The Power of Cultural Symbols

Symbols are one of the world’s oldest means of communication, dating back as far as historically possible. Today, symbols still play a vital role in society, displaying beliefs, values, morality and many other things crucial to civilisation. The social anthropologist Raymond Firth wrote “It is assumed that symbols communicate meanings at levels of reality not accessible through immediate experience or conceptual thought. These meanings are often complex and of different layers.”^[1] I intend to focus on exactly that, and how these symbols have gone beyond their original purpose to become something much more.

One of the main examples of this is the symbol used for the Campaign of Nuclear Disarmament, displayed on the right. The reason behind me using this as my primary example is down to previous research on the Glastonbury Festival, an event that was once strongly connected with the CND. Established in 1957 as a result of the increasing testing and development of nuclear weapons in Britian, the CND soon became known as a declaration of peace, the symbol being at the front of this movement. Alongside being the semaphore signals for ‘N’ and ‘D’ (Nuclear Disarmament), originally the designer intended the sign to represent despair, with the image of arms outstretched downwards and the circle representing ‘the unborn child’. By the end of the 60s however, the creator of the symbol came to regret its original meaning. Spreading overseas to the states, the sign soon became known internationally as an antiwar icon, going on to be known as the worldwide peace symbol we know it as today. It is this incredible growth of an ideology through a symbol that shows just how powerful they can be. As I discovered when I asked several of my friends, few people (certainly in my generation) had any idea that the symbol came from the CND. This in my opinion is one of the best examples of symbols developing for the better into worldwide significant icons.

Symbols becoming universally recognised and accepted in cultures other than their origins is not uncommon. The Tajitu, symbol for the basis of the Chinese culture of Yin and Yang again represents two opposing factors existing in harmony with one another. This symbol has been adopted comfortably into the western world and similar to the CND sign, is now an icon of peace. Alongside this, there is also Roerich’s banner of peace, a symbol created to protect cultural artefacts such as monuments and buildings, representing the ‘totality of culture’. Throughout the duration of history symbols of peace have always provided strong bases for values and beliefs, growing in that sense the more time passes.

With the idea of yin and yang being two polar opposites, it seems only fitting to talk about the other end of the spectrum. A symbol that, unlike the signs of peace previously mentioned, was and still is feared, powerful and known all over the world; the swastika. Whilst travelling around India, I noticed the symbol on countless buildings and temples, and naively made the quick judgement that this was a result of Nazi occupation. However, just a small amount of research on the matter tells you how far beyond the swastika goes than World War II. The origin of the symbol is more or less unknown due to it being able to be traced back to a multitude of cultures; however it can be pinpointed to civilisations such as ancient Troy and Egypt over 3000 years ago. Pre-Nazism the swastika was indeed used as a religious symbol by both Indian Hinduism and Buddhism. It is partly from India where Hitler apparently based one of the main ideologies of Nazism on; the creation of an Aryan race.

After investigating the swastika, I found myself feeling almost guilty at the fact that I had made such a snap-judgement. I may be generalising, but it would not surprise me if this judgement is not uncommon in the western world, which in my opinion is slightly tragic. Due to the events that transpired in World War II, this symbol is now mainly recognised for its crimes and atrocities, rather than its initial meanings such as wealth and good-fortune, the original word ‘swastika’ actually translating in Sanskrit as ‘good to come’. It seems a shame that one the world’s most ancient symbols is most likely now perceived in such a dark way by modern western society.

An interesting psychologist to look at when studying symbols is Carl Jung. He has his own theory on the swastikas creation believing it to be down to his idea of collective unconscious, where the human mind seems to have a natural attraction to the form of the symbol. This may explain why through history it has been used in cultures all over the world independently. Kenneth Burke, an American philosopher, describes man as a “symbol using, symbol making, and symbol misusing animal” ^[5]. In my opinion this definition provides an effective conclusion. Both the way in which symbols change and have so much meaning in the world today despite being fundamentally so simple is, and will remain throughout the course of humanity, an incredible feat.

References:

1.       Symbols and Meaning: A Concise Introduction by Mari Womack, published by Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc. in the USA in 2005.

2.       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_Nuclear_Disarmament accessed on the 04/12/11

3.       Lin, Qi and Shu: An Introduction to Science and Civilisation in China by Peng Yoke Ho, published by Dover Publications in the USA in 2000.

