Blog: June 2016

What are some internal forces that affect Juliet at the end of Romeo and Juliet?

Toward the end of the play, Juliet is affected by her desperation. It drives her to visit Friar Lawrence to ask for his help, and to consider suicide a better option than marrying Paris. Her desperation to remain faithful to Romeo overwhelms her fear of faking her own death with the friar's concoction.

Moreover, a sense of righteousness in her purpose affects Juliet who has, so far, been relatively obedient to her parents, and renders...

Moreover, a sense of righteousness in her purpose affects Juliet who has, so far, been relatively obedient to her parents, and renders her capable of defying and deceiving them. Returned from the friar's cell, she tells her father, "Henceforward, I am ever ruled by you" (4.2.23). We know this to be a lie, and Lord Capulet believes it.

Likewise, Juliet is affected by her fear. After her mother and nurse have left her for the night, she says that she feels "a faint cold fear [that] thrills through [her] veins" (4.3.16). She worries that the potion will not work or that it is really a poison that will kill her. She fears what it will be like to wake up in the vault with all her dead ancestors, or that she will wake up early and be trapped there without air so that she dies entombed. However, her courage and desperation spur her onward.

In the end, Juliet's sense of commitment and her faithfulness to Romeo affect her, compelling her to take her own life rather than live without him.

How did Stalin, Churchill, and Truman contribute to the development of the cold war?

Towards the end of World War II, Stalin was already putting in place measures for a communist takeover. On the other hand, Churchill sought the survival of the British Empire and the territory’s supremacy. The United States under Roosevelt and later Truman was focused on economic supremacy and the establishment of global institutions to foster world peace. Supremacy struggles between the three strong groups led to conflicts emanating from underhanded deals among the powers.

After...

After the war, Stalin strengthened the Soviet Union’s foothold in Eastern and Central Europe. The United States and Western powers secured Western Europe. The United States later bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but Truman prevented Soviet forays in Japan. The situation deteriorated when the Stalin and Truman administrations prepared for a supremacy war due to what seemed to be an expansionist agenda. In addition, Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” speech supported an Anglo-American coalition to face the Soviets. Grandstanding by the different leaders eventually led to the Cold War.

Stalin was stronger at the outset with control of Eastern and Central Europe. However, the Containment policy and the Truman Doctrine eventually forced an end to the war.

What are two quotes that have to do with the setting of Shoeless Joe by W. P. Kinsella?

As the book starts, the narrator, Ray, is sitting in a field that he describes in the following way: "In reality, all anyone else could see out there in front of me was a tattered lawn of mostly dandelions and quack grass that petered out at the edge of a cornfield perhaps fifty yards from the house" (pages 3-4). The setting of the story is a field of crabgrass near a cornfield in Iowa. It...

Later, Ray describes the field he builds:

"Home plate was made from pieces of cracked two-by-four embedded in the earth. The pitcher's rubber looked like a cradle when I stood on it. The bases were stray blocks of wood, unanchored. There was no backstop or grandstand, only one shaky bleacher beyond the left-field wall" (page 8).

The description that the author creates of the field shows that it is not only unremarkable, but downright shabby. There is nothing magical about the setting of the story or the field that Ray constructs. The setting helps the reader understand that the magic of the story comes from the appearance of the reincarnated baseball players on a humdrum field in Iowa.

Which of the four reasons were the most significant for American involvement in WWI?

America joined the war for four main reasons:

1. German unrestricted submarine warfare was sinking American neutral vessels that were trading the Britain and France. America almost joined the war over the loss of 128 American lives when a German U-boat sank the Lusitania in 1915. Germany was forced to back away from its policy of sinking all vessels in British waters, but by 1917 Germany resumed this practice in order to try to win...

America joined the war for four main reasons:

2. The Zimmerman note, which was a secret deal between the German Empire and Mexico that would mean Mexico declaring war on America long enough to distract the United States from the larger war in Europe. Germany pledged support, and after the war Mexico would receive the lands lost during the Mexican War fought against America from 1846-1848. While the German government in Berlin was probably never aware of Ambassador Zimmerman's plan to make Mexico a nominal Central Power ally, British intelligence delivered the note to Washington, and furthered the idea that Germany could not be trusted.

3. American war loans to the Allies would be in danger of not being paid back if the Allies lost the war. Millions of dollars of aid in the form of loans and weapons sales were going to the Allied Powers well before 1917. Germany appeared close to victory in late 1916 and early 1917, with Russia reeling in the East and the French military having mutinies on the Western Front. Something had to be done to ensure that America's financiers received their money back with interest.

4. Allied propaganda ensured that only one side of the story of the war was told. Early in the war, the British cut the German telegraph cable to America. From that point, the British ensured that only Allied war news was spread. When Germany invaded Belgium, Americans heard of Germans attacking and enslaving civilians, when in reality this practice was not as widespread as reported.

Who is "their" when it says, "Their behavoir connected to Fitzgerald's commentary on the American Dream"?

You would need to confirm with your teacher or whomever assigned the original question, but it is most likely referring to Gatsby and Nick. These are two characters who, despite seemingly having everything and doing what society expected of them, were not fulfilled and did not earn their individual "American Dream" at the end of the novel.

Gatsby rises from the child of poor farmers in the midwest to a man everyone recognizes in New...

Gatsby rises from the child of poor farmers in the midwest to a man everyone recognizes in New York City. He throws extravagant parties and has an excessive amount of money, but none of that is enough to get him what he truly desires. On the surface, that desire seems to be Daisy, but as the novel progresses, the reader realizes that Daisy is more than just a woman to Gatsby: she represents youth and beauty and everything he couldn't have when he was poor. At the end of the novel, he loses Daisy and his life when he's forced to confront the idea that Daisy cannot be everything he needs and wants her to be. He dies still clinging to the idea of Daisy and the false illusion that she loves him.

Nick, the narrator, is different in that he is clearly disillusioned with the idea of the American Dream at the end of the novel. He sees Tom and Daisy for what they are, reckless human beings, and retreats back to the midwest, where morality hasn't loosened so much. He must rethink his American Dream and what it means to be happy altogether, because he isn't willing to give up his humanity to be like Tom and Daisy.

What was one key event from the 1850s that escalated tensions between the North and South? How did the push for western expansion impact this event?

One event from the 1850s that heightened tensions between the North and the South was the raid by the abolitionist John Brown on the federal armory at Harpers Ferry, which was then in the state of Virginia. This raid helped increase tensions because the North and South reacted to it in different ways.

In this raid, Brown and his followers took control of the federal armory. Their plan, such was it was, was to give...

In this raid, Brown and his followers took control of the federal armory. Their plan, such was it was, was to give out weapons to the slaves who, they were sure, would flock to them. These slaves would then carry out an armed rebellion. Brown and his people were defeated and Brown was later executed.

The “argument” on the part of the North (or at least on the part of many Northerners) was that John Brown was a hero. Northerners saw Brown as a martyr for his cause. They felt that he was a courageous man who had stood up for what he believed in. This infuriated the South. Their “argument” was that Brown was a killer who was breaking the law in an attempt to get the slaves to rise up and kill the people of the South. They hated the idea that the North would lionize a man who wanted to cause the massacre of Southern whites. In this way, the debate between the two sides was not really about the raid, but about how people should perceive Brown.

Westward expansion did not have a great impact on this event. It happened in Virginia, not in any western area. However, expansion did have one impact. Westward expansion brought about the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the violence of “Bleeding Kansas.” John Brown was part of that violence. He helped lead anti-slavery fighters in Kansas and was involved in an incident now known as the “Pottawatomie Massacre,” in which five pro-slavery men were killed in cold blood. Although Brown was already an abolitionist, we could argue that westward expansion helped to radicalize him and make him more likely to carry out such an extreme act as his raid on Harpers Ferry.

In "The Bone People" by Keri Hulme, why does Joe think Kerewin's sun-eater is grotesque?

In the book, Joe thinks that Kerewin's sun-eater is grotesque because it appears to be an eerie contraption that operates without batteries or any electricity.

Joe finds Kerewin's sun-eater disconcerting. Kerewin's sun-eater is basically a contraption consisting of a mirror (to catch the rays of the sun), a crystal (to which is attached copper wires), and two magnets. During the day, the crystal oscillates, seemingly of its own volition. Although the text doesn't state what kind of crystal Kerewin uses in her gadget, some watch manufacturers today use quartz crystals as oscillators to keep accurate time in their watches. The quartz crystal has what is called piezoelectric qualities: it produces an electrical potential if mechanical stress is placed on it. For example, squeezing the crystal is a form of mechanical stress.

