you mean that we must learn to converse quickly as well, if we wish to have any enjoyable discourse before the descent of the duchess.† Her lips twitched. â€Å"That wasn't exactly what I meant, but – † She took a sip of her chocolate, not that that hid her smile. † – it's close.† â€Å"The things we must learn to do quickly,† he said with a sigh. She looked up, fork frozen halfway to her mouth. A small blob of egg fell to her plate with a slap. Her cheeks were positively flaming with color. â€Å"I didn't mean that,† he said, most pleased with the direction of her thoughts. â€Å"Good heavens, I would never do that quickly.† Her lips parted. Not quite an O, but a rather attractive little oval nonetheless. â€Å"Unless, of course I had to,† he added, letting his eyes grow heavy-lidded and warm. â€Å"When faced with the choice of speed versus abstinence – â€Å" â€Å"Mr. Audley!† He sat back with a satisfied smile. â€Å"I was wondering when you'd scold me.† â€Å"Not soon enough,† she muttered. He picked up his knife and fork and cut off a piece of bacon. It was thick and pink and perfectly cooked. â€Å"And once again, there it is,† he said, popping the meat into his mouth. He chewed, swallowed, then added, â€Å"My inability to be serious.† â€Å"But you claimed that wasn't true.† She leaned in – just an inch or so, but the motion seemed to say – I'm watching you. He almost shivered. He liked being watched by her. â€Å"You said,† she continued, â€Å"that you were frequently serious, and that it is up to me to figure out when.† â€Å"Is that what I said?† he murmured. â€Å"Something rather close to it.† â€Å"Well, then.† He leaned in closer, too, and his eyes captured hers, green on blue, across the breakfast table. â€Å"What do you think? Am I being serious right now?† For a moment he thought she might answer him, but no, she just sat back with an innocent little smile and said, â€Å"I really couldn't say.† â€Å"You disappoint me, Miss Eversleigh.† Her smile turned positively serene as she returned her attention to the food on her plate. â€Å"I couldn't possibly render judgment on a subject so unfit for my ears,† she murmured. He laughed aloud at that. â€Å"You have a very devious sense of humor, Miss Eversleigh.† She appeared to be pleased by the compliment, almost as if she'd been waiting for years for someone to acknowledge it. But before she could say anything (if indeed she'd intended to say something), the moment was positively assaulted by the dowager, who marched into the breakfast room trailed by two rather harried and unhappy looking maids. â€Å"What are you laughing about?† she demanded. â€Å"Nothing in particular,† Jack replied, deciding to spare Miss Eversleigh the task of making conversation. After five years in the dowager's service, the poor girl deserved a respite. â€Å"Just enjoying Miss Eversleigh's enchanting company.† The dowager shot them both a sharp look. â€Å"My plate,† she snapped. One of the maids rushed to the sideboard, but she was halted when the dowager said, â€Å"Miss Eversleigh will see to it.† Grace stood without a word, and the dowager turned to Jack and said, â€Å"She is the only one who does it properly.† She shook her head and let out a short-tempered little puff of air, clearly lamenting the levels of intelligence commonly found in the servants. Jack said nothing, deciding this would be as good a time as any to invoke his aunt's favorite axiom: If you can't say something nice, say nothing at all. Although it was tempting to say something extraordinarily nice about the servants. Grace returned, plate in hand, set it down in front of the dowager, and then gave it a little twist, turning the disk until the eggs were at nine o'clock, closest to the forks. Jack watched the entire affair, first curious, then impressed. The plate had been divided into six equal, wedge-shaped sections, each with its own food selection. Nothing touched, not even the hollandaise sauce, which had been dribbled over the eggs with careful precision. â€Å"It's a masterpiece,† he declared, arching forward. He was trying to see if she'd signed her name with the hollandaise. Grace gave him a look. One that was not difficult to interpret. â€Å"Is it a sundial?† he asked, all innocence. â€Å"What are you talking about?† the dowager grumbled, picking up a fork. â€Å"No! Don't ruin it!† he cried out – as best he could without exploding with laughter. But she jabbed a slice of stewed apple all the same. â€Å"How could you?† Jack accused. Grace actually turned in her chair, unable to watch. â€Å"What the devil are you talking about?† the dowager demanded. â€Å"Miss Eversleigh, why are you facing the window? What is he about?† Grace twisted back around, hand over her mouth. â€Å"I'm sure I do not know.† The dowager's eyes narrowed. â€Å"I think you do know.† â€Å"I assure you,† Grace said, â€Å"I never know what he is about.† â€Å"Never?† Jack queried. â€Å"What a sweeping comment. We've only just met.† â€Å"It feels like so much longer,† Grace said. â€Å"Why,† he mused, â€Å"do I wonder if I have just been insulted?