Blog: September 2017

What stereotypical male and female characteristics does Anton Rosicky possess?

The character Anton Rosicky is described by Dr. Burleigh as being a well-rounded and contented man who has struck a fine balance in his life. This balance can even be seen in the even blend of stereotypical male and female characteristics he possesses.

Stereotypical Male Characteristics

In the era in which "Neighbor Rosicky" is set, the idea of being a life-long hard worker like Rosicky was considered a stereotypically masculine trait. He provides for his...

Stereotypical Male Characteristics

In the era in which "Neighbor Rosicky" is set, the idea of being a life-long hard worker like Rosicky was considered a stereotypically masculine trait. He provides for his family and earns a living off the land with the sweat of his brow. Rosicky is also very self-sufficient, having left his hometown for the intimidating city sprawl of London when he was only 18. From his humble origins, he rose to become a land owner and prizes his independence.

Stereotypical Female Characteristics

Rosicky possesses the stereotypically feminine trait of being incredibly nurturing with his family members, including his daughter-in-law, Polly. When the doctor warns Rosicky to take it easy around his farm, trading in hard labor on the farm for helping his wife with housework, he does not balk at the order as many men would. Rosicky is not prideful and he doesn't consider himself above "woman's work" in the household. He prioritizes his family and takes great satisfaction in the emotional relationships between them. He also demonstrates a willingness to sacrifice his own comfort, lending his car to his son and daughter-in-law and taking on some of their work so they can enjoy an evening in town. In this way, Rosicky shows the stereotypically feminine trait of self-sacrifice. He is very emotionally astute and always seems to know what those around him are feeling.

Anton Rosicky is an ideal blend of the best characteristics that are stereotypically associated with each gender. As a result, he is both strong and in touch with his feelings.

What kind of pet did Jesusa take in?

In the novel, Jesusa took in a coyote.

As a revolutionary soldadera, Jesusa fought side by side with her young husband, Pedro Aguilar. Her job was to load her husband's Mauser and hers as well, so that he would never be without ammunition during battle.

On one occasion, General Juan Espinosa Y Cordoba gave his soldiers the order to set up camp in the San Antonio Arenales sierra region. It was while the soldiers...

In the novel, Jesusa took in a coyote.

On one occasion, General Juan Espinosa Y Cordoba gave his soldiers the order to set up camp in the San Antonio Arenales sierra region. It was while the soldiers were hunting for wood to build fires with and Pedro was looking for branches to fashion a small makeshift house with, that everyone caught sight of a coyote. The animal was so small that many of the soldiers called her a puppy. She was an extremely trusting animal and did not shy away from human contact.

Jesusa took in the coyote as her personal pet and fed the coyote atole, a beverage made from corn masa flour. Jesusa asserted that the coyote got very attached to her and wouldn't let anyone get near her; at night, the coyote slept on her legs and kept her warm. One day, however, tragedy befell the coyote when the colonel grabbed Jesusa's arm. Although it wasn't quite clear why he did so (perhaps he did not appreciate Jesusa playing the assembly bugle in Pedro's place), Jesusa blamed this act for the death of her beloved pet; for his part, the colonel claimed that he shot the coyote in self-defense.

She accused the colonel of cruelty and maintained that the coyote was only trying to protect her. Frustrated by her accusations, the colonel offered to pay a hundred pesos as compensation for the animal's death. Meanwhile, grieved beyond measure, Jesusa ignored the colonel's offer and instead demanded the restoration of her pet to her. The colonel, genuinely puzzled by Jesusa's unreasonable demand, ignored her and walked away.

Jesusa was left to grieve for her beloved pet alone. She maintained that she often dreamed of the coyote after its death because she missed it so much. To assuage her grief, she then raised two piglets and took to caring for a sow and a dog. She named the dog Jazmin; he was a great comfort to Jesusa after the coyote's death. When Jazmin died, and it looked like the sow would die too, Jesusa begged her husband to give the sow away. So, Pedro sold the sow to a merchant from Piedras Negras. Shortly after this, Pedro was killed in battle, and Jesusa lost all desire to have pets in her life.

What is the deeper meaning to "War" by Luigi Pirandello?

One of the symbolic meanings to Pirandello's short story is how war is the source of endless pain.

Pirandello's short story shows how there is nothing restorative in war. The small train carriage is filled with people who will never experience the battlefield. However, they all experience the hurt intrinsic to the war experience. The justifications behind war do not alleviate any of their pain. The mother who sends her son to the front can find no solace in his departure. The other passengers on the train are more interested in displaying how their pain is worse than anyone else's. The passenger who enters and speaks with authority might be the only one who shows a conviction about the necessity of war. When he talks about "good boys" who leave to "serve their country," it galvanizes the other passengers. When he speaks of the message in his son's final letter, it provides a temporary relief from war's pain. This is undercut with the mother's question of whether the man's son is "really dead." The "incongruity" of the question with the speech that preceded it overwhelmed him. The weight of war's pain was too much, as he breaks down in "uncontrollable sobs."

The symbolic meaning of the story is that there are no winners in war. It kills the young and creates a legacy of pain and hurt in those who survive. In contrast to the standard depiction of "the great war," Pirandello's story cdepicts the profound hurt that is war's inescapable reality.

Why should Jordan Baker be with Nick in The Great Gatsby?

This is certainly an intriguing, opinion-based question. One could argue for or against the idea that Jordan Baker should be with Nick. The two characters have many similarities. They are both outliers--two individuals who do not fit within common social constructs of the time. Nick has chosen not to follow in the footsteps of his family's lucrative hardware business, instead testing his prowess as a bond broker. He leaves behind a potential fiance and moves to the East Coast to pursue life as a bond broker. Jordan Baker does not follow social constructs of becoming a wife and mother, and instead is an accomplished and rather famous golfer. They are both independent and bent on making their own way in the world.

Nick is certainly intrigued by Jordan from his first meeting with her. He talks about her pleasing face and graceful manner. Later on in the novel, they become confidantes and co-conspirators in trying to unravel the mystery of Gatsby.

Both Jordan and Nick play a cursory role to the events that unfold around them. Neither of them is the cause nor the solution to the events of Gatsby's passions and Daisy's carelessness. They are witness to it all, but not able to affect the outcomes in any way.

Their commiserations could provide a basis for a relationship, and their mutual respect and admiration for each other may sustain that relationship for a time. But their similarities might ultimately make them ill-suited for a romantic relationship. Both are independent and fiercely guarding their rights to live in worlds of their own choosing, apart from the gilded cages in which other characters in the novel find themselves.

How does Junior view God in The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian?

At several points, Junior views God with anger in The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian.After Eugene, the friend of Junior's father, is shot, Junior is overcome with grief. He searches for answers in the writings of Euripides, who wrote that to lose one's land is to lose everything. As a response to the loss not only of Eugene but to the greater losses that Native Americans have suffered, Junior writes, "More...

At several points, Junior views God with anger in The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian. After Eugene, the friend of Junior's father, is shot, Junior is overcome with grief. He searches for answers in the writings of Euripides, who wrote that to lose one's land is to lose everything. As a response to the loss not only of Eugene but to the greater losses that Native Americans have suffered, Junior writes, "More than anything, I wanted to kill God" (page 173).

