Analysis: Ernest Hemingway’s The Indian Camp Essay

The short story â€Å"Indian Camp† is written by Ernest Hemingway. It is written in 1921 and takes place in North America. â€Å"Indian Camp† is about a young boy named Nick, who travels with his father and Uncle George to an Indian Camp to help an Indian girl, who has been in a painful labor for two days. Nick’s father performs a very primitive cesarean, and in meantime the woman’s husband commits suicide by cutting his throat. My intention with this essay is first to make a charactersation of the most important characters of the story. Afterwards I would like to make a short analysis of the structure, narrator and language. And at last I intend to make an interpretation of the theme of â€Å"Indian Camp†. The main character of the story is Nick, and the description of him is made implicit. We know that he is a boy, who has a great relationship with his father: â€Å"Nick lay back with his father’s arm around him. † p. 1, l. 9. He is a young boy, about 8-10 years, because he is old enough to see the cesarean, but not the suicide. Nick is very brave, because he tackles the whole situation without crying and screaming. He thinks a lot and reflex on life, which is seen in the end, when he keeps asking about life and death. Nick is a complex character, because he goes through a development. In the beginning of the story he is sitting next to his father in the stern of the boat, and he doesn’t really know what a birth is, but in the end he is sitting in front of his father in the boat and is sure about what life is. Nick’s father is a flat character. He is middle-age since he has a son and a long education. He is proud of being a doctor, which is seen, when he teaches Nick about the birth. He cares a lot about his son, because he apologize him for taking him to the Indian Camp. He wants to avoid making him nervous, so he only tells him a few necessary things about the trip. Uncle George doesn’t have an active role in the story. But it seems as if he has a friendly relationship with the Indians, because he is already in the camp in the beginning of the story, and he stays there after the birth. There are many signs, that he might be the father of the baby. He stands next to the woman under the birth, and when she bites him, she smiles. Her husband commits suicide. He was maybe ashamed of his wife being together with another man. Another sign could be, that in America they have a tradition that you hand out a cigar, when you become a father. â€Å"Uncle George gave both the Indians cigars. † p. 2, l. 3. Ernest Hemingway choice of narrator and languages is focused by, that we have to think self and read between the lines. He has used a 3th person omniscient narrator seen from Nick’s point of view. But sometimes the narrator changes to someone else’s point of view: Nick’s father is not â€Å"the father† but suddenly â€Å"the doctor†. Uncle George looked at his arm. † p. 4, l. 10. Nick doesn’t see this, because he isn’t in the room. The language in â€Å"Indian Camp† is objective. There isn’t used many adjectives and there is much direct speak. The whole story starts in a boat and ends in a boat. It has the structure: home-out-home, where there at home is cosmos and out chaos. Nick’s goes through his development, when he is out in chaos. The story starts in media-res and it has an open ending. Indian Camp† has many themes. Growing up is a good theme for this story, because Nick goes through the development from child to an adult. It could also be life and death, as a man dies and a baby is born. Another theme could be the bond between Nick and his father and how it clearly changes after the suicide. His father sees how important it is to protect the one you love and therefore apologizes to Nick. Ernest Hemingway’s short story is about how a child deals the â€Å"real tough† life and also about the secession process from parents and develops.

Convection Currents Essay

There are many different reasons why the earth’s crust is moving. Some for example are the friction between two plates causing major earthquakes. Sometimes when this plates are pushed together they form fold mountains or ridges. Today we know that the continents are gradually moving apart. Therefore the there is new rocks created in between those areas. New volcanoes are created and new rocks are formed. Plate tectonics allow scientists to know about the earth’s centre. The oceanic plate slides under the continental plate because it is heavier. Once it goes under the continental plate it melts into the asthenosphere. The Richter scale is a scale that scientists use to measure the magnitude of an earthquake. It can tell us how much the earth’s crust has moved (how hard; effecting the surface). A shift along a fault on the continental crust could also cause earthquakes. Teacher copy The earth’s crust I s made up of sections called plates. These sections ‘float’ on the liquid mantle and slowly move around. The movement of the plates is caused by convection currents. A convection current is how a liquid moves when it is heated. Hot liquid rises up and pushes the cooler liquid out of the way. In the mantle, this is happening all the time. As the liquid rock moves, it can push the continents on the plates In this diagram you can see the convection currents in the mantle and the direction In the middle of the ocean, new rock is formed when hot rock from the mantle rises up. At the edges of ocean, old crust is destroyed when it stinks down under the continent an melts again. In this diagram, you can see new crust forming at the mid-ocean ridge and pushing the old crust towards the continent.