4.       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol accessed on the 04/12/11

5.       http://www.jstor.org/pss/3848123 accessed on the 04/12/11

6.       http://history1900s.about.com/cs/swastika/a/swastikahistory.htm accessed on the 04/12/11

Images:

1.       http://www.artrepublic.com/prints/14376-cnd-soldiers-silkscreen-signed-limited-edition- of-350.html accessed on the 04/12/11

3.       http://flagspot.net/flags/qt-p-ro.html accessed on the 04/12/11

4.       http://www.luckymojo.com/swastika.html accessed on the 04/12/11

A History of The Glastonbury Festival of Contemporary Performing Arts: What makes it the event we know today?

As I live only half an hour away from the festival grounds and can hear its music from my house, which in itself tells you just how big the event is, I decided to do some research into why this festival is one of the biggest of its kind in the world. In addition to the information available both in books and online, a documentary (see reference 1) was broadcast in 2000 that provides an in depth history of the festival. Alongside this, I did work experience for the Marketing Director of the 40^th anniversary festival in 2010, giving me a better understanding of the mechanics of the festival and compelling my interest further.

In 1970 on the day after Jimi Hendrix died Michael Eavis, a Somerset dairy farmer, set up what was to be the first of many Glastonbury festivals. With a considerably large number of hippies and locals turning up, 1500 people paid £1 to enjoy the sounds of Marc Bolan and drink Eavis’ fresh cow’s milk from his dairy. The festival, despite being the start of something that would later be known worldwide, was a complete financial disaster. However, news somehow spread to London where Andrew Kerr, at that time Randolph Churchill’s personal assistant, thought something could be made of the event. Joined by Winston Churchill’s granddaughter Arabella, the company Solstice Capers was formed and with Kerr’s help the festival enjoyed another year. This time it was free and around 12,000 people turned up to hear David Bowie and others on the first ever pyramid stage. After that, it wasn’t until 1979 when the festival was given another go, and despite a £5 entry fee it again resulted in financial disaster and Eavis having to take out a loan using the deeds to his farm. After another year without the event 1981 saw the first real Glastonbury Festival. I say real, as this time it had a purpose; disarmament.

However whilst the numbers of attendees through the ten years leading up to the nineties were ever increasing, the political motives of the festival began to see rising government influence. Violence and riot squads were then involved, with Eavis’ now running what was seen as a left wing political movement. This however did not stop the festival, as throughout the nineties this subsided to provide an original image of the festival today. In 2000 it saw its biggest numbers yet, but this was not a positive factor for the festival Gatecrashers of Glastonbury 2000 doubled the licensed capacity to an estimated 200,000 people on site, leading to the cancellation of Glastonbury 2001, due to increased safety fears in the wake of the Roskilde tragedy and prosecution of the organiser for alleged breach of licence. Since then, the event has become far more domesticated and safe, with numbers still rising but in a controlled and successful manner.

In my opinion, what makes Glastonbury what it is today is the personality built up over decades of different generations. This could not be more clearly displayed by what I witnessed on my 2010 visit to the festival. On the final day, as I was helping with the clearing up around the ‘Stone Circle’, a friend and I found an odd, hidden path leading past a wooded mound of earth. Looking closer, this mound had a small hole on the side, only around a metre tall. Curious, we went inside, only to find we were crawling into a large underground amphitheatre built of wood and earth with a very different crowd to normal festival goers looking down on us. After some commotion, we were allowed to sit and enjoy one of the most peculiar and unorganised shows I have ever seen, involving a real army veteran in full combats and other very strange characters.  After the show, they made their way to another opening at the back of the room, so again curious we decided to follow.

It was there that we witnessed the true personality of the festival; permanent Glastonbury festival residents. These people have somehow been allowed to camp here for as long as 20 years, thriving as a natural community and providing a base for the personality that creates ‘the Glastonbury experience’. To me, that summed up exactly how and why it is the way it is today.

 References:

1.       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kG0wqiJlXo accessed on the 20^th November 2011.

2.       http://www.glastonburyfestivals.co.uk/history/1986/ accessed on the 20^th of November 2011.

3.       Successful Events Management Third Edition by Anton Shone and Bryn Parry, published in Great Britain by Cengage Learning in 2010.