† â€Å"If you've been insulted, you shouldn't have to wonder at it,† the dowager said sharply. Grace turned to her with some surprise. â€Å"That's not what you said yesterday.† â€Å"What did she say yesterday?† Mr. Audley asked. â€Å"He is a Cavendish,† the dowager said simply. Which, to her, explained everything. But she apparently held little faith in Grace's deductive abilities, and so she said, as one might speak to a child, â€Å"We are different.† â€Å"The rules don't apply,† Mr. Audley said with a shrug. And then, as soon as the dowager was looking away, he winked at Grace. â€Å"What did she say yesterday?† he asked again. Grace was not sure she could adequately paraphrase, given that she was so at odds with the overall sentiment, but she couldn't very well ignore his direct question twice, so she said, â€Å"That there is an art to insult, and if one can do it without the subject realizing, it's even more impressive.† She looked over to the dowager, waiting to see if she would be corrected. â€Å"It does not apply,† the dowager said archly, â€Å"when one is the subject of the insult.† â€Å"Wouldn't it still be art for the other person?† Grace asked. â€Å"Of course not. And why should I care if it were?† The dowager sniffed disdainfully and turned back to her breakfast. â€Å"I don't like this bacon,† she announced. â€Å"Are your conversations always this oblique?† Mr. Audley asked. â€Å"No,† Grace answered, quite honestly. â€Å"It has been a most exceptional two days.† No one had anything to add to that, probably because they were all in such agreement. But Mr. Audley did fill the silence by turning to the dowager and saying, â€Å"I found the bacon to be superb.† To that, the dowager replied, â€Å"Is Wyndham returned?† â€Å"I don't believe so,† Grace answered. She looked up to the footman. â€Å"Graham?† â€Å"No, miss, he is not at home.† The dowager pursed her lips into an expression of irritated discontent. â€Å"Very inconsiderate of him.† â€Å"It is early yet,† Grace said. â€Å"He did not indicate that he would be gone all night.† â€Å"Is the duke normally required to register his schedule with his grandmother?† Mr. Audley murmured, clearly out to make trouble. Grace gave him a peeved look. Surely this did not require a reply. He smiled in return. He enjoyed vexing her. This much was becoming abundantly clear. She did not read too much into it, however. The man enjoyed vexing everyone. Grace turned back to the dowager. â€Å"I am certain he will return soon.† The dowager's expression did not budge in its irritation. â€Å"I had hoped that he would be here so that we might talk frankly, but I suppose we may proceed without him.† â€Å"Do you think that's wise?† Grace asked before she could stop herself. And indeed, the dowager responded to her impertinence with a withering stare. But Grace refused to regret speaking out. It was not right to make determinations about the future in Thomas's absence. â€Å"Footman!† the dowager barked. â€Å"Leave us and close the doors behind you.† Once the room was secure, the dowager turned to Mr. Audley and announced, â€Å"I have given the matter great thought.† â€Å"I really think we should wait for the duke,† Grace cut in. Her voice sounded a little panicked, and she wasn't sure why she was quite so distressed. Perhaps it was because Thomas was the one person who had made her life bearable in the past five years. If it hadn't been for him, she'd have forgotten the sound of her own laughter. She liked Mr. Audley. She liked him rather too much, in all honesty, but she would not allow the dowager to hand him Thomas's birthright over breakfast. â€Å"Miss Eversleigh – † the dowager bit off, clearly beginning a blistering set-down. â€Å"I agree with Miss Eversleigh,† Mr. Audley put in smoothly. â€Å"We should wait for the duke.† But the dowager waited for no one. And her expression was one part formidable and two parts defiant when she said, â€Å"We must travel to Ireland. Tomorrow if we can manage it.†

Learn How Many Total Electoral Votes There Are

In the United States, the president and vice president are elected by the Electoral College rather than the popular vote of the people—and, as of April 2018, there are a total of 538 electoral votes. This system of indirect democracy was chosen by the  Founding Fathers  as a compromise between allowing Congress to elect a president and giving potentially uninformed citizens a direct vote.   The history of how that number of electoral votes came to be and the number needed to elect a president is an interesting story. Electoral Votes Background Former U.S. Treasury Secretary  Alexander Hamilton  wrote in Federalist (Paper) No. 68: Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption.  