Strangers, God and monsters

Strangers, God and monsters Strangers, gods and monsters represent experiences of extremity which bring us to the edge. They subvert our established categories and challenge us to think again. And because they threaten the known with the unknown, they are often set apart in fear and trembling. Exiled to hell or heaven; or simply ostracized from the human community into a land of aliens.The figure of the 'stranger' - ranging from the ancient notion of 'foreigner' (xenos) to the contemporary category of alien invader - frequently operates as a limit-experience for humans trying to identify themselves over and against others. Greeks had their 'barbarians', Romans their Etruscans, Europeans their exotic overseas 'savages'. The western myth of the frontier epitomizes this, for example, when Pilgrim encounters Pequot on the shores of Massachusetts and asks 'Who is this stranger?' Not realizing, of course, that the native Pequot is asking exactly the same question of the arrivals from Plymouth.Creativeskills.be - Numb er of jobs per monthStrangers are almost always other to each other.'Monsters' also signal borderline experiences of uncontainable excess, reminding the ego that it is never wholly sovereign. Many great myths and tales bear witness to this. Oedipus and the Sphinx. Theseus and the Minotaur. Job and Leviathan. Saint George and the Dragon. Beowulf and Grendel. Ahab and the Whale. Lucy and the Vampire. Ripley and the Alien. Each monster narrative recalls that the self is never secure in itself. 'There are monsters on the prowl', as Michel Foucault writes, 'whose form changes with the history of knowledge'. 1 For as our ideas of self-identity alter so do our ideas of what menaces this identity. Liminal creatures of the unknown shift and slide, change masks. We are of the earth, they whisper, autochthonous. We are carriers of the mark of Cain, hobbled by the Achilles heel of a primal unconscious.

