Skip to main content

What are the differences between Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss in Flowers for Algernon?

Dr. Nemur was not comfortable using Charlie as the subject for the experiment. However, Dr. Strauss was supportive of Charlie’s participation from the initial stages of the project. Strauss was supportive because he believed Charlie was sufficiently motivated for the experiment. Dr. Strauss was more patient compared to Dr. Nemur, who was more concerned with recognition than the experiment. Dr. Nemur wanted to publish Charlie’s test results soon after it was determined that they were making progress. He also wanted to take full credit for the experiment, which showed he was selfish. Dr. Strauss was forced to remind him that he was the one who located and performed the operation on Charlie. He asserted himself as an equal partner in the project, which, if successful, would benefit people globally. Charlie realized that Dr. Nemur was ten years older than Dr. Strauss. At the end of the story, Charlie claimed that Nemur was an uptight person and suggested that he should loosen up.



Dr. Nemur wanted to publish the results of the experiment at the end of this month. Dr. Strauss wanted to wait a while longer to be sure. Dr. Strauss said that Dr. Nemur was more interested in the Chair of Psychology at Princeton than he was in the experiment. Dr. Nemur said that Dr. Strauss was nothing but an opportunist who was trying to ride to glory on his coattails.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more