Junior also believes that God is a type of cosmic jokester who likes to play jokes on people. After his basketball team at Reardan, a mostly white team, beats Wellpinit, the team that his friends such as Rowdy and other Native Americans from the reservation play on, Junior says, "But God has a way of making things even out, I guess" (page 196). He says this because Reardan goes on to lose the championships, which makes them cry the same way that the players on Wellpinit did when they lost. Junior generally believes that God can intervene in his life in very direct ways. When he imagines his dad having an accident in his car, Junior says, "Please, God, please don't kill my daddy" (page 203). He thinks that God is immersed in the details of his life.

Explain two economic issues related to population growth.

Population growth can result in many economic issues, however, we will focus on these two: economic dependency and unemployment.

Economic dependency

a) When a country experiences population growth, this can result in a larger labour force in the future. However, the initial increase in population can put a strain on the country's resources. This because between the ages of 0 to 16 or 18 (depending on the labour laws of a country) these children are...

Population growth can result in many economic issues, however, we will focus on these two: economic dependency and unemployment.

Economic dependency

b) The financial strain on the resources of a country can extend to its educational, health, housing, and infrastructural facilities. Therefore, government and the persons in large families will have to allocate scarce resources to providing and obtaining access to more of these facilities.

Unemployment

a) In the future, when the population is grown and trained in their desired professions; they may be unable to access jobs because the aging population (their parents and other adults) are still holding these positions. This younger section of the labour force may subsequently become discouraged and either stop looking for work or migrate in search of better employment opportunities (brain drain).

What is the difference between Mcgregor's "Theory X and Theory Y" and Maslow's hierarchy of needs? How does this particularly apply to management?

McGregor's "Theory X and Theory Y" is a simplistic, but useful account of two "theories" or visions of human behavior. On theory X, we are self-interested individuals who seek wealth and pleasure and care little for others; this is essentially the same as the assumptions of neoclassical rational agent models. On theory Y, we are creative individuals who seek to challenge and express ourselves, and care less for material rewards than we do for the thrill of achievement and the joy of a job well done. One can also see these as ends of a continuum, where people combine the two motivations to different degrees.

Some styles of management appeal to theory X, while others appeal to theory Y. McGregor argues that management will be more successful if it applies less theory X and more theory Y.

Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a much more empirically-validated account of human behavior which comes from cognitive psychology. It says that human beings have several different types of needs, and we must fulfill more basic needs before we can move on to more complex needs.

The most basic needs are physiological survival: We must eat, we must drink, we must breathe. Without these needs, we rapidly die.

The second level is safety: We need to be secure from danger, and we want our possessions and our relationships to be similarly secure.

The third level is belonging: We need to feel connected with other human beings, and form intimate relationships with others.

The fourth level is esteem: We want to feel valued and respected, we want to be recognized for our achievements.

The fifth and final level is self-actualization: We want to do something with our lives, create things, accomplish things, make a difference in the world.

The major limitation of Maslow's hierarchy lies in making it a strict hierarchy; in some cases human beings will sacrifice a more basic need for a higher-level need---the extreme example being a suicide bomber who sacrifices his survival for belonging and self-actualization. An improved model might account for this by giving each need a finite marginal utility, such that more basic needs are usually stronger and more important, but can be overriden in extreme cases by higher-level needs.

As far as applications to management, Maslow's hierarchy can effectively subsume McGregor's "Theory X and Theory Y": Workers at a very low standard of living are likely to mostly obey Theory X, because their very basic needs are not being met and they need money simply to survive. But workers at a higher standard of living are likely to mostly obey Theory Y, because with all their basic needs met they are interested in esteem and self-actualization. Thus, switching from monetary bonuses to public recognition for your achievements works well on university professors, but not on assembly-line workers.

How can I track and improve e-commerce sales?

E-commerce can be tracked via numerous software packages that allow users to capture data during page visits and product purchases. The software can capture a variety of information that ranges from the basics to detailed snapshots of consumer patterns. The analytical information can be invaluable as a tool when it is put to good use. One of the most important data fields is the zip code often captured during transactions. The zip code will help narrow down what region is drawn to certain products. This information can be used to target that area with more direct advertising in either the real world or e-world.

Other analytical tools can tell you how often your online store suffers abandoned carts, which represent people who browsed and thought about a purchase. These are lost sales which rarely happen in the real world, but are very common in e-commerce. This type of information will aid in targeting marketing efforts to increase sales.

E-commerce faces different marketing challenges than real world stores. One of the major differences is the instant ability to comparison shop. Battling the comparison shopper requires a combination of targeted techniques such as instant discount, time sensitive discounts and easy to read positive reviews. Other ways to boost e-commerce sales are similar to real world stores and include upselling, sales, product placement and supply-demand illusions. E-commerce had an advantage over real world sales because e-commerce can use more marketing techniques simultaneously. However, one disadvantage is the quick pace of consumer driven trends that require constant supervision.

Which character is more evil--Jack or Roger? Explain, using quotes, the different kinds of evil behavior each demonstrates and which is ultimately...

Roger is obviously evil. He is a bully; from the beginning he takes pleasure in bothering Henry by throwing rocks at him without hitting him. When he turns his aggression on the sow, he seems to take an unhealthy pleasure in jamming his spear up the animal's rectum as "the terrified squealing became a high-pitched scream." When he learns that Jack has tied up Wilfred and beat him for no apparent reason, he sits still, "assimilating the possibility of irresponsible authority." He uses that authority to roll the boulder onto Piggy, murdering him. He does so "with a sense of delirious abandonment." There is no doubt that Roger's acts are immoral.

As horrific as Roger's deeds are, however, Jack's are even worse. Jack, as one of the oldest boys on the island, has a responsibility to set an example and lead the other boys in a way that will create a safe and functional society. However, he shows himself to be ultimately selfish and short-sighted, caring more about hunting and winning the power struggle with Ralph than for the success of the boys' society. Jack lacks a moral compass. When he dons his face paint, he is "liberated from shame and self-consciousness." When Piggy scolds Jack for letting the fire go out, Jack "stuck his fist into Piggy's stomach" and "smacked Piggy's head," causing his glasses to break, and then mocks Piggy when he complains.This shows how Jack is willing to resort to violence to cover up his own failings. Later, Jack undermines Ralph's leadership and leads a feast that gets out of control, murdering Simon. Then he steals Piggy's glasses, leaving him all but blind. He beats Wilfred for no stated reason, and he sets up the boulder to defend Castle Rock, knowing it could be deadly. He sets a tone with the boys of violence and fear; it is his "irresponsible authority" that gives Roger the green light for murdering Piggy. After Piggy falls to his death, Jack exhibits no remorse but shouts, "See? See? That's what you'll get!" He then leads all the boys in a man-hunt for Ralph, intending to kill him. As Samneric reveal to Ralph, "They hate you, Ralph. They're [Jack and Roger] going to do you." As the older boy and the leader who sets the parameters for his "tribe," Jack is even more evil than Roger.

