Directing Juliets Long Soliloquy Essay -- Drama

How would you direct Juliet's long soliloquy in Act 4 Scene 3 on a Shakespearean stage, conveying Juliet's nightmarish terror and indecisiveness? My staging of Act 4 Scene 3 will emphasise the major themes which are continued in the play as a whole; love, fate and violence. Both Romeo and Juliet are sometimes portrayed as 'pawns of fate' unable to escape their destiny, yet in this scene as I wish to stage it, I want to show that Juliet, following the Friar's plan, takes a step towards changing that destiny. She does this out of love for Romeo and to escape the despair brought on by what she thinks will be a loveless marriage to Paris. Juliet is in the grip of very strong emotions and in this scene her morbid fantasies about tombs and spectres take a violent turn, showing the violence of her feelings and state of mind. It seems strange that most modern productions omit this scene, giving only the first and last lines. The last line too is given in various versions. Do the directors think that this "death bed soliloquy" - for that is what it turns out to be - from the heroine, is too wordy and that modern audiences cannot interpret the violent images she talks about without the images themselves before their eyes? Or do they think that such violent emotions are uncharacteristic of Juliet and are out of place? In my production I intend to combine the powerful words of the distraught Juliet with the inclusion of visual images to produce maximum impact. In order to help the Shakespearean audience visualise Juliet's words, I will place actors as ghosts and spectres acting out her fantasies in the gallery as she speaks the lines. On a Shakespearean stage the scenery was minimal, as were the props, so the contemporary audience relied on the words, clothing and the actor a lot more than we would normally do now. As the director, I would ask the young actor playing Juliet to be wearing a yellow aristocratic night gown of the era. This would indicate to the audience that in the play it is currently night time and that Juliet is in her chambers (because a respectable girl would not be outside in her night clothes). The Shakespearean audience was very superstitious, so Juliet wearing a night gown that is yellow would also portray to them ideas of optimism. Also, along the ideas of superstition, I would want the vial to be red, ... ...loor of the gallery, where he has been waiting. Tybalt should look extremely menacing and threatening towards the crowd. As soon as Juliet says "O look!" I want the actor playing Romeo to appear on the gallery, next to Tybalt. While Juliet is speaking the next lines they should fight with rapiers. At the precise moment that Juliet says the second "stay!", I want Tybalt to stab Romeo, and then for all the actors on the upper stage to collapse to floor so they are not seen. I believe that in the staging of this scene, with actors acting out Juliet's fantasies as she says them, I have exploited the full potential of the Elizabethan stage. Since their access to props and lighting was limited, words had to convey the idea of action, but by combining verbal and visual I wanted to maximise the impact of the words. Juliet's highly emotional state is shown by her restless movements over the stage and her imaginings are portrayed in the gallery above. The violence shown throughout the play is mirrored here in Juliet's words. Her love for Romeo is the cause of the scene but the audience knows that in the end it is all futile since Juliet and Romeo are "star-crossed lovers".

