Appropriations of Frankenstein Essay Example

Appropriations of Frankenstein Paper The 1931 film appropriation of Frankenstein has been integral in shaping most 20th century perceptions of what the text is really about. It retains the key element of the novel a mans quest to reanimate dead tissue yet changes many other aspects. Henry Frankenstein, aided by his assistant Fritz, and later, Dr Waldman, his best friend Victor and fianci e Elizabeth, works to create life out of dead tissue. He succeeds, although ignorant of the fact that his creation possesses an abnormal brain, which has been swapped by his assistant. Repulsed by the horrendous appearance of his creation, he rejects it, leading to a reign of terror in his normally quiet domestic scene. Eventually, Henry and his fellow townspeople kill the creature, leaving Henry and Elizabeth to marry and live their lives. Explanation: Although the 1931 film appropriation of Frankenstein retains many attributes of the original text, overall it is a challenge to the way the novel is constructed and read. The depiction of Frankensteins creature is one of the most extreme variations from the original text. Shelley gave the creature intellect he is highly intelligent and perceptive with an acute sense of self and those around him. He turns against those that shun and abandon him, yet has a sense of why he commits these acts. The monster in the film is mostly mute, only able to communicate with grunts and moans, increasing his animalistic depiction. His innocence is different to that of the creature in the novel namely, he drowns the young girl simply because he is unaware that she will drown at all, and also that there are consequences for his actions. We will write a custom essay sample on Appropriations of Frankenstein specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Appropriations of Frankenstein specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Appropriations of Frankenstein specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer They are both innocent, although in different senses of the word. Shelleys creature knows what he is doing, yet continues on, regardless of this. He hates humanity because they hate him, and have made him a victim. Both monsters are abandoned and shunned the difference is that the novels creature has the self-awareness to develop a genuine hate of humanity, rather than fear. Additionally, both are dehumanised, in different ways Boris Karloffs creature is bestial and unable to express himself; Shelleys monster is considered all the more dangerous for his intellect; the Satan in Victors life. In indignation and fear, he showers the monster with insults Abhorred monster! Fiend that thou art! Wretched devil! (p83), implying its demonic status. The films monster is not anything so sinister. His human status is not even debated, Henry proclaiming You see? It understands. The use of the it pronoun is a powerful tool in reinforcing the idea that he is an animal, rather than a newborn human. When asking his friend and mentor Dr Waldman want to do with his undomesticated creature, he is told to Kill it, as you would any savage animal. The different depiction of the monsters is one of the films strongest challenges to the reading of the original text. The depiction of the scientist also differs quite intensely between the novel and the film. In the original text, Frankenstein is (at least initially) a heroic figure, driven and destroyed by his ambition and thirst for knowledge. However, he soon takes on the role of the neglectful father who cannot accept his creation, or son for what he is. His inability to face the consequences of his actions and nurture the thing he has created leads to his downfall. The starkest contrast between Victor (novel) and Henry (film) is in the remoteness they experience. In the novel, Henry is isolated he works alone for nearly two years, and despite the horror occurring in his life, tells no one of his actions. In contrast, Henry is never alone in his quest whilst constructing the creature he is accompanied by his grotesque, hunchbacked assistant, and is joined by his best friend Victor Moritz and a mentor-figure from the university. Most importantly, none of those close to him are murdered, with the exception of his assistant Fritz. He is joined by the townspeople in hunting the creature, and as such is left nowhere near as isolated as Shelleys protagonist. He is also more grotesque, seeming more sinister and concerned with his own gain. Like the scientist of the novel, he consistently refers to body parts in the it pronoun, dehumanising the flesh and bones with which he constructs the depraved wretch. (p61) As is so often demonstrated in both texts, the values of the early 20th century are extremely to that of the early 18th century, suggesting that many societal values are rigid. One of the elements in which both texts remain very similar is the approach to women. Both film and novel contain patriarchal attitudes to women, which is unsurprising as they were both composed in pre-feminist eras. Elizabeth is a passive character in both texts, suffering for the actions of her fianci e. The other women in the original text Justine, Agatha and Safie are not considered integral enough to include in the 1931 text, reinforcing the patriarchal view of women as secondary characters. From a feminist standpoint, this devalues women and demonstrates the patriarchal nature of the early 20th century, similar to that illustrated by Shelley during the Enlightenment. The two texts both complement and contrast each other. They contain different themes and ideas, due to the separate contexts they were created in. However, each also contain similar ideas, due to the similar nature of the societies they created in. Frankenstein as a text and a movie of the 1930s fears the onslaught of science, as well as the appearance of monstrosities in our life. In this way, as a text, Frankenstein is about fighting personal demons, and the darkness that they represent.