When and where was Helen born? What do you know about her family?

Helen Keller was born in the small town of Tuscumbia, Alabama. It was located in the northern part of the state. She was born on June 27th in the year 1880.

In her autobiography, The Story of My Life, Helen describes her family background in detail. Her father was Arthur H. Keller, a Confederate captain turned newspaper editor. He had been married with children previously, before he had become a widower. Later, he married...

Helen Keller was born in the small town of Tuscumbia, Alabama. It was located in the northern part of the state. She was born on June 27th in the year 1880.

Casper Keller was a relative of Helen Keller. He originally hailed from Switzerland before moving to Alabama. It was through him that Helen was related to"the first teacher of the deaf in Zurich... [who] wrote a book on the subject of their education" (Chapter 1). Helen found this fact to be "rather a singular coincidence; though it is true that there is no king who has not had a slave among his ancestors, and no slave who has not had a king among his." She recognized the importance of her ancestor's contributions to the education of the deaf. Some of these contributions later helped her. Helen also wrote about her grandparents and other relations who she was descended from.

What are the differences between Portia and Jessica as revealed in the play "The Merchant of Venice"?

The differences are subtle and come mostly from the different situations the two women find themselves in.

Portia and Jessica have much in common. Both are beautiful, intelligent, and funny. Both are bold and can be blunt (e.g. Jessica says, "Our house is hell," Act 2 Scene 3; Portia says, "There is not one among [my suitors] but I dote on his very absence," Act 1 Scene 2). Both disguise themselves: Jessica as a page...

The differences are subtle and come mostly from the different situations the two women find themselves in.

The biggest difference between the two is that Portia saves the day by playing the part of "Balthasar," a "Doctor of Laws," so that through her brilliant and humane arguing in court, she saves Antonio from having to give a pound of flesh to Shylock, Jessica's father. From this we can see that Portia is very well-educated, wise, and generous of spirit. She is also very self-confident, willing to pull off this dangerous undertaking without even telling Bassanio what she is up to.

Now, Jessica is not stupid, but we get no hint from the play that she is as well-versed in the law as Portia. She is wise and kind, but her bold move (running away with Lorenzo) is done mostly for her own sake, not to save someone else. She is brave, but not as bold as Portia. She runs away with Lorenzo at night, and even then she does not want to hold a torch for fear she be seen in her pageboy's costume (Act 2, Scene 6).

Jessica is a plucky woman trying to escape a bad home life. We can infer that her life with Shylock did not offer as high a standard of living, nor quite as good an education, as Portia received. She also has a graceless tyrant for a father, whereas Portia's father (now deceased) was apparently very wise.

Jessica is using her virtues to rise above the situation she was born into. Portia, an aristocrat, was born with many privileges that allowed her to develop her natural gifts. Now she is using her advantages to help others.

`g(t) = ln(t)/t^2` Find the derivative of the function.

`g(t)=ln(t)/t^2`

Find the derivative of the function using the quotient rule.

`g'(t)={t^2[1/t]-ln(t)[2t]}/t^4`

`g'(t)=[t-2tln(t)]/t^4`

`g'(t)=(t(1-2ln(t)))/t^4`

`g'(t)=(1-2ln(t))/t^3`

The derivative of g(t) is `(1-2ln(t))/t^3.`

`g(t)=ln(t)/t^2`

Find the derivative of the function using the quotient rule.

`g'(t)={t^2[1/t]-ln(t)[2t]}/t^4`

`g'(t)=[t-2tln(t)]/t^4`

`g'(t)=(t(1-2ln(t)))/t^4`

`g'(t)=(1-2ln(t))/t^3`

The derivative of g(t) is `(1-2ln(t))/t^3.`

What are the themes of Langston Hughes' short story "Berry"?

The theme of appearances and reality is one of the strongest themes in "Berry." There is a phoniness to Dr. Renfield's home that "troubles" Berry. He sees it in "Mrs. Osborn's grand manner to everybody but the doctor." Berry remarks, "Funny how the food ain't nearly so good 'cept when some ma or pa or some chile is visitin' here- then when they gone, it drops right back down again." Berry suggests that the entire hospital is "jest Doc Renfield's own private gyp game." There is a difference between appearance and reality that dominates this setting. It can be seen in the nurses complaining about the children behind their backs or in how Doctor Renfield is more concerned at the end of the story about the potential for lawsuits as opposed to the welfare of the child that fell. Berry is the only one who can perceive this difference between appearances and reality. As an outsider, a person of color, Hughes suggests that he might be more perceptive than most in discerning this gap between what is and what is shown. It is interesting to note that the only people who are authentic with Berry are the children, who Berry feels are "there like himself because they couldn't help it."

Another theme in the story is economic challenge. Hughes brings this out in Berry's character. Hughes mentions the hunger that Berry experiences. While the job is far too much work for so little in way of compensation, Berry "needed work and food" and "had been hungry too long." He has to keep a substandard job because of his financial condition. Berry's paltry salary highlights his economic challenge. Hughes shows that people of color during the time endured this reality quite often. At the end of the story, when Dr. Renfield reprimands Berry with a deduction of ten dollars for the broken chair, he has to be corrected that Berry makes only eight dollars. When Berry leaves to Jersey city without his last week's wages, it is a reminder of the defining role economic challenge plays in his life. This condition impacted many African-Americans.

Hughes plays with the theme of double consciousness quite a bit in "Berry." In this case, "double consciousness" refers to living a life different than everyone else. It is a term that can be found in W.E.B. Du Bois's The Souls of Black Folk. It refers to how African-Americans lived a life that forced them to be different in the company of white people than with other African-Americans. Being a man of color in a setting where there are nothing but white people, Berry lives this existence as "the other" or the outsider. Hughes writes that Berry was only spoken to when "they had some job for him to do, or when they were kidding him about being dark." Being "the other," Berry experiences the reality of being a person of color. He is seen as foreign or different. Hughes is able to illuminate how African-Americans experience a much different form of consciousness than white people.

Explain the following quote in detail and why it is significant coming from someone who is the Sheriff of Maycomb. “Mr. Finch, there's just some...

In Chapter 29, Sheriff Tate and Atticus examine Scout's destroyed ham costume and notice that there is a long, clean line in the material that was made from Bob Ewell's blade as he attempted to stab Scout. When Atticus comments that Bob was out of his mind, Sheriff Tate says that Bob wasn't crazy, he was just "mean as hell." Atticus is at a loss for words and cannot think of an evil enough person...

"Mr. Finch, there's just some kind of men you have to shoot before you can say hidy to 'em. Even then, they ain't worth the bullet it takes to shoot 'em. Ewell 'as one of 'em" (Lee 165).

Heck Tate's comment may seem surprising because he is the Sheriff of Maycomb and such a crass comment would be viewed as unprofessional. One would assume that authority figures are more tolerant and understanding than to suggest that a person be shot before they get a chance to commit a crime. However, Sheriff Tate was fully aware of Bob Ewell's despicable, immoral character and was not naive enough to believe that Bob would not attempt to harm others. Tate was essentially commenting on Bob's evil personality. He knew that Bob had the capability of committing a horrific crime which is why he tells Atticus that there are just some men that need shot before you can speak to them. In hindsight, Bob Ewell should have been shot because he had done nothing but ruin lives and cause trouble throughout the entire novel.