However, where Kerewin's contraption is concerned, it's not immediately apparent to Joe how the crystal is oscillating. He's a little uncomfortable with what he considers Kerewin's presumption; she believes that her prized gadget purrs "nicely along eating sunlight." Being Maori, Joe very likely knows about Maui, the legendary Maori hero who long ago managed to capture the sunlight by ensnaring it in a flax rope net and beating it with an enchanted jawbone. So, the phrase "eating sunlight" has a spiritual, otherworldly connotation to it which makes Joe uncomfortable.

Meanwhile, Kerewin informs Joe that she's made other sun-eaters and that one works only if it's been touched by human hands (and happy ones at that). Hearing all of this only makes Joe uncomfortable; to him, Kerewin's sun-eaters are grotesque contraptions. Perhaps he fears that Kerewin may be meddling with unknown supernatural forces she has no ability to control.

What are five benefits and five shortcomings of oral storytelling and written storytelling?

This is such an interesting question! Let's see if we can think through five advantages and five disadvantages for these two vital forms of storytelling.

First, when we tell a story, as opposed to offering it in writing, we are able to adjust to our audience in our style, a disadvantage for the written story. We will tell a story to a young child in a very different manner than we would to an adult. We might make the story shorter, eliminate some racy aspect of it, and choose simpler vocabulary. This is a distinct advantage over words that are "frozen" on the page, thus conferring a disadvantage upon the written word, since the written word cannot be changed on the spot.

Second, when we tell a story, this allows us a physical intimacy and immediacy that are not gained with a written story. The act of reading is by its nature a solitary act, while storytelling is a social act. Even for reading aloud, the reader's eyes must drop down to do the reading, a barrier between the reader and the audience. Oral storytelling, even if the audience does not speak, creates a kind of dialogue between audience and reader that is personal and here and now.

Third, oral storytelling is evanescent, while the written story persists in a form that can last for thousands of years and can travel around the world. We are still reading stories from the ancient Romans and Greeks, for example, and routinely read stories from all over the world. In fact, if we ever get to Mars, we can take our written stories with us! The written word has a powerful advantage this way, while the story told disappears.

Fourth, because of the fleeting nature of the spoken word and the enduring nature of the written one, people can make meaning more easily of the written word than the spoken one. Listening to a story is a very different kind of act from reading a story. I hear a sentence and the words are gone. Someone next to me laughs, and I miss the words. I hear something I like, but I cannot focus on it for an extra second because more words are coming. But I can read at my own pace, slowly or quickly or somewhere in between. I can read a passage more than once. I can go back and check on the name of a character. I can even cheat and see what the ending of the story is. As I have these freedoms, the story can be far more meaningful to me than a story I have heard. I am able to take the time to make connections with other stories I have read or with events in my own life. The written story is able to resonate in a way that the story told aloud simply cannot.

Fifth, a disadvantage to oral storytelling and an advantage to the story told in writing is that the latter has far more utility for someone who seeks to polish writing and reading skills, which everyone should want to do. When we read, we can come to understand far more easily how a story is constructed. When we read, we can learn new words that we can use ourselves. When we read, we expose ourselves to different styles of writing. All of these are helpful as we read more to become better readers and we practice writing. We can emulate a style. We can create a plot line more easily. We come to understand how to show a reader a character or an idea. Some of this might be glimpsed in passing with a story told orally, but it is far less likely.

For thousands of years, we could only tell stories orally. However, once we began to write, oral storytelling was by no means abandoned because, as you can see, it continues to have some powerful advantages. Reading a story has other advantages, which we would never want to give up.

How did Don John spoil the wedding in Much Ado About Nothing and why?

Don John spoiled the wedding because he was bitter and wanted to make his brother look bad. He was the illegitimate brother, you see. Don Pedro was the legitimate brother. Don John wanted to make trouble for his guests. He had nothing against Claudio and Hero personally. Hero's father Leonato was the governor, so ruining the wedding made Don Pedro look very, very bad.

Don John is a bitter and angry person. He embraces this,...

Don John is a bitter and angry person. He embraces this, and decides to take revenge on his brother and be the bad guy. He seems to revel in it.

DON JOHN

...

I cannot hide
what I am: I must be sad when I have cause and smile
at no man's jests, eat when I have stomach and wait
for no man's leisure, sleep when I am drowsy and
tend on no man's business, laugh when I am merry and
claw no man in his humour. (Act 1, Scene 3)

Don John, as the illegitimate son, is not happy. He seeks ways to make other people unhappy. If he can make his brother unhappy, he will be happier.

Don John's plan was cold and calculating. He arranged for Claudio to see Margaret having sexual relations with Borachio and told him it was Hero and another man. Claudio flipped. He believed everything and renounced Hero on their wedding day.

The saddest thing about this is that as bad as Don John's actions are, Claudio's are also horrid. Claudio waits until the wedding, then refuses to marry Hero. Leonato demands proof that his daughter was unfaithful.

LEONATO

What do you mean, my lord?
CLAUDIO

Not to be married,
Not to knit my soul to an approved wanton.
LEONATO

Dear my lord, if you, in your own proof,
Have vanquish'd the resistance of her youth,
And made defeat of her virginity,-- (Act 4, Scene 1)

The truth is, Claudio has no real proof, because there is none. He did not see what he thought he saw. His word is enough though, to ruin Hero's reputation. Hero faints and they tell everyone she is dead. Don John has ruined the wedding, and he and Don John have destroyed Hero's good name.

What was the purpose and message of Smith's novel On Beauty? What was the novel's audience?

Zadie Smith is an English novelist with a Jamaican mother and English father, who was raised in London, graduated from Cambridge University, held a post-graduate fellowship at Harvard, and has since become a tenured professor at New York University.

On Beauty is an academic novel, resembling closely works such as Byatt's Possession, David Lodge's "Campus Trilogy," and Jane Smiley's Moo. The primary audience for academic novels is often professors and graduate students, as people often enjoy books about familiar settings. The writer's own ethnicity and the issues of race in this novel create a second, broader audience of people who are interested in race and how ethnic issues affect our perceptions of art.

As this novel has much in common with the author's own life in the way it addresses the issues of people of mixed ethnic ancestry and the clash of different classes and races within an elite academic setting, part of its purpose may be for the author to express or work through her own experiences and personal issues. The characters who have non-white or non-elite backgrounds struggle with their own sense of authenticity in this elite white academic environment. The message of the novel is that racial and class origins matter even when people appear to have succeeded in elite white environments.

How did the "yellow press" contribute to American attitudes towards Spanish rule in Cuba?

The “yellow press” contributed to American attitudes towards Spanish rule in Cuba by making Spanish rule seem cruel and despicable. As Americans read the yellow press, some historians say, they became more inclined to want to go to war with Spain.

The term “yellow press” is used to refer to newspapers in the United States near the end of the 19th century which were more interested in selling papers than in telling the truth. These...

The term “yellow press” is used to refer to newspapers in the United States near the end of the 19th century which were more interested in selling papers than in telling the truth. These newspapers were willing to bend the truth, sensationalizing various events to make them seem more exciting and more lurid. If the papers could do this, they could expand their sales because people were always interested in a sensational story.

When the Cubans started to rebel against Spanish rule, some of the yellow press decided that this was a good cause for them to take up. They proceeded to start writing articles that played up Spanish misdeeds that really did exist and even to make up events that never actually occurred. For example, the yellow press paid a great deal of attention to the concentration camps set up by the Spanish leader in Cuba, General Weyler. They published illustrations of skeletal children supposedly starving to death in the camps. They gave Weyler the nickname “Butcher.” Perhaps the most infamous example came when Spanish agents searched three Cuban women on board an American ship in Havana harbor because they suspected the women might be carrying messages for the rebels. The yellow press decried the alleged mistreatment of the women and published this illustration, in which a young woman is being strip searched by a group of men. This never happened, but the yellow press was happy to claim that it did.

By printing stories and illustrations such as these, the yellow press contributed to American attitudes towards Spanish rule in Cuba. The yellow press’s exaggerations helped stir up anger in the US that eventually led to war.

Is there any merit to cultivating debt in our society? It is often said that debt might enhance your consumption standard today but will...

There is no question that there is a great deal of truth to that statement, for certain kinds of debt in particular. Historically, this has not been true for the kinds of debts you use as examples, though. That picture is changing now, so while there can still be merit to incurring these kinds of debt, I think more caution is needed when making that decision. Let's look at different kinds of debt.