Reality Tv Shows

What Reality TV Tells Us about American Culture Reality TV (RTV) and tabloid journalism have often been compared to each other. (Hill 80) Are both bringing out the worst in American culture or and they merely an example of what American culture is all about, holding a mirror up to the audience? Western culture in general and American culture in particular has always been fascinated by two things in regards to what fascinates and intrigues their interests and holds their attention, love and war. It is no different when it comes to reality TV.These polar opposites are almost always found together in life, as well as in reality TV. In Robin L. Nabi’s research presented in the journal article, â€Å"Determining Dimensions of Reality: A Concept Mapping of the Reality TV Landscape,† he draws the following conclusions from the data gathered, â€Å"The MDS [Minimum Data Set] results from both sets of data suggest that the two characteristics most salient to audiences when thin king about reality-based programming are romance and competition. † (371) These can come under many names; sex and violence, drama and action, and so on.But first we need a definition of reality TV in order to limit the scope of this analysis. Dr. Nabi and associates found that the authorities in Television production companies have not set a particular definition in regards to what is and what is not reality TV. Dr. Nabi offers us the following parameters: [There are] several key elements that characterize such programs: (a) people portraying themselves, (b) filmed at least in part in their living or working environment rather than on a set, (c) without a script, (d) with events placed in a narrative context, (e) for the primary purpose of viewer entertainment.In essence, reality programs are marked by ordinary people engaged in unscripted action and interaction. (Nabi 371) While this guideline certainly makes a good rule of thumb, one other thing must be remembered when deal ing with the genre. Unlike real life, reality TV is heavily edited by its producers to synthesize and often even contrive and misconstrue events to make them look more powerful than they were in real life. Most frequently the time frame is condensed from a week of production into twenty or so minutes of RTV.This condensation eliminates some of the nuances of real life, but often makes it more exciting. Also, editing after the fact has certain advantages as evinced by this analysis of the popular RTV show, â€Å"Cops:† [The] narrator provides viewers with information about the suspects that may not be known by the officer at the time of the chase, stop, or initial interview. The audience†¦ may be told at the beginning of the anecdote that the driver of a fleeing car has an outstanding warrant or is intoxicated. The pursuing officers may only know this information after the suspect is apprehended.Nonetheless, according to the programs, the officer is clearly making the app ropriate choice by following his or her hunch. Viewers are provided the illusion that they are watching real events unfold but with knowledge based on hindsight (a product of editing), which the officers do not have. (Prosise & Johnson 73) This poses to the audience that the arresting officers are clear in their duty and response, but in the reality of the scene, they may have not had such clear cut motives in stopping the suspect.One of the most prevalent problems associated with this type of programming and across the nations police force, is the dilemma of racial profiling that can be exacerbated by such justifications. (Prosise & Johnson) There is also a paradoxical twist to the predilection of Americans watching RTV. We, as well as many other technically proficient nations, are a culture that is inundated with news, twenty four hours a day seven days a week. There is news even when there is no news to tell. Broadcasters begin to focus on the mundane events of people with the ug liest dogs in the world, or rehash old news events for weeks or months at a time.However, Americans in droves are focusing on RTV as a seeming balm to this over information. (Javors 35; Papacharissi & Mendelson 358) Perhaps the one difference that RTV has when compared to reality news is that there is always a resolution that seems understandable. This is often not the case in real life. Sometimes missing millionaires lost in flight over the desert are never found, a young girl missing, presumed dead, in Aruba whose body is never located, all this leaves us wanting closure, perhaps RTV gives us that closure.The knowledge that at the end of the series there is always gong to be a winner is a very safe way to be satisfied. The Cops always get their man or woman as the case may be. On an individual basis, what is RTV telling us about us? Papacharissi & Mendelson in their article, â€Å"An Exploratory Study of Reality Appeal: Uses and Gratifications of Reality TV Shows,† feel tha t, â€Å"The premise of reality TV requires that individuals