4.       Events Management Third Edition by Glenn Bowden, Johnny Allen, William O’Toole, Rob Harris and Ian McDonnel, published in Great Britain by Elsevier Ltd. in 2011.

Images:

1.       http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/2055881.stm accessed on the 20^th November 2011.

2.       http://brentleeregan.blogspot.com/2011/08/glastonbury-2011-unassimilated-review.html accessed on the 20^th November 2011.

3.       http://www.sophiebarker.com/hello-glastonbury/ accessed on the 20^th November 2011.

Video:

1.       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2bXzuB7sZw accessed on the 20^th November 2011.

Mussolini’s Contribution to Cultural Heritage: Architecture

One of the main cultural influences from the ancient world on the modern world today is architecture. This is displayed all around the world, with ancient Greek, Roman and Egyptian architectural and structural concepts showing their presence in society today. Whilst beautiful, these concepts have been adapted from their original designs to form buildings that, in a manner of speaking, blend in with the cities of today.

We value this cultural link to the ancient world very highly, which is why organisations such as UNESCO (The United Nations Education, Science and Culture Organisation) exist. UNESCO protects cultural heritage, with one of its main aims being to prevent cultural atrocities by preserving historical buildings and monuments. However, during the early stages of UNESCO’s development, there is one example of both the protection and destruction of cultural heritage that was over looked; the architectural movements of fascist Italy under the control of Benito Mussolini.

Mussolini, credited as one of the creators of fascism, based a lot of his political movements around those of both Julius Caesar and Augustus. One of the best examples of this is his March on Rome, likening it to Caesar’s march from Gaul over the Rubicon. As a result of the march, Mussolini was then in a position to state his aims for the future of Rome. The underlying theme to all of the movements of this fascist government was to quite simply regain the once great Roman Empire, seen as Italy’s true heritage. Alongside this, Mussolini wanted to not only re-enforce the roman empire but to bring Rome back to the culturally and architecturally superior age of Augustus;

Within five years, Rome must appear wonderful to the whole world, immense and powerful as she was in the days of the first empire of Augustus. The approaches to the Theatre of Marcellus, the Campidoglio and the Pantheon must be cleared of everything that has grown up around them during the centuries of decadence.

Mussolini’s speech to the Roman City Council in 1925

Mussolini attempted to recreate Augustan Rome into a fascist context. In order to do this, he restored buildings from that time period but with fascism carefully intertwined with everything he did, again further linking himself to the Emperor and selling the image of building a better, fascist Rome, similar to what Augustus was praised for during his reign. This is apparent in the 1938 construction, the Palazzo della Civiltà del Lavoro, or the ‘Square Collosseum’, thought of as one of the best examples of fascist architecture from that period. The destroying anything from ‘the centuries of decadence’ part of the above speech is a reference to Mussolini’s work in 1938 on the Mausoleum of Augustus. Here, mainly for propagandistic reasons he attempted to purge the surrounding areas of anything constructed after Augustus, such as churches from the early Christian period and Papal government railway stations and factories. Alongside this, the construction of a parade route called the Via dell’ impero (now known as the Via dei Fori Imperali) to celebrate the ten year anniversary of the march on Rome, the excavations destroyed five thousand housing units, with Mussolini breaking the first ground declaring ‘Let the pick-axe speak!’. These two examples of having little regard for any history other than ‘the future fascist Rome’ displays in my opinion one of the greatest losses of cultural heritage.

Mussolini had his own ideas about cultural preservation, interestingly promoting the destruction of cultural heritage as restoration. Whilst, this is an extreme example, the restoration part of his work could be seen as quite beneficial, as it has helped shape Rome today. However with so many of post-Augustan constructions destroyed, the negatives out-weigh the positives.

References:

1.       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Fascism accessed on the 18th of November 2011

2.       http://honorsaharchive.blogspot.com/2007/03/mussolini-propaganda-and-fascist.html accessed on the 18th of November 2011

3.       Email concerning Mussolini from Claire Hearn received on the 16^th of November 2011

4.       Donatello among the Blackshirts: History and Modernity in the Visual Culture of Fascist Italy by Claudia Lazzaro and Roger J Crum, published by Cornell University Press, New York in 2005.