The Federalist Papers, authored by Hamilton,  James Madison, and John Jay, represented an attempt to convince the  states to ratify the Constitution. The framers of the Constitution, and many in leadership positions in the 1780s, feared the influence of the  unwashed  mob. They feared that, if allowed to directly elect the president, the general populace might foolishly vote for an unqualified president or even a despot—or the  masses might be unduly  influenced by foreign governments  when voting for a president. In essence, the Founding Fathers felt the masses could not be trusted. Hence, they created the Electoral College, where citizens of each state would vote for a slate of electors, who theoretically were pledged to then vote for a specific candidate. But, if circumstances warranted, the electors could be free to vote for a candidate other than the one to whom they were pledged. The Electoral College Today Today, each citizens vote indicates which electors he would like to have represent  him during the Electoral College process. Each presidential ticket has a group of designated electors ready to respond should their party win the popular vote of the people during a presidential election, which occurs every four years in November. The number of electoral votes is derived by adding the number of senators (100), the number of members in the House of Representatives (435), and three additional votes for the District of Columbia. (The District of Columbia was awarded three electoral votes with the passage of the 23rd Amendment in 1961.) The total number of electors, then, adds up to 538 total votes. To win the presidency, a candidate needs more than 50 percent of the electoral votes. Half of 538 is 269. Therefore, a candidate needs 270 Electoral College votes to win. More About the Electoral College The total number of electoral votes does not vary from year to year because the number of members of the House of Representatives and the Senate does not change. Instead, every 10  years with the new census, the number of electors shifts from states that have lost population to states that have gained population. Though the number of electoral votes is fixed at 538, there are circumstances that can arise requiring special attention. There is a constitutional process that goes into effect in case of a  tie in the Electoral College.Most states use a winner-takes-all method, where the candidate who wins the states popular vote is awarded the states entire slate of electors. As of April 2018, Maine and Nebraska are the only states that do not use a winner-takes-all system.Because of the way electors are apportioned, the presidential candidate with the most votes by the citizenry does not always win the election and become president. This was the case with  Hillary Clinton, who  won the popular vote by nearly 3 million ballots  in the 2016 presidential election, but  Donald Trump  became president because he  received 290 out of 538 electoral votes, 20 more than the 270 electoral votes he needed to win.

Long Term Care Delivery System For Older Adults - 910 Words

in place is long term care delivery system for older community adults designed to keep them in the environment of their choice as long as possible. This care system includes physicians, nurses and other professionals’ to support older adults’ medical functioning, functional wellbeing and social support to maintain them in their homes (Popejoy, Galambos, Stetzer, Popescu, Hicks, Khalilia, Rantz Marek, 2015). Aging in place have two folds of benefits: from the perspective of older adults and the policy maker. Most adults want to grow old in their own homes i.e. age in place. Aging in place offers a sense of autonomy; maintain the identity and social relationship, being in home older adults is not compelled to change their lifestyle and daily routine. Older adults with low economic status do not feel the economic burden in comparison to being in nursing homes. On the other hand policy maker also think that institutional care is much more expensive than aging in place (Iec ovich, 2014). There are many challenges that older adults who want to age in place come upon. To overcome those challenges, new and advanced technologies are required that will help maintain independence, dignity and home care. Assisted living technologies (ALTs) play an important role. There are two types of ALTs: Home and Environmental Modifications and Telemedicine and Telecare (Graybill, McMeekin Wildman, 2014). Telecare is an enhanced delivery of health and social services to people esp. olderShow MoreRelatedLong Term Care Healthcare Delivery1379 Words   |  6 PagesLong-term care healthcare delivery will be a great/popular option for many of these senior citizens. The long-term care healthcare delivery system falls within the continuum of care. The continuum of care is a series of heath care services that are provided to a great number of older adults who are in need of them throughout the course of their life/older life. The care ranges from: personal care, custodial care, restorative care, skill nursing care, and sub acute care (Shi Singh, 2012). DifferentRead MoreThe Aging Population On The Delivery Of Healthcare1225 