Overview of United States v. Susan B. Anthony

Overview of United States v. Susan B. Anthony The United States v. Susan B. Anthony is a milestone in womens history, a court case in 1873. Susan B. Anthony was tried in court for illegally voting. Her attorneys unsuccessfully claimed that citizenship of women gave to women the constitutional right to vote. Dates of Trial June 17-18, 1873 Background When women were not included in the constitutional amendment, the 15th, to extend suffrage to black men, some of those in the suffrage movement formed the National Woman Suffrage Association (the rival American Woman Suffrage Association supported the Fifteenth Amendment).  These included Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Some years after the 15th Amendment passed, Stanton, Anthony, and others developed a strategy of attempting to use the Fourteenth Amendments equal protection clause to claim that voting was a fundamental right and thus could not be denied to women.  Their plan: to challenge limits on women voting by registering to vote and attempting to vote, sometimes with the support of the local poll officials. Susan B. Anthony and Other Women Register and Vote Women in 10 states voted in 1871 and 1872, in defiance of state laws prohibiting women from voting. Most were prevented from voting. Some did cast ballots. In Rochester, New York, almost 50 women  attempted to register to vote in 1872. Susan B. Anthony and fourteen  other women were able, with the support of election inspectors, to register, but the others were turned back at that step.  These fifteen women then cast ballots in the presidential election on November 5, 1872, with the support of the local election officials in Rochester. Arrested and Charged With Illegal Voting On November 28, the registrars and the fifteen  women were arrested and charged with illegal voting. Only Anthony refused to pay bail; a judge released her anyway, and when another judge set new bail, the first judge paid the bail so that Anthony would not have to be jailed. While she was awaiting trial, Anthony used the incident to speak around Monroe County in New York, advocating for the position that the Fourteenth Amendment gave women the right to vote.  She said,  We no longer petition legislature or Congress to give us the right to vote, but appeal to women everywhere to exercise their too long neglected citizens right. Outcome The trial was held in U.S. District Court.  The jury found Anthony guilty, and the court fined Anthony $100. She refused to pay the fine and the judge did not require her to be jailed. A similar case made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1875. In Minor v. Happersett,  On October 15, 1872,  Virginia Minor  applied to register to vote in Missouri.  She was turned down by the registrar and sued.  In this case, appeals took it to the Supreme Court, which ruled that the right of suffrage- the right to vote- is not a necessary privilege and immunity to which all citizens are entitled and that the Fourteenth Amendment did not add voting to basic citizenship rights. After this strategy failed, the National Woman Suffrage Association turned to promoting a national constitutional amendment to give women the vote.  This amendment did not pass until 1920, 14 years after Anthonys death and 18 years after Stantons death.

Ethics-----Assisted Suicide Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Ethics-----Assisted Suicide - Essay Example Thus, the concept of assisted suicide when done with the purpose of hastening the inevitable where disease has already prepared the body for death should become a part of a the standard for care that is given to individuals who wish to avoid the pain of disease, the loss of mental facilities when dying, or to avoid the expense of an unnecessarily prolonged extension of a life that is already lost. The word suicide is defined as â€Å"the act of killing yourself† (Jeffers & Smith, 2007, p. 81). While this is a simple definition, it lacks the appropriate level of nuance in order to fully define the full reference to everything that it implies. Suicide is the act of taking one’s own life, but it is also an act that brings with it a series of cultural images that imply sin, socially adverse action, and culturally shameful action. In Western cultures, taking one’s own life is generally considered a sin and in the United States, it is an illegal act that has criminal consequences. This can be seen in the way that Cleave (2001) reflects her definition of suicide when she states that it is â€Å"the act of killing yourself, often while mentally unstable† (p, 146). This also becomes a part of the discussion in that it is assumed that in taking one’s life it is done under the influence of mental instability. Other terminology that can be used to describe the event of taking one’s life when placed in the position of having a disease that is going to take one’s life is to call the event voluntary euthanasia. This becomes a less volatile terminology that can be discussed on terms that do not suggest sin, mental instability, and can call into question policies of illegality. A definition of voluntary euthanasia is that it â€Å"takes place when a patient who is dying or who is in intolerable pain asks someone to help him or her to die to avoid any further suffering† (Cleave,