Images:

1.       http://jspivey.wikispaces.com/Younsuk-Mussolini accessed on the 18th of November 2011

2.       Email concerning Mussolini from Claire Hearn received on the 16^th of November 2011

Video:

1.       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xIk8jlpMFg accessed on the 18^th of November 2011

Does Tourism have Negative or Positive Impacts on Culture?

Western civilization has intruded on other cultures throughout history, from the expansion of the British Empire to the more recent Americanization of cultures worldwide. This is most effectively defined by Antonio Gramsci’s theory of cultural hegemony; ‘that a culturally diverse society can be dominated (ruled) by one social class, by manipulating the societal culture (beliefs, explanations, perceptions, values) so that its ruling-class worldview is imposed as the societal norm’^[1]. In this blog I will explore the results of the intrusion of tourism, both positive and negative, by drawing upon personal experience.

In 2010 I travelled to India, actively seeking to learn about the country’s culture and heritage. Taking the train down from the top to the bottom of the east coast seemed like the best way to pursue this goal, and whilst a lack of funds made the experience somewhat uncomfortable, the overall aim was achieved and the trip was culturally enlightening. From there, the last stop on our journey was Goa. On arrival it was clear that this part of the country was unlike any other in India. While places like Chennai and Calcutta have strongly maintained their cultural origins despite being massively influenced by the west and especially Britain, Goa has not. Goa, after originally being ruled by various different Indian empires over the ages, eventually wound up under Portuguese control and separated from the other Indian states. In 1987, Goa was finally made the 25^th state of India, however there were a lot of lingering cultural ideologies from its past Portuguese occupancy.

This background made Goa what it is today, with the majority of famous architectural sites being of Portuguese origin. There is some evidence of cultural regeneration, such as the Mahasala Temple, which before was altered to fit the Portuguese’ preference but has recently been restored. Despite this, it is perhaps this western atmosphere alongside beautiful beaches that prompted Goa’s booming tourist industry. What also needs to be considered is that whilst there may still be Goan culture such as theatre, dance and music, the question has to be asked as to whether or not this is now for the tourists’ benefit, and how much of its other culture has been sacrificed? Although an important consideration, it is dominated by a much more important issue; assisting the economy and overall well-being of Indian citizens. This is clearly illustrated as today Goa is the richest state generating the most income per year in India, with the highest standard of living. On the whole I think India still holds enough of its cultural heritage to let Goa become what it is today, but in a cultural sense it was definitely a disappointing end to my travels.

It is definitely clear that tourism has also had in my opinion totally negative impacts, for example in Thailand.  The islands of Phi Phi, situated off the western coast of Thailand, used to be incredibly secluded and unheard of, a place that of natural beauty and natural cultural heritage for the locals. This fact is ironically advertised by the film ‘The Beach’, however today that could not be further from the truth; the islands are now almost permanently swarming with tourists. Whether or not the film was a direct cause of this is another matter; however it definitely must have had some negative effects. The beach from the film in particular is a prime example of tourism’s negative influence, as now it can only be viewed for 30 minutes at a time due to there being so many people wanting to view it. In my opinion this area did not need more anymore tourism because the surrounding area and islands were already some of the main tourist locations in Thailand, for example Phuket, therefore it seems totally unnecessary that more should be created.

What I would like to make clear is that this blog is not a direct attack at tourism as I am well-aware that I was one of those tourists, however I do personally believe that overall the results of tourism on culture are generally negative, as most of the time it destroys cultural heritage to make way for western society. It is true that this invasion does have a lot of benefits, some of them occasionally incredibly necessary, but again it is a question of how much we value culture over other important considerations.

References:

1.       10^th of October Matt Kirby 210 Lecture Slide 3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_hegemony accessed on the 14^th of November 2011)

2.       http://www.goacom.com/culture/history/ accessed on the 14^th of November.

3.       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa accessed on the 14^th of November

Images:

1.       http://www.goacom.org/ accessed on the 14^th of November

2.       http://www.mobilemoviesite.com/2011/06/beach-2000-dvd-mp4.html accessed on the 14^th of November

3.       http://opazz19.blogspot.com/ accessed on the 14^th of November

The Influence of Drugs on Culture: Mass Culture (1980s to Today)

Before the 1980s, drugs have never really created mass culture. Substances such as LSD had an influence in inspirational and motivational ways such psychedelic art, displayed here through Brian Exton’s Land of Psychedelic Illuminations, and the creation of a small music genre called ‘Acid Rock’. Marijuana had a strong connection with Reggae and the Caribbean; however people did not have to be a user of drug to enjoy the sounds of the genre. The point I am trying to get across is that, until the late 1980s, these cultures were albeit strongly connected with drugs, but had never affected mass culture.