If you want the latest television and do not have cash in hand to pay for it, purchasing it on credit means you are harming your present and future consumption. By the time you get done paying for the television, you could probably have purchased it two times over, at the very least. This means that there is no merit to having decided to incur this debt. When you paying at least twice as much as you need to, you are tying up your money for no purpose but to satisfy your own impatience to have a consumer good.

However, when we incur mortgage or student loan debt, we have traditionally done so as an investment, betting what used to be a fairly sure thing on the value of the property exceeding what we are paying for it and on the value of an education doing so as well. We are getting into debt based upon the premise that we will be able to rely upon this increase in value to increase future consumption. A paid off house has financed retirements, second homes, travel, illnesses, and college educations, in addition to having provided shelter, stability, and significant tax advantages along the way. A college degree has historically provided for substantially higher earnings than a high school diploma, which allows the graduate plenty of consumption in the future.

In today's world, in which the housing bubble in the United States has burst and in which college tuition has become astronomically high, more thought and care must go into a decision whether or not to incur this kind of debt, not only for the purposes of the possibility of future consumption, but also for the purpose of taking care not to own a house the value of which becomes less than the debt and actually be losing money or taking care not to incur student loans that exceed one's ability to pay them while trying to live even modestly. If it takes you ten years to clear your student debt and in the meantime you have a job that you didn't even need a degree for and cannot afford a house or a car, this has no merit, certainly. Choose wisely, for example, a more modest home in a growing community or two years at a community college followed by two years at a state university. Both can still be wonderful investments for one's future.

Depending on one's choice in home or college, it can still be true that there is merit in incurring debt for either, but incurring debt for consumer goods such as televisions is always the path to limiting oneself financially later on.

According to Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond, how do our assumptions about the transition from hunter gatherers to farming differ from...

The answer to this question can be found in Chapter 5 of Guns, Germs, and Steel. There, Diamond discusses a number of ways in which this transition differed from our assumptions.

First, Diamond says that farming would not necessarily have been better than hunting and gathering. We tend to assume that farming is much easier than hunting and gathering, but that is because few of us farm, and even our farmers do not have lives as hard as early farmers would have. Diamond says (on p. 104 and 105) that “most peasant farmers and herders … aren't necessarily better off than hunter-gatherers.” This goes against our assumptions.

Second, Diamond says (on p. 105) that we assume that farming was discovered or invented all at once. We believe that people figured out how to farm and decided to do so. According to Diamond, this is incorrect. Instead, hunter gatherers gradually did new things that slowly evolved to the point where they found themselves farming. They did not consciously decide to start farming and they did not transition to farming all at once. It was a slow evolution that they probably did not really even notice all that much.

Third, on p. 106, Diamond says that we assume that there is “necessarily a sharp divide between nomadic hunter-gatherers and sedentary food producers.” Again, Diamond says this is not true. Instead, he argues that many societies are or have been hybrids. There have been sedentary hunter gatherers and there have been nomadic farmers. These are not clear cut boxes that we can put societies into. Instead, there can be many different economic systems with various mixes of farming and hunting and gathering.

In these ways, Diamond says, the transition to farming did not really happen in the way that we think it did.

In the essay, "Straw Into Gold: The Metamorphosis of the Everyday," Cisneros used an analogy to the fairy tale Rumpelstiltskin...

Cisneros' technique is similar to Morrison's in the sense that both are references to fairy tales, where the main protagonists are women who manage to transcend adversity and misfortune.

In Cisneros' essay, the title references the story of Rumpelstiltskin, where a miller's daughter (with the help of an imp named Rumpelstiltskin) manages to transform straw into gold and eventually marry the king. Cisneros uses the "straw into gold" analogy to highlight how she has blossomed from an awkward child into a successful and empowered woman. Her thesis is that every woman has the potential to succeed, regardless of her current challenges. In this, her analogy is similar to Morrison's, who argues that all women have the power to take hold of opportunities and to realize their ambitions.

In Morrison's essay, the writer references the story of Cinderella and her step-sisters to argue that it is the province of every successful woman to ensure her fellow sisters' self-determination and empowerment; essentially women should refrain from masculine competitiveness and aim to foster the inherent, nurturing tendencies of their feminine nature. Morrison asserts that she is "alarmed by the violence that women do to each other: professional violence, competitive violence, emotional violence...the willingness of women to enslave other women."

Morrison's technique is different from Cisneros' in the sense that Morrison focuses not just on women transcending adversity, but also on feminine violence against their same-sex counterparts. Morrison's essay highlights what women decide to subject their peers to when they are in a position of power, while Cisneros largely concentrates on women transcending traditional norms and societal expectations.

What is the conflict and how is it resolved in The Call of the Wild by Jack London?

There are several conflicts in the book, but the main conflict is that Buck is kidnapped and held against his will. It is resolved when he is rescued by John Thornton. When John Thornton dies, Buck eventually joins the wild.

At the judge’s home, Buck lived a life of luxury. He was very happy because he had everything he needed and was never mistreated. He was not really a working dog. He sometimes accompanied the...

At the judge’s home, Buck lived a life of luxury. He was very happy because he had everything he needed and was never mistreated. He was not really a working dog. He sometimes accompanied the judge’s kids hunting, but that was it. Then one day one of the judge’s employees walked him off, and he never saw home again.

Buck was mistreated by most of the people he met. These were various character vs. character conflicts. Buck vs. Manuel (his kidnapper) was one conflict. Buck vs. the man in the red sweater, who broke him, was another. Buck vs. Perrault and François, the sled team drivers, was the next. Buck’s worst conflict was with the incompetent group of sled drivers that consisted of Mercedes, Hal, and Charles. With them he met neglect and abuse. They did not know what they were doing.

In the nature of Arctic travel there was a reason why fourteen dogs should not drag one sled, and that was that one sled could not carry the food for fourteen dogs. But Charles and Hal did not know this. (Ch. 5)

This group nearly got Buck killed, and they did get themselves and the others killed. John Thornton rescued Buck. They were beating Buck for resisting. He was so exhausted he could not continue, and on some level he refused to let these people force him to pull the sled to his own death. The people really had no clue, but Buck had instincts. He was tired and hurt, but he was a strong dog. He was more valuable to John Thornton than the people.

John Thornton stood over Buck, struggling to control himself, too convulsed with rage to speak.

"If you strike that dog again, I'll kill you," he at last managed to say in a choking voice. (Ch. 5)

Ultimately, Buck does end up hearing and answering the call of the wild. He joins the wolves, but only after he loses John Thornton. He loved John Thornton, because he was the only human who ever loved him. In the wild, Buck lives by instinct.

What lesson can we learn from Helen Keller's openness to whatever life has to offer her and how can we incorporate the same in our life?

Helen Keller faced many challenges in her life. She was deaf and blind, and for several years she could not communicate effectively. After she learned to communicate using the manual alphabet, Helen was still not satisfied. She wanted to learn how to speak. She attended a special program for this purpose. Helen wished to broaden her horizons because she thought, "one who is entirely dependent on the manual alphabet has always a sense of restraint,...

Shortly after Helen learned to speak, she was accused of plagiarism because of a short story she wrote. This accusation left a deep impact on her. She lost her confidence as a writer for a while. Helen also faced other challenges. Her father passed away, and she lost dear friends. Despite these challenges, Helen did not give up. She worked hard, even graduating from college with honors.

There are many lessons to be learned from Helen Keller. One lesson is to never give up. Others can use this lesson in their lives by persevering, even when there are challenges. Another lesson is to work hard, which Helen did to learn how to speak and earn a degree. Helen also saw the good in situations, even when they were difficult. Others can benefit from looking for the positive aspects of their own lives.

Why does Athena favor Odysseus in Book 1 of the Odyssey?

There is not a point in Homer's epic The Odyssey in which the mighty Zeus's daughter, Athena, states the reason or reasons for her determined efforts on Odysseus's behalf. Throughout The Odyssey, Athena champions Odysseus's cause--his return home to his wife and son--and thwarts Poseidon's equally determined efforts at sabotaging the mortal hero of the Trojan War's journey home. What can logically be surmised, however, is that Athena greatly loves and respects Odysseus, and ample evidence of this affection is offered at the outset of Book I. Early in The Odyssey, Athena appeals to her father, the most powerful of all the gods, for Zeus's support for Odysseus. Note, in the following passages, Athena's obvious devotion to and love for Odysseus:

". . .my heart breaks for Odysseus, that seasoned veteran cursed by fate so long — far from his loved ones still, he suffers torments off on a wave-washed island rising at the center of the seas. . .