Words   |  5 Pagesis a term that most healthcare professionals and students are quite familiar with. The term often relates to health care because many of the individuals in this group are beginning to seek care because of long term illnesses associated with aging. Therefore, it is vital for healthcare professionals to understand the significance of the term â€Å"baby-boomers†. In fact, by the year 2030, one in five people will be over the age of 65 and in 2050, that number will be close to 90 million older adults, whichRead MoreDisease Trends and the Delivery of Health Care Services Essay1457 Words   |  6 PagesDisease Trends and the Delivery of Health Care Services Final Project Axia college 1/15/2012 Many health care professional have great concerns about the growth of the aging population, chronic disease and the epidemic of obesity, and how will the United States healthcare system prepared for this continuing epidemic. The fact that the aging population along with obesity epidemic is a global healthcare concern, many health cares’ professional is baffled about how to address the growing epidemicRead MoreA Comparison Of England And The United States : Healthcare Delivery For Older Adults Essay1424 Words   |  6 Pages A Comparison of England and the United States: Healthcare Delivery for Older Adults Brianna Strickland University of South Florida Abstract Despite the general knowledge most people have on health care, this research examines and compares health care delivery for older adults in The United States of America and England. The goal is to adequately analyze and compare the health care delivery for the older population in both countries. The main discussion will be about Medicare and NationalRead MoreHealth Care Systems/Medicaid Medicare Essay875 Words   |  4 Pagesmeasure the quality of health care serviced that are provided by eligible professionals, eligible hospitals that are within the health care system. These would be measures to use data that is associated with providers that are able to provide high quality care or relate to long term goals for health care. The measures would be the many aspects of patient care including: * Health outcomes * Patient safety * Clinical processes * Efficient use of health care resources * PopulationRead MoreHealthcare1318 Words   |  6 PagesAging Demographics in Health Care Cynthia Mays HCS/490 University of Phoenix January 19, 2012 Aging Demographics in Health Care The expected growth of the older population in the United States over the next fifty years will have an exceptional impact on the U.S. health care system. Population aging is a complex issue that concerns not only the well-being of today’s older American’s but also comprehensive areas and sectors affecting the totalRead MoreChallenges of Caring for Elderly Patients1839 Words   |  7 Pages ​As the generation of baby boomers goes into the older adult phase, the number of elderly individuals requiring medical services will certainly magnify (Topaz, Maxim Doron, 2013). Older patients who come to the emergency department usually have more complicated conditions than younger patients. The older persons typically have multiple co-existing diseases, take different medications and present with atypical symptoms (Peters, 2010). The management of elderly patients is further complicated byRead MoreThe True Cost Of Alzheimer s Care 21037 Words   |  5 Pages THE TRUE COST OF ALZHEIMER’S CARE 2 Alzheimer’s disease is one of the most devastating diseases affecting approximately 5.3 million people in the U.S. (Alzheimer’s Association, 2015; Caminiti, 2015; Hammer, 2016). It is not exclusively a disease of old age as over 200,000 are diagnosed under the age of 65. Other startling facts are that a majority of afflicted by Alzheimer’s are women and the rates of diagnosisRead MoreAging Research Paper703 Words   |  3 PagesThe Older Americans Act requires states to submit this plan every four years and it provides updates on legislation and activities were done over the past time period to support older adults, as well as give updates on what will be worked on in the future. It is sent to the State of Rhode Island to ensure policies are up-to-date and will provide the best care for this population. This is necessary in order for taxpayers to see where their money is going and how the RI DEA is planning to care forRead MoreHealth Care Applications The AAL concerns and developments are in line with the World Health1400 Words   |  6 PagesHealth Care Applications The AAL concerns and developments are in line with the World Health Organization (WHO) active ageing framework [7]. Active ageing emphasizes an enabling positive thinking. While a disabling perspective leads to isolation and dependence and increases the needs of older people, an enabling view focuses on maintaining the older adult’s functions and expanding their participation in all aspects of the society. Enabling instruments such as ALL devices and applications are essential