Towards to the end of the 1980s however, all cultural scenes were changing, as were the drugs. One part of this in particular was the music scene, introducing to the public rave culture and the drug that apparently created it; ecstasy. The fast tempo beats of the dance music in the late 80s were specifically designed, according to Paul Manning, ‘to stimulate the ecstasy user’ by increasing the beats per minute to suit the heartbeat of said user. Contrary to what I have read online and in literature, I personally believe that this culture was not a result of drugs, rather it remains in the same field as generations of drug related cultures before it; an influential factor not the creator. Illegal substances may have enhanced the experience, but the music can’t have been brought into the world solely for the enjoyment of drug users. This opinion is formulated by a number of factors. Firstly, due to the media and government’s reactions to raves, where in my view they have simply linked the attendees to the music quite unfairly. To illustrate this I again refer to Paul Manning, who claims that ‘criminals were among the organisers’, which would obviously display an infamous image of all those associated and thereby give the media something to talk about. In addition to this, why if these dance raves were directly and obviously linked to drugs are dance clubs and events now world widely accepted? Even if this demonstrates some form of control, surely something created by drugs and for drug-users cannot be made into a legal act while drugs remain illegal? It is for those reasons why I don’t believe that drugs create culture.

However, rave culture was created and continues to thrive today, but in a different way to how it did in the late 80s and early 90s. The answer to why this is the case could again possibly be connected to drugs. In 1995, the death of an ecstasy user at a rave was being strongly pushed by the government in order to illegalize the substance and those similar to it. The government succeeded, which as one of the consequences marked the arrival of ‘Britpop’ and the apparent end of the ‘ecstasy generation’. What is also interesting is, again according to Manning, this apparently also gave way to the alcohol culture we see today, with results such as ‘massive increases in male-on-male and female-on-female violence and allegations of date rape’. This point aside, what is peculiar is that it is only recently that rave culture has become much more commercial, with music from the current version of that genre now making a firm place for itself in the national mainstream charts. It is doubtful that this has any relevance to the use of drugs; however it would definitely be fair to say that there are some lingering hungers for that past culture that still make it into the cultural world today.

As I mentioned earlier and to conclude, acid and its effects seem to have had a significant impact on past cultures such as the art community and music scene of the 60s and 70s, but truly the most astonishing and in turn most influential is actually much more recent. Steve Jobs, one of the worlds’ most highly respected and well known people of our time is reported to claim LSD as a massively important factor concerning his success. “Doing LSD was one of the two or three most important things I have done in my life,” Jobs told a journalist also mentioning that “Bill Gates would be a broader guy if he had dropped acid once”.  In a manner of speaking, despite drugs influencing the rave scene and being the driving force behind countless musicians and artists throughout 20^th century, the fact that drugs played a major role in the success of a now globally recognized brand, it’s items comfortably settled in millions of households, in my opinion answers best how drugs have really influenced culture.

References:

1.       Drugs and Popular Culture by Paul Manning, published by Willan Publishing in Devon, England in 2007.

2.       http://www.thefix.com/content/steve-jobs-think-different-and-lsd-9143  accessed on the 14^th of November 2011

Images:

1.       http://www.designdazzling.com/2010/09/25-amazing-examples-of-psychedelic-artwork/ accessed on the 14^th of November 2011

2.       http://childrenofthenineties.blogspot.com/2010/02/raves.html accessed on the 14^th of November 2011

3.       http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml accessed on the 14^th of November 2011

The Influence of Drugs on Culture: 12th Century to the Early 1970s

For hundreds of years people have been using and will continue to use drugs. What is not widely known, and what I have been investigating is claims that this use of drugs has in some periods of time had massive impacts on culture.