"Olympian Zeus, have you no care for him in your lofty heart? Did he never win your favor with sacrifices burned beside the ships on the broad plain of Troy? Why, Zeus, why so dead set against Odysseus?"

As Zeus responds to his beloved daughter's entreaties on Odysseus's behalf, he rejects any notion of hostility towards the mortal hero of the Trojan War. On the contrary, he professes a certain fondness for Odysseus--a fondness evident in his willingness to allow Athena to battle Poseidon's efforts at denying Odysseus the latter's goal, to return home to Penelope and Telemachus.

As noted, Athena's interest in Odysseus's welfare is pervasive throughout Homer's story. She respects Odysseus, and gives every indication of loving him. She does not say outright why she wants to help him, but her words are so filled with admiration for Odysseus that one can easily conclude that aids him in his voyage because she loves him.

In God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater by Kurt Vonnegut, what negative roles does Eliot's family play?

Looking closely at both Eliot and Sylvia, one can easily see the negative roles that they play. In the case of Eliot (the protagonist), while he puts on a front of positive roles (humanitarian, husband, and millionaire), he simultaneously plays the negative roles of alcoholic, mental health patient and father of over fifty illegitimate children. Eliot is constantly drunk on “Rosewater Golden Lager Ambrosia Beer” as well as the well-known Southern Comfort. Eliot is “certifiably insane,” hence his negative role as a mental health patient. He seems to be wandering aimlessly through life, the main subject of Vonnegut’s satire. Eliot refers to his mentally ill self as an “aimless fool” as he gives away his money through the Rosewater Foundation. Eliot also plays the role of "father" to over fifty children. This fatherhood is truly a role Eliot plays in that it is not real. Eliot is essentially a eunuch and not sexually active. The children serve to assure the continuation of Eliot’s humanitarianism. Eliot’s “fatherhood” proves that he has his own reality and is, in fact, insane. Sylvia Du Vrais Zetterling Rosewater, Eliot’s wife, first tries to play the role of doting wife in order to secure Eliot’s money, but eventually merges into the role of bitter divorcee. Sylvia continually refers to the people Eliot tries to help as “useless” and is eventually “diagnosed” with “Samaritrophia . . . hysterical indifference to the troubles of those less fortunate than oneself.”

What was the behavior of the hungry prisoners in Night?

Photographs and newsreel footage detailing the liberation of the Nazi concentration camps at the end of World War II reveal scores of skeletal looking human beings who were systematically starved to death. The prisoners, among them Elie and his father, were given just enough rations, usually only soup and bread, to allow them to sustain enough energy to work. Obviously, in many cases the prisoners would do almost anything to attain extra rations. One particularly brutal scene comes in section seven as the train carries the Jews from Gleiwitz to Buchenwald. The German civilians are throwing pieces of bread into the train cars in order to watch the men tear each other apart to grab a morsel. Even a son falls upon his father just to get the bread from his hands:

He collapsed. His fist was still clenched around a small piece. He tried to carry it to his mouth. But the other one threw himself upon him and snatched it. The old man again whispered something, let out a rattle, and died amid the general indifference. His son searched him, took the bread, and began to devour it. He was not able to get very far. Two men hurled themselves upon him. Others joined in. When they withdrew, next to me were two corpses, side by side, the father and the son.

This scene most certainly played itself out more frequently than not as the Germans carried out their mass extermination. Otherwise civilized men were reduced to beasts in order to simply provide enough nourishment to keep themselves alive. At the end of the book, Elie reveals that after a year in the camps he had been reduced to looking like a "corpse."

Why does the crowd kill Cinna the Poet in Act III of Julius Caesar? What is Shakespeare saying about the Roman public?

The crowd mistakes Cinna the poet for Cinna the conspirator, which shows the Romans are whipped into a frenzy and not really paying attention to details at that point.

There was a conspirator named Cinna. Unfortunately, poor Cinna the poet is mistaken for this other Cinna after Mark Antony turns the Roman citizens into an angry mob with his funeral speech. He stirs up anger and resentment toward the conspirators. By calling Brutus and the conspirators honorable men in one breath and calling them murderers in another, Antony tells the crowd he does not want mutiny while basically telling them to mutiny.

Show you sweet Caesar's wounds, poor poor dumb mouths,
And bid them speak for me: but were I Brutus,
And Brutus Antony, there were an Antony
Would ruffle up your spirits and put a tongue
In every wound of Caesar that should move
The stones of Rome to rise and mutiny (Act III, Scene 2).

After the speech, a group accosts Cinna the poet on the street and begins to interrogate him. He is confused because he was just innocently walking along. They ask him his name and where he is going. Although he tells them he is not a conspirator, they decide to kill him anyway.

CINNA THE POET

Truly, my name is Cinna.

First Citizen

Tear him to pieces; he's a conspirator.

CINNA THE POET

I am Cinna the poet, I am Cinna the poet.

Fourth Citizen

Tear him for his bad verses, tear him for his bad verses (Act III, Scene 3).

They want to kill Cinna when they think he is a conspirator. When they find out he is not, they want to kill him anyway; they are in such a frenzy that they just want an excuse to kill anyone. There is no reason to kill a poet for bad poetry. This crowd probably hasn’t even read his poetry. They are just out for blood.

Shakespeare's point about the people of Ancient Rome is that they are so stirred up by this point that they are bloodthirsty. This is why they kill an innocent man. They are a weapon and Antony loaded and pointed them. He understands that the people of Ancient Rome are a little wild sometimes.

In the novel The Bronze Bow, was Amalek, the owner of Daniel, mean to him?

Yes.Daniel specifically runs away from Amalek to join Rosh's band in the mountains because of Amalek's harsh treatment. Daniel risked his life and nearly died running away from Amalek, which gives the reader an insight into how badly Amalek treated Daniel.In Chapter 1, Daniel introduces himself to Joel and Malthace, who are hiking up the mountain during their holiday break. Initially, Joel does not recognize Daniel. After Daniel tells Joel his full name,...

Yes. Daniel specifically runs away from Amalek to join Rosh's band in the mountains because of Amalek's harsh treatment. Daniel risked his life and nearly died running away from Amalek, which gives the reader an insight into how badly Amalek treated Daniel. In Chapter 1, Daniel introduces himself to Joel and Malthace, who are hiking up the mountain during their holiday break. Initially, Joel does not recognize Daniel. After Daniel tells Joel his full name, Joel remembers who he is and says,

"The apprentice who ran away from the blacksmith?...No one blamed you...Everyone knows how Amalek treats his boys" (Speare 4).

Daniel then tells Joel to give a message to Simon, another boy who worked under Amalek, explaining that he joined Rosh's band in the mountains. When Joel and Malthace leave, Daniel wishes that he could go back to the village but fears being enslaved to Amalek again. In the next chapter, Simon visits Daniel and tells him that he can come back to the village because Amalek is dead. Daniel is relieved to find out that his bond has expired because Amalek died without a relative to his name.

Use the force field to find the work done on a particle.

The work done by the force field in moving the particle along a path is a circulation, or line integral, of this force field around the path. The circulation is defined as

`W = int_C vecF* dvecs` .

The expression under the integral is the scalar product of the force field and the vector `dvecs` , which is tangent to the line.

The given force field has only a y-component, so the line integral of this force field on the horizontal pieces of the given path (`C_1` and `C_3` ) will be zero. (The scalar product of two perpendicular vectors is zero.)

So the work of the given force field will be

`W = int_ (C_2) vecF*dvecs + int_(C_4) vecF*dvecs` .

Since `C_2`

is vertical and is traversed upward, for `C_2`

`dvecs = dvecy` . Since `C_4` is vertical and is traversed downward, for `C_4` `dvecs =-dvecy` .

The scalar product of the unit vector `vecj`

and `dvecy`

is `vecj*dvecy = dy`

because they are parallel.

Therefore, the integral for work above becomes

`W = int_(C_2) (-(x + 2y^2))dy + int_(C_4) (-(x + 2y^2))(-dy)`

To evaluate these integrals, consider their boundaries. The curve `C_2`

is the segment of straight vertical line with the equation x =3, bounded by the y-values y = -1 and y = 1. The curve `C_4`

is the segment of straight vertical line with the equation x = 1, bounded by the y-values y = -1 and y = 1. So, after the integrals with respect to y are taken, x = 3 can be plugged in the first resultant function, and x = 1 in the second resultant function:

`W = -xy|_(3, -1) ^(((3, 1))) -2y^3/3 |_(-1) ^ 1 + xy |_(1, -1) ^(((1, 1))) + 2y^3/3 |_(-1) ^ 1 = -3*2 +1*2 = -4`

(In the first and third expression, (3, 1) and (1, 1) should be in parentheses but the math editor is refusing to display them.)