In his acceptance speech for the 1964 Nobel Peace Prize, Martin Luther King Jr. likens his experiences in the civil rights movement to traveling on...

King uses the road metaphor in the fourth paragraph of his 1964 Nobel Prize acceptance speech. During his presentation, he cites the brutality against civil rights marchers in Birmingham, Alabama, and Philadelphia, Mississippi. He wonders why he is even chosen to win the award, given the violence against his movement. King goes on to state that civil rights is part of mankind's progress and even gives it a holy goal when he states that the races will be considered equally before God. He even states that the alternative to this journey toward civil rights is a journey to "thermonuclear destruction," which was a very real concern at the height of the Cold War. King says that the new Civil Rights Bill (which was just signed into law in 1964) will be part of a new civil rights "superhighway" of justice in which people of all races will unite to solve their common problems. King uses the highway metaphor sparingly, but he uses it to describe humanity's progress.

In Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, what veils Mr.Wilson's dark suit and pale hair?

George Wilson lives in the area known as the valley of ashes, located between West Egg and New York City. Here, it seems as though everything is coated with a thick layer of this ash: the landscape, the cars, the buildings, and even the people. Wilson is no exception. He, too, is covered with ash. In Chapter II, Nick Carraway, the narrator, says, "A white ashen dust veiled [Wilson's] dark suit and his pale hair as it veiled everything in the vicinity -- except his wife." The ash appears to render him even paler and more inconsequential than he already seems to be. While his wife, Myrtle, is vivacious and somehow colorfully alive, George seems spiritless, and Nick even describes him as "anemic" at one point. It is a rather sad existence that George leads: he is manipulated by Tom Buchanan and deceived by his own wife, and all he wants to do is get ahead, try to achieve even a small piece of the American Dream. The ashes that cover over his person seem to foreshadow, even in the beginning of the novel, that both George and his dream cannot survive.

How did talking to his friend about his anger help the speaker in "A Poison Tree" by William Blake?

William Blake's poem "A Poison Tree" is a figurative expression of the relation of the spiritual world with the natural world.

When the speaker of this poem becomes angry with his friend, he communicates his feelings to this friend. As a consequence, his anger is released and the friendship between the two men continues.

I was angry with my friend:I told my wrath, my wrath did end.

In contrast to this amelioration between the...

William Blake's poem "A Poison Tree" is a figurative expression of the relation of the spiritual world with the natural world.

When the speaker of this poem becomes angry with his friend, he communicates his feelings to this friend. As a consequence, his anger is released and the friendship between the two men continues.

I was angry with my friend:
I told my wrath, my wrath did end.

In contrast to this amelioration between the friends, the speaker's failure to release his feelings with his enemy causes his "wrath" to increase and intensify, so much so that the poison tree grows as he waters it with his fears and he suns it with "deceitful wiles."

William Blake expresses in "A Poison Tree" the power of the imagination and the spirit. To Blake, the imagination possesses the capability of perceiving the realities of the spiritual world in its expression. On the other hand, the tree becomes symbolic of the corruption that occurs in the soul when a person suppresses feelings. For when the speaker does not release his emotions toward his foe as he does with his friend, and, instead, nourishes his antipathy, the tree grows and eventually produces an apple. This is the apple of cunning and guile--not unlike the apple in the Garden of Evil-- that has sprung from the energy of hate which feeds the tree.

Who is the protagonist in "The Signal-Man" by Charles Dickens?

The protagonist in Charles Dickens's short story "The Signal-man" is the signal-man because he is the character who comes into conflict with opposing forces and is affected in some way.

Since the train has disturbed nature with the carving of the tunnel as well as by the intrusion of the looming black machine, supernatural forces are released; moreover, these forces are too strong for the signal-man to control. For, they seek what may be retribution. This signal-man is at odds with the spirits of the area; consequently, he sees ghosts warning him of disaster. The narrator describes him in this way:

His pain of mind was most pitiable to see. It was the mental torture of a conscientious man, oppressed beyond endurance by an unintelligible responsibility involving life.

The signal-man tells the narrator about the apparitions that have appeared to him, but to no avail. For, on the day that the narrator has arranged to visit again, he sees instead a group of officials who are conducting an investigation of the death of the signal-man. Evidently, he had been standing on the line, peering down the tunnel when a train bore down upon him. The conductor reports that he shouted, “Below there! Look out! For God’s sake, clear the way!”

Furthermore, the engineer of the train has waved his arm in warning even as he has covered his face to keep from witnessing the train strike the signal-man. The narrator notes the remarkable similarity between the driver's actions and the actions of the phantom as the signalman has earlier related.

What are some examples where Calpurnia teaches or exercises the Golden Rule throughout the novel To Kill a Mockingbird?

There are several scenes throughout the novel where Calpurnia teaches and exercises the Golden Rule, which is "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

In Chapter 3, Jem invites Walter Cunningham Jr. over for dinner. When Walter pours syrup all over his plate, Scout asks him what the "sam hill" he is doing. Scout embarrasses and criticizes Walter for his unmannerly eating habits. Calpurnia immediately requests Scout's presence in the kitchen and chastises Scout for her behavior. Cal says, "There’s some folks who don’t eat like us...but you ain’t called on to contradict ’em at the table when they don’t" (Lee 17). Cal also says,

"Don’t matter who they are, anybody sets foot in this house’s yo’ comp’ny, and don’t you let me catch you remarkin’ on their ways like you was so high and mighty! Yo’ folks might be better’n the Cunninghams but it don’t count for nothin’ the way you’re disgracin’ ’em" (Lee 17).

Calpurnia is essentially referencing the Golden Rule by telling Scout to treat Walter Cunningham respectfully which is the way Scout would like to be treated. Also, in Chapter 12, Calpurnia takes the children to First Purchase African M.E. for Sunday service. The children notice that Cal speaks differently around her community members than she does around the home. When Scout asks Cal why she talks incorrectly, Cal says,

“It’s not necessary to tell all you know. It’s not ladylike—in the second place, folks don’t like to have somebody around knowin’ more than they do. It aggravates ’em" (Lee 78).

Again, Calpurnia references the Golden Rule by taking into consideration the thoughts and feelings of her community members.

What was Christopher Columbus' goal?

Christopher Columbus set sail across the Atlantic Ocean with the goal of finding a faster route to Asia. Trade with Asia was desirable, as many goods were available there that could not be found in Europe. Silk, rice, ivory, porcelain, and tea were among some of the popular goods imported to Europe from China and other Asian countries. The main transportation routes from Europe to Asia were by land, such as the Silk Road. This mode of travel proved to be difficult, however. Land routes went through many different countries, and conflicts sometimes prevented merchants from passing. The idea of finding a route over the ocean became a popular one.

In 1492, Columbus set sail with his crew on three ships. They eventually arrived in the Bahamas, but they thought they had reached Asia. Next they went to Cuba, which Columbus thought was China. It was not until later that explorers realized how far away Asia truly was when traveling west.