To begin with events in mind, during the late 12^th century there is some of the first recorded cultural drug use in history. At the Cambodian temple Angkor Wat festivals were held in order to celebrate and entirely based around the consumption of the various different strains of mushroom that grow within its walls (and continue to grow there today) ^[1] . It is this very primitive mixture of culture and drug use that could possibly in my opinion show how we have maintained that similar association today, and will continue to do so. Skipping forward four hundred years to the end of the 16^th century, there is loose evidence again to suggest the use of mushrooms within some of the most high culture of its time; William Shakespeare. In his writings he talks of ‘demy puppets...whose pastime is to make midnight mushrumps’, telling us how mushrooms given by fairies seem to imbue people with ‘an intrinsic earthly, grotesque and gnomic humour, or with all the beauty, glamour, danger and charm of a faerie enchantment’. Whilst in my view this is quite a loosely based assumption, if true this suggests that some of the finest culture in human history was influenced by drugs.

What is clear from reading chapters from Drugs and Popular Culture by Paul Manning ^[2] is that there has always been a strong bond between drugs and music, displayed through journalism, biography and fiction, the lyrics of songs, the cultural practices of popular musicians and audiences, and through musical forms and performance styles.  During the 1920s in the States, drugs assisted on the gradual decline over the coming decades of high culture (in terms of music) into low culture. This was a result of the public starting to protest against the classical forms of music and turn towards jazz and blues, associated from the start with illegal substances and organised crime as a result of the musician’s social habits. Jazz musicians were among organised crime’s best customers as they saw illegal drugs as a performance aid, the greatest examples of this being Miles Davis and John Coltrane, who both took heroin, which apparently would increase the volume and quality of their performances. This went on to influence their fans and fellow lesser musicians in Britain into taking the drug in order to play and live like black musicians from the states.

This seems to be a reoccurring theme throughout the 20^th century and in modern society, with people wanting to imitate their heroes and idols. ‘Benzedrine’ said James Bond. ‘It’s what I shall need if im going to keep my wits about me tonight. It’s apt to make one a bit overconfident, but that’ll help too.’ He stirred the champagne so that the white powder whirled among the bubbles. Then he drank the mixture down with one long swallow. ‘it doesn’t taste,’ said Bond ‘and the champagne is quite excellent’. This image of a hero from popular literature doing drugs provides people with an aspiration to do what said hero does.

Five years on from Ian Flemming’s Moonraker, the early sixties saw the first branches of drug related music groups emerging. For the pop-scene it was speed and amphetamines, while on the other side of the spectrum the immigrants from the Caribbean and the Indian subcontinent heavily associated with the recreational use of marijuana brought in calypso, bluebeat, ska and reggae. Drugs, Paul Manning claims, also actually created a music culture. He states it was LSD and its effects that produced some of the most commercially successful bands in British history, such as Pink Floyd and Genesis. They focused on ‘the lengthy timescale of the acid trip rather than the shorter hit of cocaine or speed, or dub reggae’s metonymous relationship with ganja mediated through the recording studio.’ This fact is questionable, as it is clear that the effects of LSD did inspire the musicians, but to say it ‘created’ that culture is a little strong; more like ‘assisted’. However, it does appear that the main influence that drugs have on popular music is when musicians attempt to replicate the feeling and effects of a drug through their music.

To the public these actions by artists could have been hugely influential and most likely ended up with people taking drugs as a result, however after the 1970s there were strong legal implications put in place to prevent this use to the public as a result of the deaths surrounding the misuse of drugs. Therefore, while the drug related deaths of artists such as Jimi Hendrix did not stop the masses idolising their musical heroes, it definitely started to have negative perceptions, placing drug users in a minority. As a consequence, this minority was then pushed once again into pursuing legal ways of taking drugs, resulting in the mass use of Ecstasy, Cocaine and the dance and rave scene...

References:

1.       Shroom: A Cultural History of the Magic Mushroom by Andy Letcher, published by Faber and Faber Ltd. in England in 2006.

2.       Drugs and Popular Culture by Paul Manning, published by Willan Publishing in Devon, England in 2007.

Images:

1.      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Buddhist_monks_in_front_of_the_Angkor_Wat.jpg accessed on the26th October 2011

2.       http://shakespeare.mit.edu/ accessed on the26th October 2011

3.       http://50pebooks.xp3.biz/BOND.html  accessed on the26th October 2011

4.       http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=1440 accessed on the26th October 2011