Theme Analysis of Jean Rhys short story "Used to Live Here Once"

To read the short story I am analyzing, try a Google search for: Jean Rhys "Used to Live Here Once".

Analysis of Theme and Literary Elements

            The short story “Used to Live Here Once” by Jean Rhys is full of symbolism. So much so that nearly every reader can gain a different perspective of the story’s theme.  The story begins with an un-named protagonist stepping over stones as she crosses a river, then walking along a familiar road to an old house that she once resided it.  Upon finding the house she takes notice of two children under a mango tree.  After several failed attempts to speak with them the story ends with her coming to a realization of her spiritual existence. This short story can be considered an allegory, as it has both literal and figurative elements that contribute to the understanding of the theme (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2013). Though it is not directly specified, the tone, setting and symbolism in this story infer that the protagonist is deceased, and therefore presents the theme of the story as the journey into spirituality and the loneliness and separation of such a condition.

            The short story is narrated in a third-person limited omniscient perspective.  According to Clugston (2010), “It is called a limited omniscient point of view when the thoughts and feelings of only one of the characters are related through the narrator” (sec. 5.2, para. 3).  The only feelings that are expressed are those of the protagonists and are dictated from the perspective of an onlooker rather than from the character herself. This perspective is effective in conveying a sense of the character’s solitude and distance from the rest of the world. This perspective even gives a sense of a slight distance that the character has from herself. This can be deduced by the fact that it is not told from a first-person perspective, which would provide the same effect when conveying a separation from others, but from the third-person implying an even further separation from the character.  In this way, the point of view supports the theme of loneliness in life after death, whereby the spirit and physical body forever detach.

            There is plenty of supporting symbolism in this story, which begins from the very first paragraph when she crosses the stepping stones of the river, recalling their individual differences.

“There was the round unsteady stone, the pointed one, the flat one in the middle –– the safe stone where you could stand and look around. The next one wasn't so safe for when the river was full the water flowed over it and even when it showed dry it was slippery” (as cited by Clugston, 2010, sec. 7.5, para. 1).

Not one word is wasted in expressing so much background information to the reader, while also hinting at the theme of life after death.  The descriptions of the stones being different, some safe and some unsteady, are symbolic of the different stages in her life: at some points trials and tribulations make the steps more difficult, in other times, there was rest and a relief.  These points are much like the journey from childhood through adulthood, beginning unsteadily and with uncertainty before coming to a flat point where late adulthood and a time of ease is most commonly assumed.  Finally, the description that is given to the treacherous rock with river water flowing over it is symbolic of the final point in life, where by either old age or accident, the body fails and succumbs to death. “But after that it was easy and soon she was standing on the other side” (as cited in Clugston, 2010, sec. 7.5, para. 1). This is the point of spiritual transition to spirituality.  The phrase “the other side” is often used figuratively for the spirit world. This implies that she has passed on.  The stones that she has crossed serves as a symbolic reflection on her life, but also expressed in a literal sense as stones that she recalls from a place she once lived.  This literal description is what the reader takes notice of first as it is not until the end of the story that the protagonist, and therefore reader, are made aware of her death.

            Upon walking further the woman takes notice of many physical changes to the environment.  The road is wider than she recalls and is said to be uncared for, implying the change in time and an overall feeling of being forgotten. Yet despite the condition of the road and the vegetation, she is described as feeling happy.  The sky is blue but has an unknown feeling to it that she could not recollect, which she best describes as being “glassy”. Glass implies fragility and reflection, which perhaps compliments the theme by of loneliness by hinting at the idea of the bittersweet nature of memories. The tone is both nostalgic and ironic in that the romantic sentiment that is attached with the feeling of a familiar place is confused with an acknowledgement of the physical characteristics having been changed. Such irony is seen also at the end of the story.