What was Milton's crisis in "On His Blindness"?

"On His Blindness" by John Milton is written in the form of an Italian sonnet. It is an autobiographical poem written in the first person. It was written after Milton, a deeply religious writer, goes blind.

The sonnet consists of two parts: an octave in which Milton laments his blindness, and a sestet in which he becomes reconciled to the blindness because he realizes God has willed it for a purpose.

The main crisis Milton...

The sonnet consists of two parts: an octave in which Milton laments his blindness, and a sestet in which he becomes reconciled to the blindness because he realizes God has willed it for a purpose.

The main crisis Milton experiences in the poem is not so much the blindness itself but the way the blindness interferes with his ability to write. He feels that his writing is doing God's work and his crisis derives from feeling that his blindness is a manifestation of God's rejection of him. He resolves this crisis by realizing God does not need or value us according to human standards, but rather according to our faith and obedience, as is conveyed in the lines:

God doth not need

Either man's work or his own gifts, who best

Bear his mild yoke, they serve him best.

Examine how the relationship between Eliezer and his father changes throughout Night.

The inversion of roles is one way the relationship between father and son changes in Wiesel's Night.

At the start of the narrative, there is a clearly defined relationship between Eliezer and his father. Chlomo Wiesel is described as "cultured, rather unsentimental man … more concerned with others than with his own family." He is the authoritarian figure in the family whose word is taken above all. For example, he is direct in how he insists that Eliezer refrains from his studies in Judaic mysticism and focus on more worldly matters. Eliezer recognizes that being the head of the family helped to create an emotional distance between them. As the Nazis strengthen their hold in Sighet, Chlomo's authority extends to the community, as he is a civic leader who assists others in the midst of Nazi cruelty. His positions as head of the family and as a community leader represent a significant part of his early characterization in the narrative.

As Eliezer and his father experience the horror of the campes, an inversion of roles takes place. Over time, Eliezer becomes a "father figure" and Chlomo becomes dependent on him, like a child. For example, Eliezer has to teach his father how to march properly in cadence. He also becomes in charge of both of their food rations, sometimes sacrificing his own so that his father can eat. Eliezer coaches his father through the selections and looks out for him as others take advantage of his weakened state. As Eliezer struggles to survive, he recognizes that he has a responsibility to his father. He acts as a paternalistic force, the way his father once did to him.

The Holocaust robbed children of their childhood, forcing many to grow up far too quickly. Eliezer experiences this in the way he has to tend to his father, putting his own needs second. In this way, the relationship between Eliezer and his father changes over the course of the narrative.

The leaders of the US, USSR, and Great Britain said they wanted to cooperate, so why were negotiations at the Yalta and Potsdam conferences so...

Actually, the three great superpowers at Yalta did want to cooperate, because they wanted to ensure peace for the postwar world. However, they all had different agendas to promote. Stalin acted on his own and was not responsible to the people of the Soviet Union. Stalin wanted to ensure a buffer zone between the West and his country, because the Soviet Union lost heavily in terms of men and material in this war. Churchill openly distrusted Stalin and there was still some animosity between Britain and the Soviet Union over the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact in 1939. Stalin wanted to see the prewar government of Poland restored, but Stalin wanted his regime to remain in place. When Churchill complained that Stalin was expanding his borders, Stalin pointed an accusing finger at British colonies and asked why the British could have a sphere of influence and the Russians could not. Roosevelt, on the other hand, needed an assurance that the Soviet Union would stay in the war to fight the Japanese, who were already retreating in January 1945 but were still quite strong. Roosevelt was willing to agree to almost anything to get this assurance, even if it meant that Eastern Europe would be occupied by the Soviet army, which was already a reality on the ground at the time of the conference anyway. Roosevelt thought that he could negotiate a deal with Stalin to get the Soviet Union to acknowledge the prewar territorial boundaries, but the American president died in April before the war's end.

When and how do readers of Saki's "The Open Window" know Vera has been lying?

Part of the beauty of "The Open Window" is that the reader is taken in by Vera's story just like Framton Nuttel. The reader gets the same uncanny feeling that Framton experiences when he sees Vera staring out the open window "with a dazed horror in her eyes" and then turns and sees what the girl is staring at.

In the deepening twilight three figures were walking across the lawn towards the window, they all carried guns under their arms, and one of them was additionally burdened with a white coat hung over his shoulders. A tired brown spaniel kept close at their heels.

Framton never finds out that he has been the victim of a practical joke. But the reader learns the truth when the three hunters enter through the open window and Mr. Sappleton speaks to his wife.

"Here we are, my dear," said the bearer of the white mackintosh, coming in through the window, "fairly muddy, but most of it's dry. Who was that who bolted out as we came up?"

"A most extraordinary man, a Mr. Nuttel," said Mrs. Sappleton; "could only talk about his illnesses, and dashed off without a word of goodby or apology when you arrived. One would think he had seen a ghost."

Vera has not only done a fine job of story-telling, but she has also done a fine job of acting. Her look of "dazed horror" seems to verify that the three returning hunters are the men her aunt has been expecting for three years. Mrs. Sappleton is perfectly cast in Vera's little drama because the girl knows exactly what her aunt is going to say when she comes down. Mrs. Sappleton will explain the open window and then start dithering

...cheerfully about the shooting and the scarcity of birds, and the prospects for duck in the winter.

Mrs. Sappleton's single-minded conversation contains nothing to contradict Vera's fiction that the lady's husband and two younger brothers were sucked into a bog and that her aunt, whose mind was destroyed by the tragedy, has been waiting for them to return for three years. Even Ronnie plays his part just as Vera has learned to expect.

Noiselessly they neared the house, and then a hoarse young voice chanted out of the dusk: "I said, Bertie, why do you bound?"

The reader realizes that this is just a normal incident at a stodgy English country manor. Three men have been out shooting all day and are now returning for tea.

Does "The Fall of the House of Usher” serve as Poe’s example of the Gothic genre, or is it written as a parody of the genre?

Edgar Allen Poe's "The Fall of the House of Usher" is an example of Gothic literature and should not be considered a parody of the genre. Admittedly, it can sometimes be difficult to understand the fine line between serious literature and parody, as some parodic works are so subtle that they almost seem serious to many readers. However, I think it's safe to say "Usher" is genuine Gothic literature through and through.

First of all, let's consider what Gothic literature actually is. Generally speaking, Gothic literature is characterized by elements of horror, events that are or at least appear to be supernatural (such as ghosts, demonic forces, etc.), and themes such as ruin, decay, and the psychological disintegration of the story's characters. Also, Gothic literature often involves medieval-like settings (such as crumbling castles), and often focuses on a once prominent family descending into chaos, madness, complete obliteration, or all of the above. Horace Walpole's The Castle of Otranto is often thought of as the first true Gothic novel, and there's no denying that the genre has had a profound influence on many authors since then.