The work performed by the given force field in moving a particle around the given path is -4.

This result can also be obtained by using Green's theorem. It states that the circulation of the force field around a closed path can be related to the area enclosed by the path:

`int_C (Pdx + Qdy) = int int ((dQ)/(dx) - (dP)/(dy)) dA` .

Here, `P = F_x`

and `Q = F_y`

For the given force field, P = 0 and `Q = -(x + 2y^2)`

so `(dQ)/(dx) = -1`

This means the surface integral equals negative area of the region enclosed by the given path. This region is the square with the side 2, so its area is 4. Thus, the surface integral equals -4, which is consistent with the result for circulation obtained previously.

What is the difference between being innocent and being found not guilty?

When a person is accused and tried for a crime, the prosecution, the state, must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused's actions have met all the requisite elements of the crime for a finding of guilt, generally that a crime has actually been committed by the accused and that the accused had the requisite intent. When a person is found "not guilty," this means that the requisite elements have not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard in the United States in a criminal trial. This does not mean the person did not commit the crime. It means there is insufficient evidence in some way, perhaps no physical evidence to connect the defendant to the crime or no means of establishing intent, for example, some sort of reasonable doubt. But a finding of "not guilty" does not necessarily imply innocence. A judge or a jury is in no position to judge that a person is innocent of a crime because the evidence presented by the defense need not prove that at all. The burden is on the state to prove that a defendant did commit the crime. There is no burden on the defense to prove that the defendant did not commit the crime. The finding of "not guilty" speaks only to the evidence presented, not to the fact of innocence or guilt. In Scotland, there is actually a distinction made in criminal trial verdicts such that the verdict may be "not guilty" or "not proven." While I am by no means an expert on Scottish jurisprudence, it is my understanding that "not guilty" is meant to signal something closer to what might be considered innocence, while "not proven" signals that only that the prosecution could not make its case.

Where is the quote in Shelley's Frankenstein when Victor is trapped in a storm and only sees the figure of the creature for a moment before it...

There doesn't seem to be a passage that shows Victor trapped in any storm. The only person trapped in the story is Captain Walton when his ship becomes stuck in ice while heading towards the north pole. In Letter IV, Walton and his crew watch the creature travel across the ice on a sledge pulled by dogs while they are trapped. Walton describes the scene to his sister as follows:

"We watched the rapid progress of the traveller with our telescopes until he was lost among the distant inequalities of the ice. This appearance excited our unqualified wonder. We were, as we believed, many hundred miles from any land; but this apparition seemed to denote that it was not, in reality, so distant as we had supposed" (8).

In this passage, Walton describes the creature as though he were an apparition that moves very quickly. It doesn't use the words "supernatural speed," though.

There is another time when Victor is in a storm and he sees the creature for just a moment, but he is not necessarily trapped. In Chapter 7, Victor heads home to Geneva to be with his family after hearing about William's murder. He is abruptly caught in a storm while going to visit the spot where his brother was killed. The thunder and lightning herald the storm that rapidly falls upon him. It is through lightning that Victor catches glimpses of his monster, which he created two years previous to this encounter. He describes the scene as follows:

"I perceived in the gloom a figure which stole from behind a clump of trees near me; I stood fixed, gazing intently; I could not be mistaken. A flash of lightning illuminated the object, and discovered its shape plainly to me; its gigantic stature, and the deformity of its aspect, more hideous than belongs to humanity, instantly informed me that it was the wretch, the filthy daemon to whom I had given life . . . The figure passed me quickly, and I lost it in the gloom . . . another flash discovered him to be hanging among the rocks of the nearly perpendicular ascent of Mont Saleve. . . He soon reached the summit, and disappeared" (50).

In this passage, Victor doesn't use the words "supernatural speed," but it is apparent that the creature moves just as quickly, because with each flash of lightning Victor finds it at another location on the mountain. Then, in Chapter 10, Victor does use the words "superhuman speed" when the creature approaches him while he is on top of a mountain during a rainstorm. The passage is as follows:

"I suddenly beheld the figure of a man at some distance, advancing towards me with superhuman speed. He bounded over the crevices in the ice, among which I had walked with caution; his stature, also, as he approached, seemed to exceed that of a man. I was troubled: a mist came over my eyes, and I felt a faintness seize me; but I was quickly restored by the cold gale of the mountains" (67-68).

Based on the passages cited, it seems as though these all encompass what is asked for in the above question: someone trapped, a storm, and the creature moving with "superhuman speed." The first passage shows Walton trapped in ice when he sees the creature; the second one shows Victor in a storm when he sees the monster for the first time since he created it; and the third one has Victor in a rainstorm, witnessing the speed of the monster, but it doesn't disappear; rather, Victor mentions its speed with the closest phrase in the book to "supernatural speed," which is actually "superhuman speed."

Why is it important that artists feel as if they can express themselves? What does art say about the culture and society in which we live?

The notion of art as a form of self-expression is relatively recent. For many societies, art is a way of encapsulating and handing down cultural norms, and serves to foster a sense of community rather than individualism. Thus rather than saying that it is important for artists to "express themselves" it might be better to think of this formulation in terms of the second sentence of the question, namely how theories of art that emphasize...

In oral traditional cultures, for example, literary works tend to be anonymous and collaborative with individual bards making gradual and minor adjustments to works they inherit from their predecessors and hand down to their successors. Many forms of architecture and art also are created collectively and meant to express a communal ethos rather than to glorify the individual. Such forms of cultural production suggest a society that values collaboration and tradition over individual ego.

The romantic notion of art as individual expression suggests a society in which community has fractured and the isolated individual is glorified. Rather than works of art being seen as contributing to the common good and expressing shared values, they are seen as a form of self-gratification or a rebellion against existing social norms.

While it is important that artists not be censored, because freedom of expression allows for the important function of social critique and challenging accepted beliefs and ways of thinking, that is different from art simply being a matter of "self-expression" or egotistical self-indulgence.

What characteristics of the upper class have been highlighted in "The Garden Party?"

Mansfield's emphasis on upper class self-indulgence is one of the dominant characteristics in "The Garden Party."

The opening paragraph talks about how the weather could not have been better "if they had ordered it." Such a reference shows the upper class sentiments of the Sheridans. They believe that even the weather should conform to their desire to host the party. The discussions that take place that morning are centered on placement of ornaments and arrangements for the party. Mansfield writes these exchanges with with a tone that underscores their importance for the Sheridans. It is as if the entire weight of the universe is brought to bear regarding the arrangements for their celebration.

Such a tone is enhanced with news of the dead worker. Laura insists that the party has to be cancelled, something that her sister cannot fathom: "... Jose was still more amazed. 'Stop the garden-party? My dear Laura, don't be so absurd. Of course we can't do anything of the kind. Nobody expects us to. Don't be so extravagant." Jose represents the upper class sensibility that places primacy on her wishes over anything else. Even though Laura suggests that the dead man casts a pall over the party, Jose and, later, her mother conclude that nothing should get in the way of their celebration. Jose further this by telling Laura that she cannot "bring a drunken workman back to life by being sentimental." Mansfield shows the wealthy's view the poor. Jose sees the deceased as a "drunken workman." Reflective of the upper class, she refuses to see someone who is poor as capable of being anything more. As a result, the celebration should not stop. Laura's mother is more direct in her view of the poor:

People like that don't expect sacrifices from us. And it's not very sympathetic to spoil everybody's enjoyment as you're doing now.

The upper class are shown to be self-indulgent in "The Garden Party." They get what they want at the cost of everything and everyone else.

What are two reasons that explain how Macbeth is in control of his own life?

Macbeth is in control of his own life because even though he received prophecies, he is the one who chose to act on them.

Macbeth is definitely influenced by others. The witches made prophecies that he would be Thane of Cawdor and king. He could have ignored them, as Banquo did. Instead he chose to tell his wife about them. She then encouraged him to pursue the opportunity, even if it meant killing the king.

When Macbeth found out that Malcolm was named the king’s heir, he was upset. He made a comment in an aside, which reinforces the fact that Macbeth wants to be king no matter what. It demonstrates his anger at being passed over, and his ambitions.

[Aside] The Prince of Cumberland! that is a step On which I must fall down, or else o'erleap, For in my way it lies. Stars, hide your fires; Let not light see my black and deep desires … (Act 1, Scene 4)

Macbeth chose to act on what the witches told him. He did have a hard time making up his mind. His wife was more strongly in favor of the idea. Yet, Macbeth listened to her and chose to follow her lead. When he suggested that it might not work, she told him he just needed to be strong enough.