            The constant movement the protagonist makes as she journeys over the river, down the road, and to the house comes to a stop when she comes upon two children under a tree. “There were two children under the big mango tree, a boy and a little girl, and she waved to them and called "Hello" but they didn't answer her or turn their heads” (as cited in Clugston, 2010, sec 7.5 para. 5). In a short story, every image has an important use to the story.  There is symbolic purpose behind the children and the mention of the mango tree.  Both are a reference to youth and childhood. Fruit is typically representative of youth, new life, or fertility.  In this case, with the presence of the children, is meant as an expression of her childhood. She makes three failed attempts to communicate with the children, which are wrought with symbolism. Her inability to be seen or heard finally confirm that she is deceased and in a spiritual realm, while also remarking on the loneliness of her condition as she tries not once, but three times to get their attention. Additionally, her loneliness is confirmed in her approach to the children: “her arms went out instinctively with the longing to touch them” (as cited in Clugston, 2010, sec 7.5, para. 6). In this line, the tone seems to shift into a burst of sentiment as we can see that she has an incredible urge to connect with others.  Being denied the contact she seeks and the final understanding of her condition is ironic as one would not expect such a pleasant journey through fair memories to arrive at such a solemn awareness. There is an evident sense of pain in her separation from life and a devastation in the awareness (and possible acceptance) of death (Aubrey & Rollins, 2001).  This directly relates the theme of the journey into spirituality and the loneliness that results.

            The theme in any story is focuses on a broad lesson or understanding of life based on ancient or cultural myths.  They speak of what we know, or hope to know, of our existence. In short, the theme tells us what the story is about (Clugston, 2010). In “I Used to Live Here”, the theme is made evident by the use of tone, symbolism, and the point of view the story is narrated in.  These literary elements are key in understanding the value and meaning in the character’s journey.  While we all can relate to feeling nostalgic about places we have made memories in, the elements in this story imply a much more philosophical outlook on the journey she makes. Since life after death is not something anyone can speak intelligently about, literature relies on symbolism to express the feelings that can only be speculated on, and hence, are subjective to each person’s individual perspective. Her transition from life to death, the loneliness that derives from such an exile, and the difficult acceptance of her spirituality are thematic in this short story.

 

Reference

Aubrey, B. & Rollins, D. (2001). Jean Rhys. Critical Survey Of Short Fiction, Second Revised Edition, 1-4. Retrieved from: http://ehis.ebscohost.com.

Clugston, W. R. (2010).  Journey into literature.  San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.  Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/books.

Encyclopedia Britanica. (2013). Allegory. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/16078/allegory.

 

An Archetypal Analysis of Kate Chopin’s “The Story of an Hour”

 

An Archetypal Analysis of Kate Chopin’s “The Story of an Hour”

 

There are several methods of critiquing literary works, all of which rely on the way each person interprets and responds to the material. In some cases interpretations vary greatly, such as when one reviews the material from a reader response approach.  Other interpretations, such as the archetypal approach, are more widely related among readers as it is made up of viewpoints that are the foundation for human nature. Often stories that incorporate such images capture the reader’s interest and make the story or poem more personal and meaningful. Having read Kate Chopin’s “The Story of an Hour”, I was intrigued by the depth of the imagery created for the main character as she experiences a journey through the grief process which can be universally understood through an archetypal analysis. 

True emotions can often get buried beneath stereotypical obligations and our own sense of propriety. Society, family, friends, even the expectations of one’s gender can force us into a status quo, replacing what is deep rooted and heartfelt for what is ‘appropriate’. In “The Story of an Hour” by Kate Chopin, the main character Mrs. Mallard, after learning of her husband’s sudden death, is overcome with a whirlwind of emotions that ranges from shock and disbelieve to a hard realization of relief and release from her role as a wife. I was drawn to this story by the use of imagery to depict how this exchange of emotion takes place and breaks Mrs. Mallard from her acceptance of the status quo. “There was something coming to her and she was waiting for it, fearfully […] she felt it, creeping out of the sky, reaching toward her through the sounds, the scents, the color that filled the air” (as cited in Clugston, 2010, sec. 2.2). What comes to Mrs. Mallard is her own realization that with her husband’s death comes her freedom to live her life as she pleases. Chopin’s use of personification gives the realization a sense of tangibility. Since thoughts cannot be held they can figuratively slip away, therefore the tangible quality that Chopin describes takes a firmer and more permanent hold over her character. Such a shift in thought and the breakout from the repression that is described of Mrs. Mallard is monumental is expressing the general quest for freedom and happiness that we all seek, and is primary in what captured my interest in this story.