The American judicial system Essays

The American judicial system Essays The American judicial system Paper The American judicial system Paper The American judicial system, in theory, is supposed to be the great leveler among different groups; racial, gender, ethnic and class. However, there have been a number of cases in which the judicial system has fallen far short of what its design and function was meant to do under our Constitution. The Scottsboro Case and the hell that the judicial system put nine black boys, some as young as twelve, serves as an impediment to the belief that our judicial system is impartial. Even at the time of the trials, the all white Alabamian jury could feel that at least some of the boys were innocent. In the trial of one of the defendants, despite being found guilty of raping a white woman was not giving the death penalty. Up to that time, it would be the first time that such a lenient sentence would be given on such an offense. The trial showed the divisions within the community and the courthouse in which the trial was taking place as well as the country as a whole.To an alarming degree, the larger division that this trial highlighted was the differences in the feelings towards race which the country possessed. This does not hold true for the more than 130 million people living in America by 1931; saying that all Northerners were free from bigotry and all southerners were drowning themselves in it. However, the division that was present within the country was never shown so dark, then in their respective treatment of this trial and of the presumed guilt of these defendants. It would take decades until the Scottsboro boys and their own personal hell would be over. Some would be scarred, both mentally and physically, for the rest of their lives. What is equally as tragic, is that for African Americans, the thoughts of the Scottsboro Trial and the mishandling of justice, would only increase their suspicion towards America’s judicial system, and their increasing belief that in America, an African American would not, could not, be afforded a f air trial.It is discouraging to read of the details of the trial and what transpired in the days, weeks and years that the trial took place and the reactions to it. The troubles began on March 25, 1931 in which a number of both black and white teenage boys got into a fight while riding in a box car.[1] During the years of the Depression, this practice of free transportation was becoming more and more popular as the country went deeper and deeper into the Depression. There was a rumor of a government job in Memphis. During the trip, the white and black teenage boys got into a fight and the white boys were overpowered and thrown off of the train. The white boys told the authorities and a wire was sent to Paint Rock, Alabama and when the train stopped, the black boys were arrested. They were taken, bound together and then sent back to the jail in Scottsboro, Alabama. There were two young women on the train as well. Victoria Price and Rudy Bates, seventeen and twenty one years of age, w ere the ones who first levied these charges of rape against the boys.[2] When asked what their business was on the train, in order to mask the possibility of being charged under   the Mann Act which made it illegal to conduct immoral practices across state lines ( it was believed that the two were prostitutes) Victoria Price said that the African American boys on the train had raped her. This spread across the town like wild fire and by the end of that night, there were a several hundred men who were standing outside of the jail in which the boys were held and were looking to lynch the boys. The situation became so violent that Alabama’s governor B.M Miller ordered the National Guard to Scottsboro in order to avoid any attempt at a lynching.[3] The trial would soon begin.As the trial began, it became obvious, if it had not been done so already, the prevailing ideology of the Scottsboro pears as well as the belief of those, not only in the town but also the entire South. The re would be exceptions to this rule, but at least within the state of Alabama, it had been assumed that these boys, all of the boys, had been guilty of the crime of rape. In the days before the trial began, one local newspaper’s headline read: â€Å"All Negros Positively Identified While Nine Black Friends Committed Revolting Crime.†[4] Also, the defense for the boys was dubious at best. The parents of the defendants could afford to scrape together, only sixty dollars and with that money, obtained a real estate attorney named Stephen Roddy as well as Milo Moody, a seventy one year old lawyer who had not tried a case in years. The NAACP was reluctant to get involved in the case during the immediate days after the news hit the wire that these boys would be charged with rape. They would later get involved but not until the ACLU and the Communist Party took the lead in the defense of the boys. Attempts had been made to retain famed attorney Clarence Darrow for the trial bu t the powers that be, had waited too long and for better or worse, the American Communist Party had hired their own attorneys to defend the boys.This move was like adding salt to an open wound. â€Å"Hatred for Communists and the ACLU in Alabama, was only bested by the prevailing status quo’s hatred towards African Americans, especially regarding the crime of rape.†[5] It seemed that the Northern based ACLU and the Communist Party did not fully understand the prevailing ideology among the clear majority of southerners concerning their feelings for the party and its cause. It is unlikely that Clarence Darrow would have been able to obtain acquittals for the nine Scottsboro Boys, had he had the opportunity to be in the position for the defense. However, their fate was sealed when the Communist Party and the ACLU took any part in the trial. This does not speak to the quality of the defense that the above mentioned would have been able to provide for the boys, but rather, how they were regarded by the South. â€Å"The Communist Party was regarded as only slightly better than the perceived rapists that they were defending.†[6]   This would lead to a speedy trial and an even speedier guilty verdict.These attacks were obvious and certainly not subtle. In the closing arguments, Prosecutor Knight asked the jury: â€Å"whether or not justice in this case is going to be bought and sold with Jew money?†[7] The defense attorney seemed to agree and did not even offer a closing statement. The local papers described the trial as: â€Å"Almost perfect and a guilty verdict is to be assumed.