Entomology. insect. Sexual Selection Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Entomology. insect. Sexual Selection - Essay Example The two point mandibles found in the male beetle are because of sexual selection. In the case of stag beetles, the males fight and the females choose the strongest. This ensures that the female choose and reproduce with males who posses their favourable characters. Sexual selection is only for male and that is why the male develop adaptive and non-adaptive features to attract the female. The male beetle genital morphology comprises of two outstanding and general models of morphological variation. This morphological variation includes swift evolutionary divergence both in shape and in complexity as well as poor relationship with body size as suggested by Simmons, Tomkins and Hunt (1999). The aspect of sexual selection causes these variations. Some of the variations are non-adaptive, for instance, the reduction of the scaling relationship between the genital size and the body size. The idea that evolution of new traits is followed by trade-offs is important in evolutionary studies. The weapons used by the male stag beetle in fighting can be physiologically expensive and are mostly trade offs with investment in other characters, like spermatogenic investment and wings. This investment into other weapons results in the evolution of mating strategies for the male beetles. For instance, the enlarged mandibles used for male-to-male competition. The male-male fight in sexua l selection accounts for the evolution of exaggerated traits used as weapons in male competition. The exaggerated characters can be responsible for the dispersal and ejaculatory strategies. The change of investment into other traits or weapons for competition can lead to evolutionary changes in life history characters. Since investment in exaggerated traits can cause trade-offs alongside other traits related to fitness, life history tactics are affected by evolution of sexually selected behaviour. During evolution, the males’ population