Now, with this context in mind, let's consider "Usher." The story features a wealthy family riddled with incestuous relationships and facing decline and obliteration. The events take place on a crumbling family estate that seems to be haunted by some kind of evil presence. Additionally, the estate is reminiscent of a medieval castle, as it contains many vaults which were used as dungeons in the past. Finally, the story focuses on Roderick Usher, a man who appears to be going insane, and who buries his sister alive and is then killed by her during a terrifying storm. All in all, the short story has a crumbling, gloomy estate, supernatural elements, psychological disintegration, and deep, dark family secrets. It's definitely Gothic.

Still, the question remains: is it serious, or is it a parody? To answer this question, it helps to look at the tone of the story. As an example, take a look at the story's opening passage (taken from ' excellent online version of the text):

During the whole of a dull, dark, and soundless day in the autumn of the year, when the clouds hung oppressively low in the heavens, I had been passing alone, on horseback, through a singularly dreary tract of country; and at length found myself, as the shades of the evening drew on, within view of the melancholy House of Usher. I know not how it was—but, with the first glimpse of the building, a sense of insufferable gloom pervaded my spirit... I looked upon the scene before me—upon the mere house, and the simple landscape features of the domain—upon the bleak walls—upon the vacant eye-like windows—upon a few rank sedges—and upon a few white trunks of decayed trees—with an utter depression of soul which I can compare to no earthly sensation more properly than to the after-dream of the reveller upon opium—the bitter lapse into everyday life—the hideous dropping off of the veil.

The tone in this opening passage is immediately gloomy, ominous, and dreadful. Observing the House of Usher and its environs, the narrator looks upon a scene of utter desolation and decay, and he compares the experience to the unpleasant aftereffects of drug use. In short, the tone here is quite serious, and it sets the stage for the tale's later horrors. If the story was a parody, it would involve at least some sense of mockery in the tone, and Poe's prose would not be so thoroughly gloomy. Indeed, there really isn't a light moment in the text, and the climax is truly terrifying. As such, I believe that "Usher" should be considered a true example of Gothic literature, rather than a parody of the genre.

How does Machiavelli show humanist values and teachings through his works The Prince and Discourses?

In The Prince and Discourses on Livy, Machiavelli exhibits the characteristics of humanism in many ways. First, both works are full of allusions to classical politics, especially to the Roman Republic. Livy himself was an ancient Roman historian, writing shortly after the fall of the Republic, and Machiavelli attempts to use his telling of Roman history to discuss the ways in which a republic could be sustained among modern people. The frequent allusion to classical works is also found in The Prince (a very different book than Discourses.) He refers to Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and many other examples from ancient Greece and Roman history to frame his argument. The argument of the Prince itself is an example of humanistic thinking. In the Prince, he famously advocates that a prince's behavior as a leader should not be governed by abstract, usually religious notions of right and wrong but rather by a hard-headed appraisal of how the world actually works, and what is most likely to achieve the best results. This view is characteristic of humanism. So in terms of content, argument, and methodology, the works of Machiavelli were steeped in humanistic principles. At the same time, Machiavelli's thinking was modern--he was no more bound by classical philosophy than he was by Christian thinking.

What are some comparisons between Shakespeare's Macbeth and Miller's The Crucible?

On the surface, the plays seem to have nothing in common but witches. However, Macbeth and The Crucible are both about the perils of ambition. In Macbeth, the witches are (probably) real, but the ambition is the problem. The witches make a prophecy to Macbeth that he is going to be king, and he takes it and runs with it. Then, his desire to stay in control slowly destroys him and his kingdom. In The Crucible, there are no witches except the ones in Abigail’s head, and her ambition also slowly destroys Salem.

After hearing the witches make the prophecies, which are probably just to have a little fun with him, Macbeth decides that even though he is not named king, he is going to become king anyway. Then, after killing the former king Duncan, he is not done. He is worried that he can’t hold onto his ill-gotten gains without getting rid of other possible obstacles to his success, such as his supposed former friend Banquo, who also heard the prophecies.

To be thus is nothing;

But to be safely thus.--Our fears in Banquo
Stick deep; and in his royalty of nature
Reigns that which would be fear'd: 'tis much he dares;
And, to that dauntless temper of his mind,
He hath a wisdom that doth guide his valour
To act in safety. … (Act 3, Scene 1)

Macbeth sends murderers to kill Banquo, his son Fleance, and Macduff’s entire family. They fail to kill Macduff, who joins the heir to the throne, Malcolm, and comes for Macbeth with an army. The kingdom is torn by war for no reason, just because of Macbeth’s ambition and because some witches wanted to have some fun.

In some ways, Salem goes through similar chaos in The Crucible. It is also torn apart for no reason. Abigail Williams tries to make herself seem important and distract from her bad behavior. She also uses the witch trials as a way to get back at people she does not like, especially John Proctor for spurning her.

Most people seem to just go along with the witch trials, just as no one seems to have publicly questioned Macbeth. Hysteria gets the best of them. Proctor seems to be one of only a few who speaks against the witch trials.

PROCTOR: What work you do! It‘s strange work for a Christian girl to hang old women!

MARY: But, Mister Proctor, they will not hang them if they confess. Sarah Good will only sit in jail some time… and here‘s a wonder for you, think on this. Goody Good is pregnant! (Act II)

Although he spoke against them in his home, he was public too. When accused, Proctor also faced a choice. He could confess when he did nothing or be honest and go to his grave honest. For Proctor, doing the right thing in a sea of chaos was of the utmost importance.

What is the tone of Lincoln's "Gettysburg Address" speech?

President Abraham Lincoln delivered the "Gettysburg Address" on November 19, 1863. This was in the middle of the Civil War. The occasion of the speech was the dedication of the Soldiers' National Cemetery in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. Since this was the dedication of a memorial and burial ground of fallen soldiers, the occasion was solemn. As well as the mourning occasioned by the deaths of soldiers in the past, the mood was made even more somber by...

As is appropriate to such a solemn occasion, Lincoln's tone is formal and hortatory. Although Lincoln expresses sorrow for the fallen soldiers, the tone is not uniformly mournful, but rather encourages his audience to honor the soldiers' sacrifice by continuing to fight for the values for which the soldiers made the ultimate sacrifice. The conclusion of the speech shows determination and even optimism, arguing that the war should not simply be mourned but also seen as a beacon of hope, that the war was not only an emblem of death but of birth of a new political tradition, and:

that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Why does Marcellus tell Horatio to speak to the ghost in Hamlet?

Marcellus wants Horatio to see the ghost because Horatio does not believe that there is one; also, Marcellus believes that if Horatio, a scholar, speaks to this specter, it will respond.

The play Hamlet opens with the changing of the guard on the ramparts of Elsinore Castle on a cold winter's night. Bernardo relieves Francisco, and they speak of "Not a mouse stirring" (1.1.10). Then, Marcellus and Horatio enter. When asked if the guards if...

Marcellus wants Horatio to see the ghost because Horatio does not believe that there is one; also, Marcellus believes that if Horatio, a scholar, speaks to this specter, it will respond.