place themselves on public display, thus forfeiting all claims to personal privacy for the sake of transient fame and the possibility of monetary compensation. (355) So for the possibility of Warhol’s fifteen minutes of fame and the glory of the prize, a modeling contract, a million dollars, or the idol of millions, we are willing to embarrass and expose ourselves to ridicule, if the price is right. This harkens back to early TV and game shows as well as the popular series Candid Camera. Although the reality at the end of Candid Camera was the surprise that you were actually being filmed. There was no payoff other than being on TV and most participants were willing to sign their names on the release forms. This brings us back to our original associate with RTV and tabloid journalism:A core feature of popular factual television is that it presents information in an entertaining manner. The origins of reality program ming point towards a close association with tabloid news†¦ Although the tabloid news connection is often used as evidence of the ‘dumbing down' of factual television, the connection can also be used as evidence of the way reality TV attempts to present information to audiences who want to be entertained and informed at the same time. (Hill 80) In Annette Hill’s book, Reality TV: Audiences and Popular Factual Television, she presents RTV as factual context in an entertainment venue.A fan of RTV, Ms. Hill fells that it is often the target of cultural profiling in associating it with the less savory aspects of reportage and the lowest common denominator (LCD) of tabloid journalism. Many would argue with her conclusion as she goes on to compare watchers of RTV with fans of horror or violent action movies. To say that fans of violent movies will exhibit violent behavior, she contends, is a gross generalization. The same gross generalization that RTV has fallen prey to i s to assume those watchers are simply â€Å"voyeurs† with no real life of their own. (Hill 83)However, psychologist and therapist are viewing RTV with a skeptical eye. They feel that there is an aching psyche in the American culture that is using RTV as a cure, much in the way the Marx referred to religion as being the opiate of the people, or as one writer updates it: Is reality TV the crack cocaine of what critic Marie Winn calls the â€Å"plug-in drug? † My answer is yes, when addicts' distorted views of reality make it impossible for them to function in the world outside the tube. Why meet the neighbors when we have the Osbournes? Why take that trip out West? Survivor is on at 9:00. Breyer 100) Some therapists further see this as the desensitizing of American culture. RTV coupled with the massive bombardment of news, mostly bad, from around the nation and the world is numbing us to any emotional ties to reality. Dr. Irene Javors compares RTV shows to the quick fix junk food restaurants and calls them â€Å"fast food programs† and states they are as bad for our minds as a constant diet of Double Whoppers with cheese and Chocolate Milk shakes would be to our bodies. She states that, â€Å"As a result, we are numbing ourselves to very real life challenges. (35) This makes us more and more unable to respond to life in any real or meaningful way and as technology reduces many interactions to words on a screen, this is not so unbelievable. In a world of justification RTV is not without them. Many proponents argue that RTV shows like American Idol, America’s Next Top Model, etc, have about them the lure of the lottery. If the person I am watching become Donald Trump’s new apprentice can do that, maybe I can become manager of the Burger King I am working for. A dollar and a dream is the mentality of the masses faced with this existential angst. (Hill 83; Javors 35) We are not alone in this.In China, often accused of attempting t o mimic Western culture, the producers of an RTV show â€Å"Ying Zai Zhongguo,† or translated somehow as â€Å"Win† in English draw a similar conclusion: †¦their hope that the program would encourage more people in China to start their own businesses. Song Wenming †¦hoped the show would introduce the â€Å"positive power† of entrepreneurship. Ms. Zhou said she hoped potential entrepreneurs would learn the importance of both perseverance and passion. There was much more in the same vein. (Fallows) Perhaps there is some altruism at the end of the tunnel when considering the cultural benefit of RTV.But the preponderance of the evidence seems to suggest that there is something deeply missing in the American psyche that needs to be healed. Is RTV the cure or part of the problem? This is the conundrum that researchers face. Although nothing new, since The Iliad and the Odyssey and before, circled around campfires and telling stories human beings have had som e desire for adventure, love, and battles. It is part of our nature, perhaps being suppressed, that RTV touches upon. Is it exploitation or vicarious therapy? This still remains the