†[8] The jury came back from deliberations and on the day of April 8, 1933, gives their answer as they deliberated for less than an hour and came back with nine guilty verdicts; eight were given the death penalty and twelve year old Roy Wright, was given a life sentence in prison. It was later said of the jury by the ACLU: â€Å"If you ever saw those crea tures, those bigots whose mouth are slits in their faces, whose eyes popped out at you like frogs, whose chins dripped tobacco juice, bewhiskered and filthy, you would not ask how they could do it.†[9]   More trials would continue and it would be many years until the boys, who had by then, become men, and were acquitted.The differences before, during and after the trial, concerning the beliefs of the South and the North was complete and absolute. There were exceptions of course but, by and large, the South, and especially, Alabama where the trial took place, did not look upon outsiders nicely. The efforts of the NAACP, the ACLU and the Communist Party; three groups which were never taken seriously or respected in the South, their involvement in what many believed to be â€Å"a matter for only southerners to decide,†[10] only heightened the feelings of distrust and hatred for the motivations of these above mentioned groups.   Never mind the fact that the actions of t he jurors, the prosecution as well as the white community at large concerning the prosecution of these boys was dubious at best, criminal and immoral at worst, a misplacement of justice was never more apparent than in this case When interviewed, one long time member of the town of Scottsboro, said of the defendants: â€Å"We ought to string up these nig-rs right now. They raped those girls as sure as day. We can save the county a whole lot of trouble and expenses with only a 30 cent piece of six foot rope.†[11] These sorts of comments, and there was no shortage by the white establishment when asked their opinion concerning the guilt or innocence of these boys, came not only from their racist feelings towards African Americans and their feelings against the crime of murder but also against people and groups who were labeled as â€Å"outside agitators† in relation to their involvement in this trial. Any outside sources which were used to defend the boys and therefore, us urp the authority of the state of Alabama, in the eyes of the town’s people, would lead to a strict response.Also, the views of the South in relation to the trial, could not escape the prevailing beliefs concerning the issue of race. In the state of Alabama, being part of the Deep South still had lingering effects of the Civil War and the institution of slavery. There were still some people who were alive and residing in the South who had fought in the Civil War and many more who had been influenced and still wished to continue the environment of Jim Crow and its laws on segregation and the perceived inferiority of African Americans. This way of thinking affected one of the plaintiffs before the case even went to trial. Rudy Bates, the seventeen year old who had said that the Scottsboro boys had raped her, had grown up in a very poor part of town and with her father out of the picture, Rudy and her mother were forced to live in the African American section of town. They were the only white family on the block. Before taking up residence in the house that she and her mother were living in at the time of the alleged rape, it was told to her by her new landlord. â€Å"Nigg-rs lived here before you.   I smell them.   You can’t get rid of that nig-er smell†[12] This was what was reported by Miss Hollace Randall. She ended her account of this aspect of the living conditions of Miss Bates by concluding: â€Å"Miss Bates looked apologetic and murmured that she had scrubbed the place down with soap and water. The house looked clean and orderly to me. I smelled nothing but then I have only a northern nose.†[13] This helped to sum up the differences in opinions among the northern and southern opinions concerning the case.There were bigots in the North as well as the South but there were differences. The ACLU, the NAACP and the American Communist Party, were all involved in the defense of the Scottsboro Boys and all came from the North. Thi s is beyond a coincidence as the defense would be hard pressed to find anyone of a reputable reputation, coming to the defense of the boys in what was a rape case in which race was at the center of the issue. Either a case in involving race or rape would be a trial in which many good hearted men and women, believing in the innocence of the defendants, would not feel so compelled to speak up as to the injustices that were occurring. When the two are combined, it became like finding a needle in the haystack concerning the attempt to find anyone within the Southern community to come to the defense of the boys. This would have helped in the defense of the boys as perhaps a respectable citizen from among the South and was respected by his own peers, was courageous enough to speak up for the defense of the boys. This would have had an n much more helpful reaction from those members of the jury who was suspicious of all those who came from outside of the South and who â€Å"stuck their no se where it did not belong.†[14] These feelings helped to mask the true issue at hand: nine innocent boys were being accused by two notorious women of questionable moral code, with the absence of any real proof and the fact that two doctors testified to the fact that there was no sign of the ripping or tearing of the private parts of either women. These seemed to elude the prosecution as well as the jurors who many have believed, â€Å"decided the guilt of the boys before the trial even began†[15] This seems to be a common theme among most misuses of our judicial system.Many in the South believed that claims of Price and Bates, despite the fact that most within the community has passed judgment upon these women and their lower social status and seemingly immoral sexual relationships with married men. Even the judge in the second trial, Judge Horton, when interviewed by Miss Hollace Ransdall in her famed report on the Scottsboro Trial for the ACLU, reported that the judg e commented, when describing one of the witnesses for the plaintiff: Well, we all know what his family is. ‘Her mother for instance’†¦ and he broke off as it was too obvious for words what his mother was like. I asked if he meant that the family was feeble minded or of a low mentality. No, not that, he replied, but†¦. ‘Well we know that they are not much good.’ He would commit himself no further.†Ã‚  [16] This was not taken into consideration: the disreputable character of the prosecution’s chief witness, yet the moral accounts of these nine boys, none of whom had ever been seen by the prosecution before this trial began and therefore, really had no way of being able to back up their opinions of these boys; these opinions which Ms. Ransdall detailed in her accounts of the trial and what the townspeople said were their opinions of the defendants. â€Å"They said that all Negroes were brutes and had to be held down by stern repressive measures or the number of rapes on white women would be larger than it is.   Their point seemed to be that it was only by ruthless oppression of the Negro that any white woman was able to escape raping at Negro hands.   A Negro will always, in their opinion, rape a white woman if he gets the chance.   These nine Negroes were riding alone with two white girls on a freight car.   Therefore, there was no question that they raped them, or wanted to rape them, or were present while the other Negroes raped them all of which amounts to very much the same thing in southern eyes and calls for the immediate death of the Negroes regardless of these shades of difference.†[17]   As one southerner in Scottsboro put it, We white people just couldnt afford to let these Niggers get off because of the effect it would have on other Niggers. This is why the society hated these boys and wanted to see them dead. Scottsboro had been hit hard by the Depression and when economic hardships come, prevailing racial bigotry always seems to intensify into a maddening fever. This was the case here.The Scottsboro Boys never had a chance at a fair trial in 1930’s Alabama. The legacy of slavery, the loss of the Civil War and Jim Crow laws was still too fresh in the minds of Southerners to allow nine black boys to be given a fair trial, along with even the possibility of being acquitted.   The demands were so high and the stakes so elevated by the opinions of the status quo, that there was little chance that the boys would be acquitted. Any chance at an acquittal was decreased any further when the defendants of the boys, were Northerners: the NAACP and groups which flaunted their communist beliefs or who were associated with communists. This acted as a double edged sword against the fairness of a trial. It seemed as though everything was working against the boys: They were black and the defendants were white. The crime that they were accused of was rape. The boyâ€⠄¢s defense came from the North and were groups which the jurors had an equally amount of mistrust and disdain against. They were outsiders who were defending perceived rapists. The Scottsboro boys never had a chance.This seemed to be the prevailing opinion among the Northern press as well. The Chicago Tribune, in an editorial, stated: â€Å"It seems doubtful that the defendants in this case, within the backdrop of Southern racism and bigotry, will be given a fair trial†¦. An acquittal is not expected.†[18] The New York Times mirrored such sentiments by stating that: â€Å"There has never been a more blatant misuse of justice than in Scottsboro, Alabama this week. These boys were innocent and the town knows it.† There were bigots in the North as their probably is to this day. The difference is that in comparison to the South, the North was a haven for progressive thought in which African Americans were treated with much more respect than their counterparts in the South.   The Civil War had been fought over the institution of slavery and the North had won. The North did not institute slavery because there was no need for it; no market in which to forcibly employ African Americans to work. This speaks to the same lack of interest in keeping African Americans in the same role of subjugation in the North than what many in the South felt to be necessary. There is no way of knowing whether these boys, had the accusations occurred in the North and a famed trial lawyer like Clarence Darrow or any defense attorney that would have been received more warmly by the jurors than the reception that the South gave the Communist Party in the Scottsboro trial. Perhaps, not even in the enlightened North, would all nine boys have been acquitted. What does seem more of a likelihood, the case would not have riled such a misuse of justice as the mitigating factors of race and sex would not have been viewed to such a degree of horror as it was in the South and wi th the absence of â€Å"outside agitators,† another excuse for a guilty verdict would have been vacated from the trial.In a final summation of the trial and the ideology which at the time, placed these boys in what would seem like the electric chair, ACLU representative Miss Hollace Ransdall stated: â€Å"We pride ourselves in this country upon having a free and compulsory educational system.   Why then did these young Negroes, all under age, not know how to read and write?   Because the subjugating white race is not concerned to see that black children go to school.   It is not to their interest to educate the Negro.   They profit too much by having a race under their feet that will do the dirtiest, the hardest of their work.   Southern whites feel to their marrow-bone only one thing about the Negro, and they say it over and over.   Hundreds of thousands of them have been saying it for generations.   They will continue to say it as long as anyone will listen.à ‚   It is their only answer to the Negro problem.   It is their reply to the questions of the Scottsboro case the Nigger must be kept down.†Ã‚  [19] These ideas and words were all too common in 1930’s Alabama as well as across the entire South. Feelings of racial superiority rose to the top with redoubled vigor as millions in the South were fighting for their own economic survival and with African Americans looking for much of the same, thus becoming a competitor towards the few jobs that were available, it seemed even less likely that a feeling of calm and respect could reside between the two races. As it became all too familiar, an opportunity in which the white majority in the South, had the opportunity to assert their superiority over the African American community in any way possible, this was sought after with a blinding resolve. In the process, nine boys, regardless of their eventual acquittal, went through hell for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and in the opinion of the jury, being the wrong color as well.