The play Hamlet opens with the changing of the guard on the ramparts of Elsinore Castle on a cold winter's night. Bernardo relieves Francisco, and they speak of "Not a mouse stirring" (1.1.10).
Then, Marcellus and Horatio enter. When asked if the guards if they have seen anyone, Bernardo replies that he has seen nothing. Marcellus tells them,

Horatio says ’tis but our fantasy

And will not let belief take hold of him

Touching this dreaded sight twice seen of us. (1.1.20-22)

Since Horatio does not believe in ghosts, Marcellus feels that if Horatio sees this ghost, it must be real. Hopefully, too, he can speak to it.
Just then the ghost enters, and Marcellus urges everyone to be quiet. Bernardo notices that it resembles King Hamlet. He remarks upon this resemblance to Horatio. Horatio replies that it does, indeed, and it frightens him. Further, Marcellus urges Horatio to question the ghost. Horatio speaks to it:

What art thou that usurp'st this time of night
Together with that fair and warlike form
In which the majesty of buried Denmark
Did sometimes march? By heaven I charge thee, speak. (1.44-47)

But the ghost will not speak to him, and it walks away. Horatio exclaims that if he had not seen it, he would not have believed in the ghost. Marcellus asks if this ghost does not resemble the deceased king; Horatio declares that it certainly does. Later, Horatio expresses some concern about this ghost because such spirits are usually harbingers of misfortunes to come. He cites how they ran through the streets of Rome, speaking gibberish before Julius Caesar was assassinated.

Before departing, Horatio suggests that they tell Hamlet what they have seen and urge him to come because then the spirit will speak to him, his son.

How would I graph 5x+3y=-15? How would I graph 8x+2y=-4? Is the x=8/-3 the x-intercept for the equation -3x+4y=8?

One method to graph is to find the x and y intercept of the equation. Then use the intercepts to graph the line.

Example 1: `5x+3y=-15`

To find the x-intercept of the linear equation let y=0 and solve for the x value.

`5x+3y=-15`

`5x+3(0)=-15`

`5x=-15`

x=-3

Therefore one point on the line is the coordinate (-3, 0).

To find the y=intercept of the linear equation let x=0 and solve for the y value.

`5x+3y=-15`

...

One method to graph is to find the x and y intercept of the equation. Then use the intercepts to graph the line.

Example 1: `5x+3y=-15`

To find the x-intercept of the linear equation let y=0 and solve for the x value.

`5x+3y=-15`

`5x+3(0)=-15`

`5x=-15`

x=-3

Therefore one point on the line is the coordinate (-3, 0).

To find the y=intercept of the linear equation let x=0 and solve for the y value.

`5x+3y=-15`

`5(0)+3y=-15`

`3y=-15`

`y=-5`

Therefore a second point on the line is the coordinate (0, -5).

Plot the points (-3, 0) and (0, -5) and draw a line through the two points.

The same method can be used for the second example.

Example 2: `8x+2y=-4`

To find the x-intercept of the linear equation let y=0 and solve for the x value.

`8x+2y=-4`

`8x+2(0)=-4`

`8x=-4`

`x=-1/2`

Therefore one point on the line is the coordinate (-1/2, 0).

To find the y=intercept of the linear equation let x=0 and solve for the y value.

`8x+2y=-4`

`8(0)+2y=-4`

`2y=-4`

`y=-2`

Therefore a second point on the line is the coordinate (0, -2). Plot the points (-1/2, 0) and (0, -2) and draw a line through the two points.

Example 3: `-3x+4y=8`

To find the x-intercept of the linear equation let y=0 and solve for the x value.

`-3x+4y=8 `

`-3x+4(0)=8`

`-3x=8`

`x=-8/3`

Therefore one point on the line is the coordinate (-8/3, 0). To find the y=intercept of the linear equation let x=0 and solve for the y value.

`-3x+4y=8`

`-3(0)+4y=8`

`4y=8`

`y=2`

Therefore a second point on the line is the coordinate (0, 2). Plot the points (-8/3, 0) and (0, 2) and draw a line through the two points.

List these items in order from largest to smallest: organelle, cell, tissue, organism, population, molecule.

Let's reason our way through this.

Organelles are the substructures (such as mitochondria and chloroplasts) inside cells that perform particular functions. They are therefore smaller than cells.

Cells are self-contained self-reproducing pieces of living matter, which form the makeup of all living organisms. They are therefore smaller than organisms.

Tissues are groups of cells that perform a common function, such as skeletal muscle tissue or fat tissue. They are therefore larger than cells.

Organisms are made up of organs which are made up of tissues, and are therefore larger than tissues.

Populations are groups of organisms living in a particular region. They are therefore larger than organisms.

Finally, molecules are the tiniest possible form of a given chemical substance that maintains its chemical properties. Chloroplasts contain molecules of chlorophyll. Therefore molecules are smaller than organelles.

Combine all of these things and this is our ordering from largest to smallest:
Population, organism, tissue, cell, organelle, molecule.

What poetic devices does Johnson Agard use in "The Clown's Wife"?

Besides its imagery, the most obvious poetic devices in this poem are irony and paradox. While the clown is the "king on the throne" (4) with a silly "red nose" (7) whose job it is to make his audience laugh, the wife assumes that same role when her husband gets home. The poem makes the statement that a person who works so hard at making others happy may have a more difficult time making himself happy. The paradox here is that making the lives of the general population better has a negative effect on the actual life of the individual performer. Perhaps this is true because the performer truly understands that he is only presenting a type of facade rather than reality.

The speaker, the wife, reveals the clown's melancholic personality when she notes that "I do me best to cheer him up, poor soul"(9). She worries that he buries his emotions inside, the opposite tendencies of a clown. The poet uses images to reveal the antics of a clown, but humorously uses them to describe not the clown himself, but the wife. In stanza four, she juggles, jokes and performs physical stunts to do, in effect, the same job her husband does during the day. Her understanding of his predicament lends to her characterization as a truly devoted wife. The husband appreciates his wife's efforts in the last lines, 16 and 17, of the poem: O life, ah life, what would I do without this clown of a wife?"

The reader understand the images portrayed by a typical street clown, but is more affected by the irony and paradox of the actual life of a clown. All is not fun and games in real life; even a clown knows that.

Is Mr. Poe afraid of living or death in Avi's The Man Who Was Poe?

In his real life, Edgar Allan Poe had many devastating experiences with death that tormented him the rest of his rather short life. He was so tormented by the deaths of his family members that, in Avi's novel The Man Who Was Poe, the character Edmund very correctly realizes that Poe has become afraid of living, as Edmund asserts in the final chapter, just before he and Poe part ways:

You're always talking...

You're always talking about death, ... but it's living you're frightened of. (p. 198)

All throughout the novel, Poe speaks of his fears such as the fears of being haunted by a ghost, who was really Edmund's mother in the cemetery looking for her daughter, and tormented by demons, who were really nothing more than people at a party who criticized Poe's work. Furthermore, Poe explains that the reason why he writes about evil in the world is because "writers write about what they know best. And ... what some writers know best is what they fear" (p. 117). These fears of his developed partially in response to the experiences of death he suffered, first the death of his mother when he was only three years old then the death of his young wife, whom he called Sis, just as Edmund calls his sister Sis in Avi's story.