question. Reality Tv Shows What Reality TV Tells Us about American Culture Reality TV (RTV) and tabloid journalism have often been compared to each other. (Hill 80) Are both bringing out the worst in American culture or and they merely an example of what American culture is all about, holding a mirror up to the audience? Western culture in general and American culture in particular has always been fascinated by two things in regards to what fascinates and intrigues their interests and holds their attention, love and war. It is no different when it comes to reality TV.These polar opposites are almost always found together in life, as well as in reality TV. In Robin L. Nabi’s research presented in the journal article, â€Å"Determining Dimensions of Reality: A Concept Mapping of the Reality TV Landscape,† he draws the following conclusions from the data gathered, â€Å"The MDS [Minimum Data Set] results from both sets of data suggest that the two characteristics most salient to audiences when thin king about reality-based programming are romance and competition. † (371) These can come under many names; sex and violence, drama and action, and so on.But first we need a definition of reality TV in order to limit the scope of this analysis. Dr. Nabi and associates found that the authorities in Television production companies have not set a particular definition in regards to what is and what is not reality TV. Dr. Nabi offers us the following parameters: [There are] several key elements that characterize such programs: (a) people portraying themselves, (b) filmed at least in part in their living or working environment rather than on a set, (c) without a script, (d) with events placed in a narrative context, (e) for the primary purpose of viewer entertainment.In essence, reality programs are marked by ordinary people engaged in unscripted action and interaction. (Nabi 371) While this guideline certainly makes a good rule of thumb, one other thing must be remembered when deal ing with the genre. Unlike real life, reality TV is heavily edited by its producers to synthesize and often even contrive and misconstrue events to make them look more powerful than they were in real life. Most frequently the time frame is condensed from a week of production into twenty or so minutes of RTV.This condensation eliminates some of the nuances of real life, but often makes it more exciting. Also, editing after the fact has certain advantages as evinced by this analysis of the popular RTV show, â€Å"Cops:† [The] narrator provides viewers with information about the suspects that may not be known by the officer at the time of the chase, stop, or initial interview. The audience†¦ may be told at the beginning of the anecdote that the driver of a fleeing car has an outstanding warrant or is intoxicated. The pursuing officers may only know this information after the suspect is apprehended.Nonetheless, according to the programs, the officer is clearly making the app ropriate choice by following his or her hunch. Viewers are provided the illusion that they are watching real events unfold but with knowledge based on hindsight (a product of editing), which the officers do not have. (Prosise & Johnson 73) This poses to the audience that the arresting officers are clear in their duty and response, but in the reality of the scene, they may have not had such clear cut motives in stopping the suspect.One of the most prevalent problems associated with this type of programming and across the nations police force, is the dilemma of racial profiling that can be exacerbated by such justifications. (Prosise & Johnson) There is also a paradoxical twist to the predilection of Americans watching RTV. We, as well as many other technically proficient nations, are a culture that is inundated with news, twenty four hours a day seven days a week. There is news even when there is no news to tell. Broadcasters begin to focus on the mundane events of people with the ug liest dogs in the world, or rehash old news events for weeks or months at a time.However, Americans in droves are focusing on RTV as a seeming balm to this over information. (Javors 35; Papacharissi & Mendelson 358) Perhaps the one difference that RTV has when compared to reality news is that there is always a resolution that seems understandable. This is often not the case in real life. Sometimes missing millionaires lost in flight over the desert are never found, a young girl missing, presumed dead, in Aruba whose body is never located, all this leaves us wanting closure, perhaps RTV gives us that closure.The knowledge that at the end of the series there is always gong to be a winner is a very safe way to be satisfied. The Cops always get their man or woman as the case may be. On an individual basis, what is RTV telling us about us? Papacharissi & Mendelson in their article, â€Å"An Exploratory Study of Reality Appeal: Uses and Gratifications of Reality TV Shows,† feel tha t, â€Å"The premise of reality TV requires that individuals