The archetypal approach to analyzing this story draws on what we know about our own humanity in terms of goals, dreams, fears, and common responses to dilemmas. Archetypes in literature determine the structure of the story and the meaning that is implied, based on both ancient and current cultural mythology (Delahoyde, 2011). Myths and the cultures amongst societies provide a general understanding of the meaning and purpose in the elements presented in a story.  For instance, the term “tomorrow is a new day” would be considered trite and obvious if it was not laden with the meaning that we can always start over, or try again when we are met with failure or difficulty.  Analyzing literature by way of the archetypal foundations laid within the work allows the concept to be unanimously understood and therefore makes the literature itself more relatable.

Kate Chopin uses several archetypal images in “The Story of an Hour”. In the third paragraph the narrator describes Mrs. Mallards reaction to her hearing her husband’s death, stating “When the storm of grief had spent itself she went away to her room alone” (as cited in Clugston, 2010, sec. 2.2). The reference to a storm is significant in understand the feelings she had, how they came, and how they seemingly left her empty.  The archaic understanding of a storm in literature dictates emotion, and the wild frenzy that is creates in us. Additionally, storms represent a spiritual cleaning that is necessary after a significant disruption in life (Chopin, 2001). This renewal is seen when Mrs. Mallard leaves to her room where she sits in solitude and silence before accepting a fulfillment of new emotions.  She is left empty and sits with what is explained as a blank stare before being seemingly grabbed by the enlightenment of freedom.

In having come to such a state, the narrator describes Mrs. Mallard thoughts of “spring days, and summer days, and all sorts of days that would be her own” (as cited in Clugston, 2010, sec. 2.2). The image of spring and summer days are symbolic of new life and optimism, as found in ancient mythology. In the character’s case, such new life is symbolic of her release, or rebirth, from repression (Chopin, 2001). This concept is widely understood. It is of particular interests that the fall and winter are not mentioned as being seasons Mrs. Mallard looks forward to, as mythology suggests these seasons as the time of death, solitude, and confinement indoors which would be contradictory to the anticipation of freedom that Mrs. Mallard is expressing.

            Mrs. Mallard alone is an archetype that is symbolic of the martyr.  In the finality of the story, she descends the stairs with a sense of poise, self-confidence, and affirmation in her new found perception of life only to be stuck dead by the sudden shock, and ironically a great grief, of finding her husband alive and well staring back at her.  It is the nature and timing of her death that makes her a martyr as she held true a new sense of self, or spirituality, so strong that the sudden loss of it caused her a heart attack. Her freedom was given and robbed from her, jarring her between a life servitude, to independence, and back again. Her death speaks for feminism and the general view society has of women, particularly in the late 19^th century when this story was written.

            Kate Chopin’s main character and experience through the grief process in “The Story of an Hour” was written with the use of several metaphors, and personification of inanimate objects and thoughts, that filled the story with meaning. The use of archetypal imagery made the moral timeless and universally understood.  Mrs. Mallard may be personally relatable to both men and women; whether in the 19^th century or the 21^st, every person mourns the loss of their “freedom” in some regards. Release is found in the moments, as fleeting as they may be, when weights are removed and we are able to live for ourselves.  Such a philosophy is what captured my attention and what lays the archetypal foundation into this this story.

           

 

References

Chopin, K. (2001). The Story of an Hour. Close Readings: Analyses Of Short Fiction, 86-112. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.

Clugston, W. R. (2010).  Journey into literature.  San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.  Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/books

Delahoyde, M. (2011). Archetypal Criticism. Retrieved from http://public.wsu.edu/~delahoyd/archetypal.crit.html

 

The Captivity of Orca Whales, A Moral Dilemma (RESEARCH PAPER)

The Captivity of Orca Whales, a Moral Dilemma

Humans are curious beings.  They marvel at the wonder of the Earth and the many species that share it. Wonder is natural and with many other species, is reciprocal. With the development of technology in the past century, such curiosity and wonder has progressed into a utilitarian attitude towards the Earth and her inhabitants. This is evident in the practice of capturing and displaying wild animals for profit. Orca whales in particular have been the frontline of zoological attractions which offer the opportunity to experience “the energy and spirit of the ocean” (SeaWorld San Diego, 2013, para. 1).  Though some people argue that captivity is an acceptable form of conservation, captivity in the case of orca whales is a particularly exploitative and morally repugnant industry which poses health and safety risks to the whales and the people that care for them.