Racial Or Nationality Subcultures

Racial Or Nationality Subcultures In any society there are not only cultures, but also a variety of subculture and countercultures that develop within society. Subcultures and countercultures are formed by generalizations, occupation, class, lifestyle, likes, dislikes, etc. [1] Basically subculture is a group of people that belong to larger culture but differentiate from that. In early 1950s, there has been a distinction between an accepted majority style and a subculture as an active minority style. Dick Hebdige criticize that a subculture is subversion to normality. Subcultures have a nature of criticism and can be perceived as negative. Subcultures get together those individuals who feel neglected and allow them to develop a sense of identity. [2] A sociological term used to describe the values and norms of behavior of a cultural group is term as counterculture .In counterculture a group whose behavior deviates from the societal norm. Although distinct countercultural undercurrents have existed in many societies, here the term refers to a more significant, visible phenomenon that reaches critical mass and persists for a period of time. It is important to distinguish between counterculture, and subculture. [3] Subculture A subculture is a group of individuals that do share some qualities that the majority of society share, but the group has its own values, beliefs, norms, behavior, etc. Subcultures tend to be created when society endures problems or enjoys common privileges. Most individuals within a subculture have common interests and beliefs. Types of subculture   Following are the major types of subculture. Organizational Culture A type of subculture that allows members to have solidarity, community, and social relationships that influence individual behavior. It is the way an organization deals with the environment.   Counterculture It is a type of subculture that completely disregards societys norms and values and creates new ones. They tend to develop when people will not conform to the mainstream.   They have their own beliefs, problems with cultural integration, and have their own material culture. [1] Racial or nationality subcultures These subcultures tend to vary in their values, ambition and beliefs which get reflected in their consumption priorities, spend save patterns, purchase behavior, use of credit, social traditions and customs etc.Nowadays multiracial societies like America comprised of citizens who come from different nationalities or belong to different races. Religious subcultures: Most societies of the world today consist of people subscribing to different religions, which may differ in their beliefs, values and customs. The religious subgroups may follow different custom, have important rites of passage (like birth, marriage and death) performed in different ways and have different festivals. [4] Counter culture vs. Sub culture Counterculture can be defined as a group whose behavior deviates from the societal norm. It is different to the mainstream culture in their politics, norms, social beliefs, and way of dress and social structures. (or) A counter culture is one that reacts against the prevailing culture in place. Example: Throughout the last century examples of counterculture might be the suffragettes, the green movement, polygamists and feminists, punk movement and the infamous hippie counterculture movement of the 1960s, are formed and exist to oppose the dominant culture. All of these counter cultures have specific beliefs and values that cause social change. Counter cultures are large movements that cause social change. Counter cultures are against mainstream culture.[5] Members of a counterculture come together around their desire to reject movements within the larger, dominant culture. While members have this opposition in common, they may not share religious or political affiliations, similar socioeconomic situations, or values. Countercultures can be both negative and positive. They can also become larger when more people are involved and assimilate into the mainstream just as subcultures in general have this potential.[6] Biker Gangs, drug users, career criminals, prisoners, and terrorists have in common that they all have negative perceptions from society and are countercultures. [7] Subculture A sub culture can have its own beliefs, norms and values, but they are generally able to exist within mainstream culture. Their beliefs or manner of being may be different enough to make them stand out, but they are not at odds with society. Subculture is a culture shared and actively participated in by a minority of people within a broader culture. Examples: sub cultures might be Goths, emos, surfies, homies etc. Jews and Tea Party members are both examples of subcultures in the U.S. While the Jewish subculture is based around shared religious values, the Tea Party movement was primarily founded around dissatisfaction with the political status. Sub cultures tend to also share common interests and experience. Sub cultures can exist within mainstream culture.[5] Sub cultures are united by common aesthetics, interests and experience. Subcultures are distinctive segments of the larger culture of a region or society that are marked by shared interests in music or cultural phenomena, membership in a specific ethnic or religious group, or shared socioeconomic status. While some subcultures exist in contradistinction to the societys dominant culture, others exist harmoniously within it. Subcultures incorporate large parts of the broader cultures of which they are part, but in specifics they may differ radically. Subcultures bring together like-minded individuals who feel neglected by societal standards and allow them to develop a sense of identity. Subcultures can be distinctive because of the age, ethnicity, class, location, and/or gender of the members. [6] The qualities that determine a subculture as distinct may be linguistic, aesthetic, religious, political, sexual, geographical or a combination of factors. They certainly play an important role in any individual life and help to explain how each person develops a frame of reference. [7] Everybody has their own perceptions on society, values, and life in general. Values, attitudes, gestures, and sanctions tend to stem from the dominant culture in ones life. Throughout the dominant culture that a person spends his or her time in learning and changing through different experiences many subcultures have developed. Subcultures allow people, who share similar interests to assimilate, socialize, gives them a sense of belonging and fellowship among peers. [8] Similarities Countercultures and subcultures both identify themselves in juxtaposition to the dominant culture of a society. Members usually dress and behave in different ways than average citizens of a society and are usually identifiable by their different appearances. Differences Culture is made up of an amalgamation of subcultures. So, a single subculture is a small segment of the larger culture, which is usually defined by shared socioeconomic status or a common cultural interest. A counterculture, on the other hand, is defined by their opposition to the dominant culture. A member of a counterculture may oppose the prevailing cultures values. Or, it could just oppose certain segments of the culture, or certain subcultures. A subculture is differs slightly from the dominant culture in a society, while a counterculture opposes the culture or subculture itself.