place themselves on public display, thus forfeiting all claims to personal privacy for the sake of transient fame and the possibility of monetary compensation. (355) So for the possibility of Warhol’s fifteen minutes of fame and the glory of the prize, a modeling contract, a million dollars, or the idol of millions, we are willing to embarrass and expose ourselves to ridicule, if the price is right. This harkens back to early TV and game shows as well as the popular series Candid Camera. Although the reality at the end of Candid Camera was the surprise that you were actually being filmed. There was no payoff other than being on TV and most participants were willing to sign their names on the release forms. This brings us back to our original associate with RTV and tabloid journalism:A core feature of popular factual television is that it presents information in an entertaining manner. The origins of reality program ming point towards a close association with tabloid news†¦ Although the tabloid news connection is often used as evidence of the ‘dumbing down' of factual television, the connection can also be used as evidence of the way reality TV attempts to present information to audiences who want to be entertained and informed at the same time. (Hill 80) In Annette Hill’s book, Reality TV: Audiences and Popular Factual Television, she presents RTV as factual context in an entertainment venue.A fan of RTV, Ms. Hill fells that it is often the target of cultural profiling in associating it with the less savory aspects of reportage and the lowest common denominator (LCD) of tabloid journalism. Many would argue with her conclusion as she goes on to compare watchers of RTV with fans of horror or violent action movies. To say that fans of violent movies will exhibit violent behavior, she contends, is a gross generalization. The same gross generalization that RTV has fallen prey to i s to assume those watchers are simply â€Å"voyeurs† with no real life of their own. (Hill 83)However, psychologist and therapist are viewing RTV with a skeptical eye. They feel that there is an aching psyche in the American culture that is using RTV as a cure, much in the way the Marx referred to religion as being the opiate of the people, or as one writer updates it: Is reality TV the crack cocaine of what critic Marie Winn calls the â€Å"plug-in drug? † My answer is yes, when addicts' distorted views of reality make it impossible for them to function in the world outside the tube. Why meet the neighbors when we have the Osbournes? Why take that trip out West? Survivor is on at 9:00. Breyer 100) Some therapists further see this as the desensitizing of American culture. RTV coupled with the massive bombardment of news, mostly bad, from around the nation and the world is numbing us to any emotional ties to reality. Dr. Irene Javors compares RTV shows to the quick fix junk food restaurants and calls them â€Å"fast food programs† and states they are as bad for our minds as a constant diet of Double Whoppers with cheese and Chocolate Milk shakes would be to our bodies. She states that, â€Å"As a result, we are numbing ourselves to very real life challenges. (35) This makes us more and more unable to respond to life in any real or meaningful way and as technology reduces many interactions to words on a screen, this is not so unbelievable. In a world of justification RTV is not without them. Many proponents argue that RTV shows like American Idol, America’s Next Top Model, etc, have about them the lure of the lottery. If the person I am watching become Donald Trump’s new apprentice can do that, maybe I can become manager of the Burger King I am working for. A dollar and a dream is the mentality of the masses faced with this existential angst. (Hill 83; Javors 35) We are not alone in this.In China, often accused of attempting t o mimic Western culture, the producers of an RTV show â€Å"Ying Zai Zhongguo,† or translated somehow as â€Å"Win† in English draw a similar conclusion: †¦their hope that the program would encourage more people in China to start their own businesses. Song Wenming †¦hoped the show would introduce the â€Å"positive power† of entrepreneurship. Ms. Zhou said she hoped potential entrepreneurs would learn the importance of both perseverance and passion. There was much more in the same vein. (Fallows) Perhaps there is some altruism at the end of the tunnel when considering the cultural benefit of RTV.But the preponderance of the evidence seems to suggest that there is something deeply missing in the American psyche that needs to be healed. Is RTV the cure or part of the problem? This is the conundrum that researchers face. Although nothing new, since The Iliad and the Odyssey and before, circled around campfires and telling stories human beings have had som e desire for adventure, love, and battles. It is part of our nature, perhaps being suppressed, that RTV touches upon. Is it exploitation or vicarious therapy? This still remains the question.