Rouler - to Roll; to Drive - French Verb Conjugations

Rouler - to Roll; to Drive - French Verb Conjugations The  French verb  rouler means to roll or drive. Find simple conjugations for this regular -er verb in the tables below. Conjugations of Rouler Present Future Imperfect Present participle je roule roulerai roulais roulant tu roules rouleras roulais il roule roulera roulait nous roulons roulerons roulions vous roulez roulerez rouliez ils roulent rouleront roulaient Pass compos Auxiliary verb avoir Past participle roul Subjunctive Conditional Pass simple Imperfect subjunctive je roule roulerais roulai roulasse tu roules roulerais roulas roulasses il roule roulerait roula roult nous roulions roulerions roulmes roulassions vous rouliez rouleriez roultes roulassiez ils roulent rouleraient roulrent roulassent Imperative tu roule nous roulons vous roulez Verb conjugation patternRouler  is a  regular -ER verb

Universal jurisdiction application of International Law Essay

Universal jurisdiction application of International Law - Essay Example Universal jurisdiction refers to universal prescriptive jurisdiction and obliges states to assume jurisdiction over international crimes that are especially serious regardless of where the crime was committed (O’Keefe, 745). According to the dissenting opinion of Van den Wyngaert, the definition of universal jurisdiction is not clearly established under international Convention or customary international law with the result that the definition is uncertain (Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 also known as Joint Separate Opinion of Judges Higgins, Koijmans and Brugenthal). However, the International Law Commission and the International Criminal Court Statute both provide ample explanation of the concept of universal jurisdiction and its purpose. This paper identifies and analyses the international law on universal jurisdiction and identifies where uncertainties may arise. Definition and Concepts of Universal Jurisdiction According to the International Law Commission’s Report of the Sixth Committee, universal jurisdiction is defined as: †¦a legal principle allowing or requiring a state to bring criminal proceedings in respect of certain crimes irrespective of the location of the crime and the nati onality of the perpetrator or the victim (1). Arguably, the concept of universal jurisdiction is also referred to in the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court, 1998 (ICC Statute). The Preamble to the ICC Statute, states that â€Å"the most serious crimes of concern to the international community† â€Å"must not go unpunished† and that all member states will implement laws for ensuring the â€Å"effective prosecution of† of those crimes† and in doing so, the international community must cooperate (ICC Statute, Preamble). More specifically, the Rome Statute of the ICC goes further to state that: †¦it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes (Preamble). According to the Joint Separate Opinion of Judges Higgins, Koijmans and Brugenthal, various states have implemented laws conferring jurisdiction on them over international crimes. However, none of these states have provide d for jurisdiction over crimes to which the enabling state does not have some form of connection (Joint Separate Opinion of Judges Higgins, Koijmans and Brugenthal, 70). National courts have been more decisive however. For example, the Federal Court of Australia listed a number of international crimes over which it had universal jurisdiction. The Supreme Court of Austria ruled that it had universal jurisdiction over crimes of genocide. The United States has assumed universal jurisdiction in two notable cases, Yunis in 1988 and Bin Laden in 2000(Joint Separate Opinion of Judges Higgins, Koijmans and Brugenthal). Some states are hesitant to assume jurisdiction over a matter that another state has jurisdiction over. For example both the UK and the Russian Federation have expresses similar views against one state assuming jurisdiction over a matter that relates to an offence that was committed within the territory of another state (Joint Separate Opinion of Judges Higgins, Koijmans and Brugenthal). Regardless, in addition to international treaties in which jurisdiction over specific crimes such as torture and genocide require some form of link to the offence, the offender or the victims in order to confer jurisdiction, universal jurisdi

Dupont Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Dupont - Essay Example What is also significant to note that the organizations are considered as the artificial citizens of the world therefore they have an obligation to engage themselves into practices which can enhance the world in which they operate? This may therefore not only include following the sustainable business process and products but also engages into practices which can ensure the cooperation between the different stakeholders in the society. DuPont is one of the most famous organizations of the world with presence in many countries. Over the period of time, it has been able to develop itself into a firm which is socially responsible with clear set of goals for fulfilling the needs of the society. This paper will therefore focus on the role of DuPont in the society and how it has been able to fulfill its role specially in terms of serving the society, the stakeholders as well as the implications of the actions of the firm on its stakeholders. DuPont is an American chemical company with a rich and old history as it was formulated in late 19th century. Primarily engaged in chemical business, firm produces different products and is now the second largest chemical producing companies in the world. It has been able to completely revolutionize the way polymer products are being manufactured all over the world and has been able to introduce new and innovative technologies which helped it to obtain the leading position in the market. What is also important to note that over the period of time, DuPont has been able to create a strong brand image for itself such that most of the generic products in chemical industry are known with the brand names of this firm rather than their original generic name? Such acceptability of the products therefore suggests that the firm has been able to create a unique name in the world for itself. It is also however, important to note that various research studies have