[6] Literature review Dick Hebdige argued that a subculture is subversion to normality. Subcultures tend to be perceived as negative and have a nature of criticism. [9] According to Hebdige, subcultures are actually an alternative and reconfiguration of the dominant cultures. As his all very brief references to black and West Indian cultures suggest that he considers these cultures to be transplanted dominant cultures within British society. This misrepresentation raises the question of whether ethnic groups or minorities fit into Hebdiges notion of what constitutes either a parent culture or subculture. [10] According to Wolfgang Ferracuti, subculture is a normative system of some group or groups smaller than the whole society .This implies that there are value judgments or a social value system which is apart from and a part of a central value system. But a subculture is only partly different from the larger culture, and cannot be totally different from the culture of which it is a part; otherwise it is what Wolfgang called contra culture. This implies that the subculture has some major values in common with the dominant parent culture. The transmission of sub cultural values involves a learning process that establishes a dynamic lasting linkage between the values and the individuals .But also important to Wolfgangs subculture of violence theory is the notion that people may be born into a subculture. They argue that the black subculture actually values violence and that it is an integral component of the subculture which experiences high rates of homicide. Just as the dominant society punishes those who deviate from its norms, deviance by the comparatively non-violent individual from the norms of the violent subculture is likewise punished, either by being ostracized, or treated with disdain or indifference. Also, the more a person is integrated into this subculture, the more intensely he embraces its prescriptions of behavior, its conduct norms, and integrates them into his personality. The subculture of violence theory might be even more relevant today than it was when it was first published, especially with regard to juvenile crime. It seems to be a common fear that adolescents today are more violent and lacking in empathy than those of only a generation or two ago. Parker (1989) criticisms of the black subculture of violence model are many: First, the use of global indicators describing an entire class of people, southerners or blacks, assumes that these communities are homogeneous in values and lifestyle, an assumption that is clearly false for any group as large as these groups. Second, particularly in the case of blacks, it entails an implicit pejorative indictment of urban minority residents and communities, which is unfair and racist in nature. Finally this approach ignores the role of institutionalized racism itself in producing a link between violence and racial composition. Wolfgangs subculture of violence theory has had its share of critics. Erlanger (1974), Parker (1989), Shihadeh and Steffensmeier (1994), are just a few of the investigators who have failed to find the theory useful in explaining sub cultural violence. Other authors have found that the sub-culture of violence theory is a useful model, particularly when it is used along with other theories Benedict and Baron. Kennedy and Baron call for such an integrative approach, and assert that often, different theories may complement one another. Finally, still other researchers continue to rely upon the model. 11] Scholars differ in the characteristics and specificity they attribute to counterculture. Counterculture might oppose mass culture, or middle-class culture and values. Counterculture is sometimes conceptualized in terms of generational conflict and rejection of older or adult values. It typically involves criticism or rejection of currently powerful institutions, with accompanying hope for a better life or a new society. Countercultures tend to peak, and then go into decline, leaving a lasting impact on mainstream cultural values. Their life cycles include phases of rejection, growth, partial acceptance and absorption into the mainstream. According to Sheila Whiteley, recent developments in sociological theory complicate and problematize theories developed in the 1960s, with digital technology, for example, providing an impetus for new understandings of counterculture. Andy Bennett writes that despite the theoretical arguments that can be raised against the sociological value of counterculture as a meaningful term for categorizing social action, like subculture, the term lives on as a concept in social and cultural theory to become part of a received, mediated memory.[12] Conclusion The term counter-culture is not entirely an adequate way of describing all of the changes that took place for several reasons: some changes were a progression of events throughout the century, other changes were due to scientific discoveries which have always produced new ideas and ways of looking at the world, and many changes can be better described as movements or ideologies.[14] Subcultures allow people, who share similar interests to assimilate, socialize, gives them a sense of belonging and fellowship among peers. Sub cultural studies often involve participant-observation, and may variously emphasize sociological, anthropological, or semiotic analysis in order to address the organization and production of relational, material, and symbolic structures and systems. [15] Suggestion Healthy sub-cultures share leaderships conceptualizations of how tasks should be accomplished; how employees can advance and take on greater responsibility; how employees interact with each other; the ways in which change is accepted and accomplished; and how new knowledge is acquired and perpetuated. Distinct, healthy sub-cultures are organizationally aligned in their understanding of how they must perform to produce successful and acceptable results and outcomes. Leaders actively seeking to influence their organizations culture must consider sub-cultures. The major point here is to make sure that you are integrating and linking your sub-cultures into the broader, intended cultural objectives. Accept and foster productive sub-cultures while consistently communicating how employees must perform in order for the organization to be successful.[13]