Who Caused Financial Crisis Investment Bankers Or Government Finance Essay - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 6 Words: 1831 Downloads: 2 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Finance Essay Type Narrative essay Did you like this example? The aim of this essay is to try to examine who was responsible for the financial crisis of the recent years, which hit the whole worlds economy. It is reasonable to blame both the government and the banks, which together contributed to create a speculative financial system, but also the mortgage holders, who asked for loans they were not able to pay. The government lacked enough control and regulation, while the banks focused on making the biggest short-term profits they could, taking excessive risks and keeping it hidden from the investors. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Who Caused Financial Crisis Investment Bankers Or Government Finance Essay" essay for you Create order The other main characters of the financial system-Mathematicians, Central Banks, Regulators and Rating Agencies-contributed to the crisis too, directly or indirectly, but to a smaller extent. Many words will be spent especially on the subprime crisis of 2007, which started in the US, the first of a series of successive and related crises throughout the world, which all together culminated in the so called Credit Crunch. Each country worldwide tried to find a solution to the problems created by the crisis, sustaining the economy, in order to avoid recession. A particular focus will be on the United Kingdom, one of the countries which suffered most the bad consequences of the crisis. This recently pushed the British government to introduce a package of austerity, one of the most severe plans of the last 30 years. The role of Government, Regulators and mortgage holders Most people around the world have lost their trust in bankers, and they are considered guilty by the majority. People should also think about what the governments did and what the governments did not do, during that period. US government lost control over the regulation of the banking system, trying to stimulate the economy and the overall consumption. During the boom of the housing market it focused on liquidity rather than on risk. It encouraged bankers to grant loans to almost everyone, even to people with low income and poor credit, without any security for banks to regain the money. The government prolonged the crisis by increasing the interest rate on borrowing, due to the increasing inflation of 2007. People who were finishing their introductory period of mortgage faced an even higher interest rate, being unable to pay their debt towards the bankers. It made the situation worse by providing support to certain financial institutions and their creditors but not for others in a n ad hoc fashion, acting too late, without a clear framework. This increased uncertainty and panic in the market. Furthermore government permitted financial firms to pick their preferred regulators in what became a race to the weakest supervisor. Regulators had ample power in many arenas and they chose not to use it. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for instance could have required more capital and stopped risky practices at the big investment banks, but it did not. In case after case after case, regulators continued to rate the institutions as safe even in the face of troubles, often downgrading them just before their collapse. Even households played their role: they borrowed excessively, leaving them vulnerable to financial distress or ruin if the value of their investments declined even modestly. From 2001 to 2007, US national mortgage debt almost doubled, and the amount of mortgage debt per household rose more than 63% from $91,500 to $149,500, even while wages were essentially stagnant. It is this combination of structural conditions that investment bankers were able to exploit. The role of Bankers and Rating Agencies On their side, bankers tried to make the biggest profit they could from the boom of the housing market. They were also encouraged by the government to lend money as much as they could, apparently without limits. This lack of control pushed bankers to give mortgages even if they were too expensive and with a high chance of default. In order to be able to sell more mortgages, mortgage companies bundled the debt into consolidation packages and sold the debt on to other finance companies, like banks. In practice they borrowed money to be able in turn to lend mortgages. Bankers sold these mortgage debts to financial intermediaries, in order to spread the risk; as a consequence rating agencies gave these mortgages a low risk rating, being unable to really understand the level of risk they carried, since the bundles passed from lenders to lenders. To make it worse, many mortgages had an introductory period of one or two years of very low interest rates, at the end of which, interest rates increased a lot. People, who were initially able to pay, found themselves no more able to, defaulting. The 2007 economic scenario was not helpful at all: inflation was increasing and the government had to persuade the bankers to increase the interest rates because of it. Householders faced lower income because of rising health care costs, rising oil prices and rising food prices. As a consequence there was a rise in mortgage defaults, since many householders could not afford to pay. This situation signalled the end of the housing boom in the US and house prices started to fall; the increasing number of defaults caused many US mortgage companies to go bankrupt. Also many banks in Europe and UK lost billions of pounds in the bad mortgage debt they had bought off US mortgage companies. Banks