            The orca, formally called the “Orcinus orca” but more commonly known as the “killer whale”, is among the most intelligent species in the whole world. They are highly social animals as evident in the observations of their interactions among their own kind in the wild as well as in captivity. In the wild their group structures, or pods, are based on deep bonds between mothers and their offspring whom stay together throughout their lifespan (Orca Fact File, 2013). Science has suggested that orca whales display what humans refer to as “culture”, or specific ways of communicating, interacting, and hunting. According to the National Parks Conservation Association (2010), “the animals are thought to have complex forms of communication with different dialects (slightly different language) from one pod to another” (para. 8). Recent research has even verified that the orca brain demonstrates the presence of a limbic system – the apparent foundation for emotional life - more advanced than that of the human brain (Oteyza, M. & Cowperthwaite, G., 2013). These findings confirm the presence of a psychological connectivity to their environment and an awareness of life. Such characteristics relate to “personhood”, thus by most societies’ standards, deems them worthy of respect and dignity.

The knowledge of these animals’ biology and psychology poses the question of ethics regarding what responsibility humanity has towards these fellow inhabitants. In determining such morality the theory of virtue ethics may be applied. Virtue ethics by definition states that one would come to a conclusion on a moral dilemma by assessing what is most virtuous, rather than what represent the needs of many or by focusing on the consequences of the action (Mosser, 2010). Therefore, this theory implies the moral dilemma would be solved by considering what would be right in terms of the whales and not personal or commercial interest. Inevitably, there is quite the controversy over what constitutes virtue when proposing the questions that virtue ethics demands to be answered:  As the awareness of the complexities of these animals continue to evolve and humanity comes to believe that they are conscious beings, individuals not unlike humans themselves, by what right does society validate their abduction and imprisonment for the sake of entertainment? At what point does the proverbial line between research and conservation of these animals cross into blatant slavery and degradation of their species? Perspectives may vary, though after casting aside corporate greed and personal intrigues, it is hard to ignore that the captivity of these animals is morally corrupt and an abuse of human power.

Attraction parks like SeaWorld claim they provide a rich learning experience and inspire an appreciation for marine animals while simultaneously providing appropriate medical care for their orcas that would (in their opinion) not otherwise thrive in the wild after a prolonged life in captivity. This argument is quite contradictive; if it is true that captive whales have been institutionalized to a point that they cannot survive in the wild, it is the fault of the attraction itself for not only breeding orcas in captivity, but for training them to be dependent on humans when they are still only calves. While oceanariums offer efforts towards public awareness and conservation, the focus is on the profit received by displaying these animals as a product. Such attractions seek to direct the debate of morality towards the live capture of orcas from the wild which, despite a ban the United States and Canada has placed, is still being practiced internationally. The ban on seizing wild orcas is not enough though to satisfy the moral dilemma at hand. As of 2011 more than forty-one killer whales resided in amusement parks around the world (What to Do About a Killer Whale, 2011). Considering how many may have been born in captivity or taken from the ocean since then one could safely assume this number has increased – a quite unfortunate assumption considering how captivity affects their physical and mental well-being. In the wild orcas swim approximately 100 miles a day, whereas in captivity they are restricted to tanks that to humans would be the equivalent of a bathtub. Consequently, they face a series of health issues such as infections, disease, and a mortality rate twice as high as adult whales in the wild (Horgan, 2013). Several marine biologist have surmised that these conditions combined with the extremely advanced intelligence of orca whales can and have led to their psychosis. These facts are evidence that there is no benefit for orcas, and thus no virtue, in captivity. The virtuous actions marine attractions claim to make towards conservation, education, and awareness can be easily refuted. The argument against captivity is the most logical in terms of virtue ethics.

To act on virtue ethics would be to release these animals into the wild, if possible, or at the very least to a more natural environment where they are free to swim openly, hunt, and reclaim placement in their intricate social structure. While there may always be debate as to whether a full release into the wild would be possible for orcas that have spent most of their life in captivity, many agree that attempting it would be the morally correct action. For instance, the 1993 blockbuster movie “Free Willy”, featuring Keiko –a captive fifteen year old killer whale, inspired millions of children and activists groups to take such action. In a tribute to Keiko and whales like him, movie producers, schools, and several donators rallied together and raised funds for Keiko’s release back into the wild. After years of planning Keiko was slowly reintroduced to his natural habitat. At twenty-five years old, less than two years after his complete independence from humans, Keiko died of natural causes. While some claim the nearly twenty-million dollars spent to release Keiko was a waste, Keiko ultimately proved to the world that life outside of nets and tanks is possible after a life spent in captivity (Kirby, 2013). His story produced a tremendous amount of media attention in favor of his new life. At the time of his death, Keiko was the oldest adult whale captivity had seen.