How does Steinbeck present the life of an itinerant worker at the beginning of the novel?

Steinbeck begins his novel by creating the setting. He paints a beautiful image of a peaceful environment where Lennie and George live in. This suggests an ironic tone to their lives as it is not quite as peaceful and harmonic as the setting. Their lives is quite the opposite, as they work hard and their only form of entertainment is starting fights, drinking heartly and going to cathouses. Readers are introduced to the lives of itinerant workers in America during the Great Depression.Steinbeck uses setting to describe itinerant workers’ lives such as â€Å"small square windows† – a symbolism of the prison-like working conditions of a farmhand worker. Also, it portrays the small constricted view of the outside world that these itinerant workers had. They did not have any privileges and did not afford to have any luxury. It could be argued that their bosses had total control over the itinerant workers.They were confined to have a simple life such as displayed when it is said â€Å"Tell ya what – know what he done Christmas? Brang a gallon of whisky right in here and says, Drink hearty, boys. Christmas comes but once a year.† This shows their simplicity and how they are easily pleased and impressed due to their low expectations. Although, at the mercy of their bosses, itinerant workers were victims of exploitation of work such as being overworked and maltreated as seen in this quote â€Å"The boss gives him hell when he’s mad†. This suggests the workers had to keep the boss satisfied.African-American itinerant workers are mentioned at the beginning of the book and the frequent use of the word, now an explicitly racist word â€Å"nigger† is heavily used to emphasise the attitude society had to african-americans. The first reference to it is in the quote â€Å"Ya see the stable buck’s a nigger.† We are hinted to the idea of â€Å"niggers† being treated worse than men such as Lennie and Geo rge, because of their skin colour and the old belief of african-americans being less â€Å"worthy†. Itinerant workers were used to the constant verbal and occasional physical abuse given by their bosses. Readers get the opportunity to understand better the mentality of itinerant workers and how they would prefer to spend their leisure time.â€Å"When the end of the month come, I could take my fifty bucks and go into town and get  whatever I want. Why, I could stay in a cathouse all night.†, â€Å"Order any damn thing I could think of†, â€Å"Get a gallon of whisky, or set in a pool room and play cards or shoot pool†. Readers keep being reminded of their simple life and low-life cheap entertainment which was the norm, this was what itinerant workers enjoyed. Another suggestion to entertainment enjoyed by them is in the form of violence: â€Å"After that the guys went into Soledad and raised hell.†. As they were farm-men and known for being masculi ne, they would carry out violent acts for the sake of satisfaction.Their simple way of living and their natural simplicity is stressed several times in the beginning of the novel such as when Lennie is described to the boss in an attempt to make him appear more handy: â€Å"Oh! I ain’t saying he’s bright. He ain’t. But I say he’s a God damn good worker.†. This emphasises the lack of education amongst itinerant workers. It is also reflected in the sociolect used by these men, which is grammatically incorrect but widely spoken: â€Å"An’ you ain’t gonna do no bad things like you done in Weed, neither.†In conclusion, we are exposed to a lot of information in the beginning of the novel that describes the way itinerant workers lived and their personalities and interests in order to properly understand the story.

There Are Four Elements to a Valid Contract

There are four elements to a valid contract. 1. At least two separate parties entering into an agreement: The agreement can be between two people, or one person and a company or between two companies. 2. The parties are qualified to agree to the terms and conditions in the contract: The parties must be of legal age and have an understanding of what the contract is and details it outlines. 3. Both parties are receiving consideration or value from the agreement: This is most commonly money in exchange for a good or service, but there are other methods of consideration, especially in the business arena. . The contract is created for legal activities: Contract are not binding or considered legally valid when they propose illegal activities or violate existing laws in anyway. (What are the four elements of a contract, 2010). The Objective theory of contracts is a principle in U. S. law that the existence of a contract is determined by the legal significance of the external acts of a party to purported agreement, rather than by the actual intent of the parties. (Objective theory of contract, 2010).This theory applies in this case because in this case it was stated they could win a Harrier-Jet if they collected the Pepsi points, but in actuality it was never their intent to give one away. The Court held there wasn’t a valid agreement here, because one party (Pepsi-co) made an agreement, but never signed a contract with the other party (John D. R. Leonard). As expensive as that jet was, a commercial ad couldn’t have actually offered the consumers the jet. (Unilateral Contract, 2010). Some advertisements are considered offers because if they advertise something and you have to pay for it that is money exchanged for a good or service.This case differs, because Leonard fulfilled his end by coming up with the points, but didn’t actually receive his reward upon the completed act.References Objective theory of contract; Retrieved from, http://www. encycl opedia. com/doc/1G2-3437703138. html Unilateral contract; Retrieved from, http://www. legal-dictionary. thefreedictionary. com/Unilateral+contract What are the Four Elements of a Valid Contract? 123; Retrieved from, http://www. life123. com/career-money/business-law/contracts/what-are-the-four-elments -of-a-valid-contract. shtml