MACBETH If we should fail?

LADY MACBETH We fail! But screw your courage to the sticking-place, And we'll not fail. (Act 1, Scene 7)

Lady Macbeth was persuasive, but it was Macbeth who eventually made the choice. More importantly, once he was king he stopped listening to anyone. He was the one who chose to kill Banquo and Macduff's family. Once king, he was desperate to remain king.

For the second set of prophecies, Macbeth was convinced that they were unrealistic and contradictory. How could a forest come for him? How could he be not harmed by man born of woman, but still beware Macduff? How could Banquo’s sons be king, if he killed him? He did not kill Fleance, Banquo’s son. Malcolm brought the forest to Macbeth’s door. Macduff turned out to not technically be born of woman. Yet it was Macbeth’s reliance on prophecy that muddled everything and made his reign unsuccessful.

What are some examples of solutions without liquid?

Solution is another name for a homogeneous mixture. A homogeneous mixture is one whose components are evenly distributed throughout the mixture.

A solution is composed of a solute and a solvent. The solute is the substance that is dissolved in the solution. The solvent is the substance that dissolves the solute.

A solution can be composed of solutes and solvents that are solids, liquids, and gases.

Examples of solutions that don't include liquids:

Solution is another name for a homogeneous mixture. A homogeneous mixture is one whose components are evenly distributed throughout the mixture.

A solution is composed of a solute and a solvent. The solute is the substance that is dissolved in the solution. The solvent is the substance that dissolves the solute.

A solution can be composed of solutes and solvents that are solids, liquids, and gases.

Examples of solutions that don't include liquids:

Air: Air is a solution composed of a gas solute and a gas solvent.

Hydrogen and platinum: Hydrogen is a gas solute and platinum is a solid solvent.

Water in air: Water is a liquid solute and air is a gas solvent.

Smog: Smog is composed of solid solute particles in a gas solvent.

Alloys: In an alloy, the solute is a solid metal and the solvent is a solid metal.

Where did Brian shown confidence in the book Hatchet?

Brian shows confidence in coming up with innovative solutions for his survival.

For someone who is young and does not have a ton of survival experience, Brian is actually fairly confident. Many boys in his situation would give up or get discouraged much more easily than he does. Brian has his ups and downs, but generally speaking he is intelligent and innovative, and continues to work hard. He doesn’t let mishaps get him down.

...

Brian shows confidence in coming up with innovative solutions for his survival.

An example of this is his desire to get a better food source. Brian wants to develop a fish spear. He makes a plan and carries it out, confident that he will succeed. It is not successful at first.

He had been so sure, so absolutely certain that it would work the night before. Sitting by the fire he had taken the willow and carefully peeled the bark until he had a straight staff about six feet long and just under an inch thick at the base, the thickest end. (Ch. 12)

Brian has to “invent” a bow and arrow. Again, he is confident that this will work. He doesn’t give up because he is hungry and can’t just go to McDonald’s and order a burger and fries. When one thing doesn’t work, he knows that he will be able to make something else work. He believes in himself.

When Brian misses a search plane, he gets frustrated and feels as if he wants to die. However, he regains his confidence again. He realizes that he is clever, and has come this far. He is confident that he can survive on his own.

He was new. Of course he had made a lot of mistakes. He smiled now, walking up the lake shore after the wolves were gone, thinking of the early mistakes; the mistakes that came before he realized that he had to find new ways to be what he had become. (Ch. 13)

Brian fishes out the survival pack, and its contents are almost superfluous because he has been so successful on his own. However, it has a radio that the search planes use to find Brian. If Brian had not maintained his calm and confidence, mistakes and all, he never would have been found.

Is there a guarantee that had Bob not gone to the West, he would not have turned out to be a criminal?

No, there is no certainty that if Bob had not gone to the West he would not have turned out to be a criminal. The West didn't make him a criminal. He went there because it seemed to offer opportunities for criminal activities. He tells the plainclothes officer who asks if he did well out West: “Bully; it has given me everything I asked it for."

If Jimmy had gone west with Bob, Jimmy would have...

If Jimmy had gone west with Bob, Jimmy would have ended up in some strictly respectable and secure profession. Their characters were already formed by the time that Jimmy was twenty and Bob was eighteen. Bob would have looked for excitement and opportunities to get rich quick in New York if he had stayed in that great, ever-growing metropolis--and no doubt he would have found plenty of both.

Bob characterizes both Jimmy and himself when he says of his old friend, "He was a kind of plodder, though, good fellow as he was." Jimmy is a plodder relative to Bob, who has the character of a gambler. If Bob had stayed in New York, he might have been less successful as a crook because there would have been more competition in every racket. But he would have grown in the same direction, and the friendship between the two men could not have survived. In actuality, it did not survive even when they were separated by a thousand or more miles. Jimmy did not realize that Bob was no longer his friend until he encountered him in the doorway of the drugstore after twenty years. Their friendship might be said to have "gone up in smoke" when Bob lighted his cigar and Jimmy saw his face. In that instant they became "erstwhile friends." Their relationship was based on the fact that they used to be friends. Jimmy couldn't remain a friend of a man like Bob.

What happens in an aqueous solution as the concentration of H3O+ decreases? ...

Each water molecule can form four hydrogen bonds with other water molecules due to its polar nature.

Therefore, a hydrogen atom taking part in a hydrogen bond between two water molecules can shift from one water molecule to the other. When this occurs, it leaves its electron behind. Therefore, the hydrogen ion will be a proton written as H+. The molecule that has lost its proton is called a hydroxide ion with the symbol OH-....

Each water molecule can form four hydrogen bonds with other water molecules due to its polar nature.

The process described above is dissociation of water molecules. However, these molecules can re-form water exists in a state of equilibrium with a neutral pH of 7.

Anytime a substance increases the H+ ion concentration in solution, it is called an acid. A base reduces the H+ ion concentration of a solution. Water is technically both an acid and a base. A shift in the number of H+ ions where they outnumbered the OH- ions would result in a lowered pH and the solution would be acidic. A shift in the number of H+ ions where they were less than the OH- ions would result in an increase in pH.

In a water- based solution at 25 degrees C, the product of H+ ions and OH- ions = 10 -14. Basically, in a neutral solution, there is an equal number of H+ and OH- ions.

The pH of a solution = -log (H+) therefore, in neutral water, the H ion concentration is 10-7 and if one uses the formula above, pH= - (-7)= 7.

The pH scale is written from 1 to 14. Neutral water has a pH of 7 and values below 7 are increasingly stronger acids. Values above 7 and continuing to 14 are increasingly stronger bases.

In a solution, if the number of H30+ ions (also written as H+ ions) decreases, the pH of the solution will increase. There will be a shift toward more OH- negative ions as the H3O + ions decrease.

What are some ways in which the colonizers benefited from imperialism?

There are at least three ways in which colonizers benefited from imperialism. They benefited (or at least could potentially benefit) economically, militarily, and politically.

A major reason for imperialism was economic. Colonizers were industrialized countries that needed sources of raw materials and new markets in which to sell their goods. If they colonized countries that had resources that they needed, they could take those resources for themselves. They could produce finished goods and sell those goods back to the people in their colonies. The colonized people would be a captive market, thus benefiting the colonizers. For these reasons, industrialized countries often wanted to take empires.

A second reason for imperialism was military. Powerful countries wanted to be able to project their military power around the globe. When they took colonies, they could place naval bases in those colonies. If England had, for example, a colony in Yemen, it could use that as a base for naval forces that would protect shipping that went between England and India through the Suez Canal. In order to be more militarily powerful, European countries took colonies.

Finally, colonizers could benefit in political/prestige terms. If a country had a large empire, it would seem much more important to other countries. It would therefore have more political prestige and power. This was another reason to have colonies. In all these ways colonizers benefited, or at least felt that they benefited, from having colonies.

What line of poetry should I use for my descriptive writing assignment?

What you need to find is a poem that paints only part of the painting, so to speak. Then you can feel free to take the prompt further on your own and describe the scene that you imagine, based on the few beginning words that the poet supplies. I have three recommendations. The text of each poem is provided in a link below.

If you pick Robert Frost’s “The Road Not Taken,” you can follow...

If you pick Robert Frost’s “The Road Not Taken,” you can follow the first line, “Two roads diverged in a yellow wood.” How do you see these two roads? Are they at all the same? How are they different? Which one would you be inclined to take, if you had to make the choice? What lies at the end of each road?