            Unfortunately, after Keiko’s release society fell relatively quiet to this issue of morality, focusing once again on the wonder of these animals and the extraordinary experience it is to see them up close. Oceanariums around the world market such attractions in a way that appeals to one’s emotions, claiming it to be a once in a lifetime opportunity to see these whales. As advertised by SeaWorld San Diego (2013):

Dancing fountains set the stage as you connect with thrilling sea creatures and realize we are all part of one world, one ocean. Your soul is ignited as our worlds are united… and you realize that we all have the power to make a difference in this planet we share (para.1).

This appeals to the curiosity and wonder of humanity, and in so doing plants the false notion that attending such shows expresses respect for this species. It is a powerful message of rebuttal to virtue ethics, as it calls to the ethical egoist, who act in the favor of their own pleasure.

            Ethical egoism, the decision to do whatever it is that intensifies one’s self interest, is a prominent way in which business and consumerism operates today (Mosser, 2010). Rarely anyone can deny that seeing a massive killer whale leap from the water, flip in the air, and wave its dorsal fin is a thrilling experience. No doubt such a show would be hard to deny, particularly when its marketing helps reason away the negativity behind it. Consumers are led in, entertained, and left with little information as to what the lives of the orcas are really like. For some egoist, naivety is not as much an issue as is the blatant disregard for the facts. Most people cannot deny what is obviously natural for these animals and thereby what is right and wrong, though it is easy to ignore the facts when distracted by appeals made to their sense of entitlement… a condition that seems to plague humanity. Protest groups such as Mate call the practice of keeping orca whales captive “barbaric” and claim it is morally degrading to the entire community (“Protestors”, 2001). Affirmation to this ideal began to spread after the release of the documentary movie “Blackfish”, which first aired in the summer of 2013. Since then there has been a steady rise in awareness and debate regarding orca whales. The movie follows the life of Tilikum, a male orca owned by SeaWorld, while unraveling the truth and highlighting the deceptions that oceanariums hide behind. Regardless of the negative publicity the film caused SeaWorld, they reported no damage to their ticket sales after the film was released.  Despite the public’s awareness of evidence against captivity, egoism will continue to pose a challenge to enforcing what society in general deems virtuous.

            Perhaps the theory of deontology would provide further insight into the issue of morality. Deontology states that people must do as they are obligated to do to show respect to one another (Mosser, 2010).  The basic premise of this theory can be surmised by the popular phrase “do unto others as you would have them to unto you”.  A deontologist would argue that human beings have dignity which must be considered when determining the moral choices made when dealing with them. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as determined by the people of the United Nations, asserts that all persons are to be free from slavery and servitude (United Nations, 2013).  Such rights are based on the presence of inherit dignity that the human race possesses, which is parallel to that possessed by orca whales. Since research has established the orca whales demonstrate psychological characteristics similar, if not the same, to that of humans, then it can be deduced that they are to be treated with the same dignity that humans are entitled to. Since the human condition, like that of the orca whale, is universal and knows no borders the relativist would find no bearings on an argument against it. Based on this logic the theory of deontology, as well as the theory of relativism, denies any moral foundation in holding orca whales in captivity.