wrote off large losses and this made them reluctant to make further lending available. As a result it became very difficult to raise funds and borrow money worldwide; the cost of interbank lending increased a lot and the market dried up. The situation was slightly different in the UK. The mortgage lending had more controls than in the US, but the crisis hit a lot of English banks. The reason is that many banks, like Northern Rock which was the first to go bankrupt, had a high percentage of loans financed through reselling in the capital markets; when the subprime crisis hit the economy, they were unable to raise funds from it. In addition, many UK banks bought the bundles of the bad mortgages debt from US companies, directly or indirectly. Therefore when US mortgage defaults rose, many UK banks lost money. Many banks were left with a shortfall and had to ask the Bank of England for emergency funds, causing customers to worry and start withdrawing their savings. Banks tried to write off bad debts improving their balance sheets by lending less and encouraging customers to save more. As a result even UK mortgages became more expensive and lots of them, especially the riskiest, were removed from the market. At the same time, world stock markets continued to fall in value; investors rushed to sell so-called toxic assets, moving their money into safe areas such as commodities and bonds. This contributed to make the credit less easily available and more expensive; as a result consumer spending declined further, resulting in increasing unemployment as companies became unable to sustain their payrolls. Consequences and future tasks What started as a problem of private-sector debt has become a problem of public-sector debt; we have to look at the financial conditions that preceded the crisis, which is a result of the credit-driven growth: abundance and excess of cheap money that was being lent without regards to borrowers ability to repay. The banks have since become more conservative; in order to get a loan you need proof of your income and you need to have a deposit. Politicians are now attacking the banks for not lending enough: the custodians of capital are much more careful about where they use their money, and this is going to be very awkward for the economy. Looking in particular to the British governments reaction, the measures it is going to take have few precedents in the latter half of the last century: a budget which focuses on cutting 82 billion pounds in this legislature possibly before 2015. The fear is to fall in the same situation Greece and Ireland are experiencing, but many economists worry that this excessive austerity could lead to recession. The governments plan is to cut on an average of 19% the public expenditure. The outlook is a reduction of 500,000 jobs in the public sector, the rise of the pensionable age, the trim of credit allowances for well-off families, the incentive for the unemployed to find a job. The effect of this will downsize the British welfare, which would be intolerable to sustain. As a consequence many economists think that, since many families are going to experience a reduction in their income, these will bear on the consumption. Data from September 2010 show that British people have drastically reduced their spending, aware that they will need to save more. New banking regulations are being introduced at different speeds in the main economies. UK is among the quickest countries introducing bank levy, while crucial changes are being demanded by international banking regulators (based in Basle), which require banks to hold more capital in orde r to prevent losses, increase transparency and defer bonuses. Nowadays two key issues remain to be addressed: first the structure of banking-especially investment banking-and secondly international cooperation: the 2007-2008 crisis was an international one. Even those European banks which did not have any direct exposure to the US sub-prime mortgage crisis were caught-up in its effects on the global financing market; there is a need to coordinate policy, both macro and regulatory. Conclusion To sum up, both the government and the bankers contributed to create a speculative financial system which worked as a framework for the crisis. This was the result of human action and inaction: lack of control, regulation and severe parameters to follow ended up creating a bubble that burst as the overall system allowed it to happen. On one hand the government insisted on pervasive permissiveness, inducing banks to give loans to everyone, in order to make the economy work well; on the other bankers wanted to get the highest possible profits, hiding the bundles of debt and contributing for instance to confusing rating agencies. Firms and investors blindly relied on them as their arbiters of risk. As a consequence these agencies helped the market soar and then fall down. Without their active partecipation, the market for mortgages could not have been what it became. Bankers also ignored and failed to question, manage and understand the evolving risks in the system. There were warning signs of the crisis, despite many people said that it was unpredictable, but they were ignored and discounted: financial institutions made, bought, and sold mortgage securities they never did care to examine, or knew to be defective. Last but not least, ordinary people played their crucial role, integral to the consumer society. Since we love to own all the products we like, which make our life easier and give us satisfaction, many investors borrowed money without a clear limit in mind, consciousness about not being able to pay back the whole loan, or part of it; in this way we contributed to the spread of the risk and to the worsening of the situation.