If you pick William Wordsworth’s “I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud,” you can describe the field of daffodils that he discovers. Take the lines from the second verse, “They stretched in never-ending line / Along the margin of a bay.” How do you see the daffodils in relationship to the water? Are boats sailing nearby? Are any other people walking nearby? Does anyone else see these 10,000 daffodils besides you? Or is this a special place that only you know about? How would it look in summer, fall, or winter, without the flowers?

If you pick Robert Browning’s “My Last Duchess,” you can describe the painted portrait of the woman. Begin with the first two lines, “That’s my last Duchess painted on the wall, / Looking as if she were alive.” Since she was a Duchess, she was part of royalty. What country is she from? What is she wearing in the portrait? What color is her hair? Is she smiling or frowning? Is she holding anything important? Where is this painting hung? Who sees it on a regular basis?

Ask yourself questions, and let your imagination answer them. Then write down what you see in your mind.

How does John Keats personify autumn in the poem "To Autumn?"

Personification is the attribution of human characteristics to non-human objects. In his poem "To Autumn," English poet John Keats employed the literary device of personification to the autumnal season, as well as to other non-human objects, such as insects.

Right from the start of his poem, in the opening stanza, Keats suggests that the natural phenomena associated with the transition from summer to fall to assumes human characteristics, such as the forming of close relationships:

...

Season of mists and mellow fruitfulness,

Close bosom-friend of the maturing sun;

Conspiring with him how to load and bless . . .

Conspiring is defined as working together; literally, to conspire is “to breathe together” (Oxford English Dictionary). The use of the phrase "close bosom-friend" is clearly an example of personification, as the defining characteristics of the season in question do not actually exist in a human-like relationship with the nearest star. Similarly, in the following passage from the second stanza, Keats again attributes to nature human characteristics, such as in the notion that a season can sit on the floor, or that it has hair:

Who hath not seen thee oft amid thy store?

Sometimes whoever seeks abroad may find

Thee sitting careless on a granary floor,

Thy hair soft-lifted by the winnowing wind;

Finally, in the third and final stanza, "small gnats mourn" and "hedge-crickets sing," suggesting that insects possess human emotions and abilities, while the wind "lives or dies." Keats employs personification throughout "To Autumn." His ode to the transitional season bridging the heat of summer with the cold and desolation of winter is presented entirely in human terms.

Imagery In The Most Dangerous Game

Arguably, the most effective imagery in Connell's "The Most Dangerous Game" is the light/dark imagery that prevails throughout the story.

Rather than contrasting the light and darkness, however, Connell cleverly creates an interplay with the light and dark: The light deceptively lures or attracts rather than providing safety, as is often the case.

In the exposition of the story, as Rainsford is alone on the deck, he thinks to himself, "It's so dark that I...

Arguably, the most effective imagery in Connell's "The Most Dangerous Game" is the light/dark imagery that prevails throughout the story.

In the exposition of the story, as Rainsford is alone on the deck, he thinks to himself, "It's so dark that I could sleep without closing my eyes, the night would be my eyelids--" This observation foreshadows this interplay of light and dark as Rainsford is lured by the lights in this intense darkness.

Yet, at first there is the traditional suggestion of the safety of light in this part of the story. For instance, that Rainsford is in danger when he falls overboard is indicated by "the receding light of the yacht," and also in this description:

[T]he lights of the yacht became faint and ever-vanishing fireflies, then they were blotted out by the night.

After Rainsford finally drags himself onto a shore, he sleeps until late in the afternoon of the next day. Having heard gunfire, Rainsford follows its direction, but darkness is falling:

[B]leak darkness was blacking out the sea and jungle when Rainsford sighted the lights.

Rainsford follows the way to these lights as he thinks of the traditional safety of light, but he soon discovers that they all emanate from one huge structure, a palatial chateau, complete with threatening pointed towers and set upon a cliff on three sides. Still, he is drawn to these lights, the only ones in the darkness, just as the sailors are drawn to the flash of lights leading into the deceptive channel of Zaroff where, like moths drawn to light, the sailors eventually meet death.

The sinister nature of both darkness and light continues throughout most of the narrative. On the first day of the hunt, for example, Rainsford tries to put as much distance as possible between him and the general as he repeatedly doubles back on his trail in order to confuse the hunter. By the time night falls, he is exhausted; so, knowing that it would not make sense to blunder through the dark, Rainsford climbs a tree, taking care not to leave any sign of his having touched this tree. As he rests on one of the thick branches, Rainsford thinks to himself, “...only the devil himself could follow that complicated trail through the jungle after dark.” But, he is wrong, as the general emerges toward morning and stops beneath his tree, lights a cigarette, and then casually departs.

Which allusions and references to other literary works are used in Shakespeare's Hamlet?

A good place to start looking for allusions is in Hamlet's soliloquies. Since Hamlet is characterized as a scholarly young man, his language reflects his education. In his first soliloquy, for instance, in Act 1, Hamlet refers to his deceased father as "Hyperion"--an allusion to the Greek sun god. He compares Gertrude to Niobe, a mother from another Greek myth. At the end of Act 3, Hamlet refers to Nero, the cruel Roman tyrant who...

Let not ever

The soul of Nero enter this firm bosom.

In this case Hamlet is reminding himself not to hurt his mother, not to be like Nero who murdered his.

We can also find allusions in Hamlet's dialogue with other characters. In Act 2, he demonstrates his knowledge of Roman mythology by asking the Player to recite lines from the Aeneid. Major players in the Trojan war are mentioned: Hecuba, Pyrrhus, and Priam. When talking with Polonius, Hamlet mentions Jephthah, an allusion to a story in the Old Testament, in which a father sacrifices his daughter for a military victory.

Ophelia also uses allusions. In Act 4, Ophelia's mad songs and phrases are derived from well known English folk songs.

These are just a few to get you started. An interesting analysis of these allusions might involve looking at what is revealed about the characters through the allusions they use--Hamlet's references to history, literary works, and the bible, or Ophelia's references to folk songs and tales, for instance.

How can I analyze the poem "The Sea Is All Male" by Helen Segal?

Helen Segal is a modern poet from Johannesburg who first published in 1965. Her works have been categorized as "Southern African poetry," but in many of her poems, as in this one, she speaks about personal feelings and experiences. Her poetry has been praised for its technical skill and wit but has also been criticized (in this article) for a lack of clarity in themes and images owing to the introspective nature of the poem's writing.

According to this doctoral thesis, "The Sea is All Male" is primarily a reference to a fellow female poet's suicide by drowning in the ocean. The poem chiefly describes the experience of "some women" in the sea (which appears to be a metaphor for romance or for being dominated by men), why these women feel drawn to it, and how they are consumed by it.

In the poem's first stanza, the speaker asserts that the ocean is masculine, which is why it's both enticing and fatal for women. The ocean is chaotic, and it rejects anything imaginative. The second stanza could be interpreted in many ways due to multiple meanings of the word "consummation," but it's possible that the speaker here is asserting that women seek a kind of union or ultimate experience through romance (or in the sea, in the literal words of the poem). The third stanza emphasizes the link between the actual ocean and its representation as a powerful and forceful lover while describing women's physically intense struggle to swim beneath the waves of the sea. In the final, brief fifth and sixth stanzas, the women stop fighting the sea and float on its surface, tired and peaceful, their hair mixed with seaweed.

Overall, one interpretation of the poem may be that love (or male dominance) is too powerful a force to allow some women the space to find their own "ecstasy" or "heroic consummation." This view may be supported by the poem's many implications that the sea is a representation of maleness, love, and dominance. However, as I mentioned, Segal's poems have been recognized as suffering from blurry themes. We'd have to find an interview with Segal herself to be certain of what her intended meaning was in "The Sea is All Male."

Stylistically, the poem pleases the ear with several instances of alliteration ("secret depths salt-song," "brains and bones blood and brawn," "land-locked lover," "breaking brittle bonds") and pleases the mind's eye with a great deal of imagery ("the heavy waters," "jet to surface," "weedy hair"). Lines in the poem appear in free verse with no regularity or rhyme, suggesting the "reckless order of the sea" which is the poem's subject.

Finally, the poem invites comparisons to other works of literature, such as The Awakening by Kate Chopin (in which a woman also drowned herself in the sea due to her inability to cope with being controlled by men) as well as "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" by T. S. Eliot, which also deals with the failure to find meaning in romance and which also evokes images of the floor of the sea and of seaweed on "combing waves." However, whether Segal intended to allude to works like these is indeterminate; her choices of images and theme may simply be original and universal.