            Both virtue ethics and deontology present strong arguments against orca whales in captivity, though they both rely on an agreement that orcas have rights based on their similarities to humanity which is a stance that, no matter how far scientific data goes, will never be universally accepted.  For those less concerned with philosophical reasoning is the theory of utilitarianism.  This classical theory bases decision making on what action produces the most happiness for the most people involved (Mosser, 2010).  Many would say the most happiness is placed in viewing the shows that oceanariums like SeaWorld produce, much like the stance that ethical egoism takes.  While it is true that one’s utility- or their state of happiness - may be increased with the close interactions offered by these shows, the safety of the trainers and the audience should be of greater concern.  Orca whales are larger, faster swimmers than humans, and on a predatory level are much more dominant.  Though the last century has proven that people are able to control orcas behavior and ultimate dependency through positive reinforcement (or in some cases, food deprivation), there have been several recorded instances of injuries and deaths from interactions with orca whales.  Whether accidental or intentional, orca whales in captivity have demonstrated their ability to trash and drown trainers and others that come within close contact to them.  For instance, in 2010 SeaWorld trainer Dawn Brancheau was killed by Tilikum, the largest male orca owned by SeaWorld Florida following a show. While there are mixed reports as to what actually transpired, the official report states that Tilikum pulled Brancheau into the water by her pony tail, scalped her, repeatedly rammed and dismembered her before finally drowning her and refusing to release her body (Blackfish, 2013).  Such incidents are rare, but have recently been proven possible and serve society with the sobering reminder that humans are inferior to the physicality of these animals. In terms of utility, the enjoyment one receives from such shows does not outweigh the ultimate safety risks imposed to the audience and staff.  Rather, the greatest good to the public is to avoid close proximity and interactions with these animals that are not only uncontrollable when they attack, but are clearly only volatile in captivity as there have never been any reports of human injuries from orcas in the wild.

            There are many ways to view the issue of morality in the case of keeping orca whales in captivity, all of which provide different views of the argument which society struggles to come to agreement on.  The three classical theories all offer logical insight, from that of virtue ethics which considers what is best for the whales, to the theory of deontology which considers the duty we have as human beings, and finally the theory of utilitarianism which views the issue from the angle of the consequences it faces to those involved. Despite such logic, the selfish instincts of society fuels actions, such as captivity and the direct or indirect sponsoring of it, as produced by ethical egoism, thus denying the moral obligations that humanity has to its respective species.

Conservation is an effort worthy to be condoned when executed in the best interest of the animals involved. Since there has yet to be any indications that orca whales are in danger of extinction, there seems to be little purpose in maintaining oceanariums for such preservation.  Furthermore, human safety in handling these whales have been compromised. For profit corporations that house these animals for entertainment pose safety risks to their employees and the audiences that have been allowed to interact with them. Observations of the whales in captivity, as well as in the wild, have provided scientists with a deeper understanding of the psychological and physical needs of these animals.  They require space to swim large distances and an open sea to hunt.  They are highly intelligent social animals that thrive in their natural biologically formed pods and display emotional connectivity to their environment.  The more that is learned about them the more is required of humanity to make changes in how we live amongst them. Holding them captive and training them to do tricks is blatant slavery and degrading to their dignity. It is an abuse of the power that humanity has claimed and an ultimate estrangement from the virtues, ethics, and morality that mankind strives to uphold.

           

             

           

 

References

Anonymous. (2011). What to Do About A Killer Killer Whale. Maclean's, 124, 4. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/861842492?accountid=32521

Hogan, S. (2013). Author Decries Keeping Killer Whales in Captivity. Gloucaster Daily Times.

Kirby, D. (2012). 7 Things About Wild Killer Whales You’ll Never Learn at SeaWorld. Retrieved from: http://www.takepart.com/photos/wild-killer-whales/orcas-in-the-open-ocean.

Kirby, D. (2013). 20 Years After ‘Free Willy’, Was It Right to Free Keiko the Killer Whale. Retrieved from http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/09/24/i-remember-keiko-20-years-after-free-willy-former-trainer-recounts-killer-whales

Mosser, K. (2010). Ethics & Social Responsibility. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.

National Parks Conservation Association. (2010). Killer Whale. Retrieved from http://www.npca.org/protecting-our-parks/wildlife_facts/orca.

Orca Fact File. (2013). ARKive. Retrieved from http://www.arkive.org/orca/orcinus-orca/

Oteyza, M. & Cowperthwaite, G. (2013). Blackfish [Documentary]. United States: Magnolia Pictures.

Protesters Call for Bjossa the killer whale to be set free, not moved south. (2001, Apr 21). Canadian Press NewsWire. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/359527961?accountid=32521

SeaWorld SanDiego. (2013). One Ocean. SeaWorld Parks and Entertainment. Retrieved from http://seaworldparks.com/en/seaworld-sandiego/Attractions/Shows/One-Ocean?from=Top_Nav

United Nations. (2013). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. NY: UN Publications. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/#atop