How would I write a sonnet about Friar Laurence from Romeo and Juliet?

I am assuming you will be writing a Shakespearean sonnet, which has 14 lines with 10 syllables for each line. The rhyming scheme must be "abab-cdcd-efef-gg": in other words, the first and third, second and fourth, fifth and seventh lines, etc. must rhyme, as must the last two lines. With these structural concerns out of the way, let us look at Friar Laurence as a character. As a holy man, he is an important confidant for both Romeo and Juliet. He takes an active and sincere interest in both of their lives, chiding Romeo for his lovelorn nature and commiserating with Juliet upon Romeo's banishment. He agrees to marry the two lovers because he hopes that their marriage will bring about a truce between their two feuding families. Once Juliet's engagement to Paris is determined by Lord Capulet, he concocts a scheme to get her out of it, and to reunite the couple. While this scheme is obviously a bit farfetched, dependent on a number of factors for success, the fact remains that he undertakes it in the interest of Romeo and Juliet themselves. So a sonnet about Friar Laurence should include a discussion of these characteristics, and probably should consider as well that the Friar, in all of his actions, wise or unwise, was always struggling against fate.

What is the climax of the story "Okay for Now" by Gary Schmidt?

The climax of "Okay for Now" occurs when police arrive at the Swieteck home to announce that the person who stole Joe Pepitone's jacket has called to confess. Although the confession was anonymous, the jacket was returned and the police will not be pursuing a hearing against Doug's brother, Christopher. In addition to the jacket, the thief returned Doug's stolen Babe Ruth baseball and the goods taken from the hardware store. This moment is triumphant...

As a result of Christopher's proven innocence, Principal Peattie calls Doug into his office to apologize for all of the negative things he said about Doug and his family. He agrees to give Doug the Brown Pelican plate from the Autobon Society, nearly completing the library's collection. This moment is a personal triumph for Doug and it reflects the culmination of all his hard work and optimism throughout the story. The retrieval of the plate seems at first to be an anti-climax when Mr. Powell informs Doug that the only remaining missing plate was purchased by an anonymous collector. Despite the fact that this means Doug is unable to complete the official collection, Mr. Powell uses his drawing of the last plate as a replacement. In this way, the climax of the story symbolizes the message of realism woven throughout the text. In real life, resolutions are rarely perfect but, like Doug's rendering of the last plate, they can be more than satisfying for their own purposes.

How did the Persian empire come about? What challenges did the rulers face and what institutions and policies did they devise to meet those...

The Persian Empire occupied an area that is now mostly located in modern Iran. It originated in the late Bronze Age when the Median people migrated into an area of Northern Iran from Central Asia. They spoke an Indo-European language and took advantage of a temporary power vacuum caused by the decline of the Middle Assyrian Empire.

From roughly the tenth through the seventh centuries, the Medes were ruled by the vast and powerful Neo-Assyrian Empire. In the late seventh century, civil wars and rebellions by subjects including the Medes, Babylonians, Chaldeans, Egyptians, Scythians, and Lydians led to the collapse of the Assyrian Empire. The Medes took advantage of this to conquer Nineveh and establish a Median kingdom or area of influence. Our information about this period, unfortunately, is limited. Our major source is the Greek historian Herodotus, who is not completely reliable.

In the seventh century, the Persians had settled in the southern part of the Iranian plateau. Also speaking an Indo-European language, they were nomadic peoples who had arrived in the tenth century. It was the unification of the Medes, Persian, and Parthians that led to the formation of the Persian Empire.

The Achaemenid Empire or First Persian Empire (c. 550–330 BC), also called the First Persian Empire, was founded in 550 BC by Cyrus the Great, inverting the power relationship in which previously the Medes had dominated the Persians. The major challenges he faced were administrative. He needed to transform a small, tightly-knit, ethnically uniform nomadic society into a multi-ethnic empire controlling a fixed territory. The Persians borrowed many administrative ideas from Mesopotamia.

One of the biggest problems in governing an ancient empire was communication from the center to the periphery. The Persian kings addressed this several ways. First, they built substantial road networks and a system of messengers. Cyrus was also responsible for supporting a comprehensive postal system.

Next, local satraps were given the authority to govern specific regions of the Persian Empire and given considerable autonomy. This regional autonomy included religious and cultural freedom.

The Persian kings sustained their rule economically with a taxation system that required each satrapy to raise a certain amount of taxes, which were used to support a professional army and maintain civil services.

The Persian Empire had a uniform legal code and generally solved the problem of maintaining the loyalty of subject peoples by offering military protection and civil services in return for taxation, with minimal interference in local customs.

How should Groupon enter international markets? As Groupon goes global, should it adapt its business to different cultures? Should Groupon run...

The starting point for your assignment should be discussing the focus of Groupon's business. While the initial model of "pushing" emails of local coupon deals into mailboxes was successful for a short period, the company's stock prices collapsed shortly after its IPO and it has been trying to re-invent itself, moving to a "pull" model for its core business, moving more heavily into general discount online retailing, and moving into the food delivery market. From a business perspective, it might actually be better for Groupon to solidify its core business strategy before trying to expand randomly in every direction. Its main strength is its early start in mobile marketing; its main weakness, a lack of direction and uneven results with its core group coupon business.

The key to expanding as a platform company is that platforms tend to be natural monopolies. Attracting large numbers of vendors attracts large numbers of customers and then the the large customer base attracts more vendors, starting a virtuous cycle. This means expanding piecemeal into a large range of new markets is not an appropriate business strategy. Instead, it makes sense to target a few carefully selected markets where it might be possible to achieve dominance. This would be done best by forming partnerships or strategic alliances, as the route to success is eliminating competition. As detailed understanding of local buying habits is needed, much of the marketing and other decisions should be done locally.

What is the relationship between religion, spirituality, and theater from the early Egyptian culture through the Greek and Roman cultures? What is...

Historians recognize the ancient Egyptians as the first known society to develop drama according to our definition of drama: a performance that has "plot, characters, [and] stage directions" ("Theatre History—Beginning through Renaissance," Southeastern Louisiana University). In the city of Edfu, archeologists have found texts depicting a religious performance for the festival of Horus, god of war, law, and rulers. The drama includes the carrying of the statue of Hathor from the temple in the town of Dendera to the festival in Edfu. The drama also has roles for numerous performers, additional props, backdrops, and dances depicting holy ceremonies. One aspect of the play included the ceremonial conquering of the god Seth, god of violence, disorder, storms, and other troubles. The god Seth was symbolized by a hippopotamus killed by a priest or by the king enacting the role of Horus, who conquers Seth with law and order.

Archeologists are also aware Egyptians performed morality plays and reenactments of creation myths. One example of a morality play concerns the story of Isis and the seven scorpions a story in which seven scorpions charged with protecting Isis poisoned the child of a rich woman who refused to give Isis, disguised as a beggar woman, shelter, whereas a poor fisherwoman gladly did; feeling the revenge her scorpions took was unjust, however, Isis commanded the poison to leave the child, leaving the rich woman to feel remorseful and donate all of her possessions to the poor fisherwoman. Hence, as we can see, the Egyptians used drama to capture their religious and moral beliefs.

Similarly, ancient Greek dramas were performed during the festivals of Dionysus, god of spring time, rejuvenation, and wine. He symbolized mankind "being impelled onwards by a joy within him that he cannot explain" (Mills, D., Ch. XIV, The Book of the Ancient Greeks). Ancient Greek drama started as recounting stories of Dionysus to pay him honor, but performances of stories about other gods soon evolved. Greek drama also evolved from being performed as stories relayed in songs sung only by a chorus to being sung by a dominant speaker, with the chorus having a smaller role. Drama continued to evolve to being stories acted out by performers, with the chorus having an even smaller role. Though the chorus's role shrank, the chorus's words remained a reminder of the power of the gods. Ancient Greek drama also evolved to depict Greek legends, such as the Fall of Troy, and to include moral lessons ("Ancient Greek Theatre," Northern Virginia Community College). Moral lessons were captured in the portrayal of the gods, whom Greeks viewed as having human characteristics of bearing grudges, being jealous, and fighting with each other ("Ancient Greek Theatre"). Moral lessons were additionally portrayed in mankind's battles against humanity's flawed nature and destinies laid out by the gods. Yet, no matter how much ancient Greek drama evolved, it was still always performed during the festivals of Dionysus, in the theater of Dionysus, and in worship of Dionysus. All performances were also followed by a sacrifice to Dionysus (Mills). Hence, like the ancient Egyptians, the dramas performed by the ancient Greeks were also directly linked to their religious and moral beliefs.