It's because Poe's own Sis died in his own real-life story that Poe can't picture Edmund's Sis as doing anything but dying in Poe's version of Edmund's story. Edmund realizes Poe's inability to see Edmund's Sis live stems from Poe's fear of the continuation of life, since the continuation of life brings nothing but more fears, more sorrows, and even more death.

While Edmund is correct in his assessment of Poe's actions, Poe retorts by explaining that Edmund's Sis would have lived eternally if her death had been captured on the pages of his story. Poe's response shows us that Poe has come to cope with his griefs through his writing, because he sees his writing as being able to create that which can live eternally.

Why is the use of tempo effective in a fight scene of a play?

The question--why is the tempo of a fight that occurs within a play important--does not specify a particular play. There have, however, been plenty of examples throughout the history of theater in which fight or battle scenes have been incorporated into the action. Plays that were produced during Medieval times, or that were authored by Shakespeare, or that were produced in ancient Rome or during the present have included scenes of conflict, and these scenes have been structured for maximum effect through the use of, among other techniques, pacing. The pacing or tempo at which the fight is staged is manipulated for the purpose of maximizing the scene's dramatic impact or, conversely, moving the scene along as expeditiously as possible so that more important scenes or themes can be emphasized. It all depends upon the role of the fight in the broader context of the act or scene in which it occurs. Sword fights, which featured prominently in many plays during earlier periods, including adaptations of Alexander Dumas' The Three Musketeers and Count of Monte Christo, were staged in real-time tempos because of their centrality to the scenes in which they occurred. Fights staged in productions adapted from the works of Shakespeare will similarly use a tempo consistent with the rest of the action presented. Larger battle sequences, such as occur in Henry V, are adjusted for the obvious limitations of the stage (i.e., physical limitations in terms of the size of the stage and the number of actors involved), the fighting being depicted in truncated terms both because of those inherent limitations and because of the peripheral role of the actual fighting to the broader action.

Just as with film, fight scenes in plays are either sped up or slowed down depending upon the writer and/or director's vision for the role of the conflict in the broader story. The assassination of Julius Caesar is, obviously, a vital scene in Shakespeare's play, but, as readers and viewers of the play know, it is not central to the political machinations that provide the basis of the story the playwright wanted to relate. The scene, however, can be slowed down to emphasize its inherent brutality and the theme of betrayal involved, or it can be staged in normal pacing to emphasize its inevitability. Tempo is a tool directors use to manipulate audience sentiments and reactions.

In "A White Heron," how does Jewett use Sylvia's interest in birds to advance the plot?

Sarah Orne Jewett uses Sylvia's interest in birds to advance the plot when we learn that the visiting hunter's priority is locating the nest belonging to the white heron he's seen in the woods. On the night he arrives, Sylvia's grandmother tells him that "'the wild creatur's counts her one o' themselves. Squer'ls she'll tame to come an' feed right out o' her hands, and all sorts o' birds.'" The hunter didn't even attend to the personal information Mrs. Tilley shared because of "his eager interest in something else. 'So Sylvy knows all about birds, does she?' he exclaimed." Thus, Sylvia's knowledge of the birds makes her useful to the hunter, and so he prolongs his visit with her and her grandmother in an attempt to put her knowledge to use for him. Were it not for her interest in and knowledge of the birds, he would likely not have stayed with them as long as he does. He proceeds to charm her, offering her trinkets and even money in an attempt to win her over and get her to tell him where the heron makes its nest, and this series of interactions furthers the plot and introduces the conflict of the story.

If you could choose Connor, Risa, Lev, or Roland to be unwound, who would you choose? Give 3 reasons why.

This is a morbid question because it asks me to pick which teenager I want killed and chopped up into little pieces. With that said, I would definitely pick Roland. That guy has zero redeeming qualities about him. He is a bully through and through. He preys on the weak, and uses that fear to rule over other teenagers. Additionally, Roland isn't scared of selling out his friends and allies, if it secures him something in return. For example, Roland agrees to fly the Admiral, Connor, and Risa to a hospital in order to save the life of the Admiral. Roland agrees to do it because he plans on turning in Connor and Risa for the reward money. Next, Roland barters with the cops in order to secure his own safety and even more money. Roland tells the cops about the Graveyard and all of its 400 Unwinds.

Roland looks the Juvey-cop in the eye — no shame, no fear — and boldly presents his offer. "What if I told you I know where there are more than four hundred AWOL Unwinds? What if I helped you take down a whole smuggling operation? What would that be worth?"

I would definitely choose Roland to be unwound. The world is a safer place without him in it.

Does the story of Roseto establish Gladwell's purpose in Outliers?

Yes. Gladwell sets the stage at the beginning of Outliers by first defining what an outlier is, and then by following it up with the story of a small town in eastern Pennsylvania named Roseto. He says an outlier can consist of “a statistical observation that is markedly different in value from the others of the sample.” This description fits the residents of Roseto, who had fewer instances of heart disease (and of other diseases) than people living in other parts of the country. A team of researchers went to Roseto to see how these individuals could be so much healthier than the rest of us. They studied their genetic make-ups, diets, and lifestyles. Most of the people had emigrated from the town of Roseto Valfortore in the Italian province of Foggia. It turned out that they had brought their native paesani culture with them. This tie gave them a stronger sense of community than other American towns had. The people spent a lot of time together. Generations lived under the same roof. People worshiped at the same church and belonged to some of the same charitable organizations. Their good mental health and personal satisfaction was reflected in their good physical health. Gladwell explains that the town of Roseto was an example of an outlier: “a place that lay outside everyday experience, where the normal rules did not apply.”

What are four higher-order questions about selflessness in Shoeless Joe?

One question would be what is selflessness? Based on what is seen in Kinsella's work, how is selflessness defined? How do specific characters' actions reflect it? Explorations here could focus on the building of the diamond and Ray's embrace of his mission behind it.

Another question might examine the role baseball plays in defining the characterizations in the novel. It could be framed as a position question: "Do you think people in Shoeless Joe are defined by their selfless love of baseball?" This question requires an explanation of the relationship between selflessness, love of baseball, and specific characters in the narrative.

Another question could relate to the effects of selflessness in the novel. It could be a question such as "Based on its depiction in Shoeless Joe, is selflessness entirely positive?" This type of question will require selflessness to be shown in a complex manner. For example, when Ray plows over his field, it puts a financial hardship on the family. While selflessness is noble, those who are close to people who are selfless might experience challenging realities. As with the previous questions, this one is nuanced and requires a higher-order approach to see something usually seen as only good as perhaps containing more complexity.

A final question relating to selflessness relate to the athletic dimension: "Examining athletes in Shoeless Joe, what role does selflessness play in the pursuit of their success? How does this compare to modern athletes?" The first part of the question drives at the relationship that athletes like Shoeless Joe have towards selflessness. In a time before excessive materialism and wide-ranging branding, what role did selflessness play in athletic pursuits? An answer could get into the "love of the game" that is intrinsic to athletic selflessness. Finally, exploring selflessness in terms of similarities and differences to modern athletes could be very interesting. For example, how does the selflessness of Shoeless Joe Jackson compare to modern ballplayers like Barry Bonds, Mike Trout, or Alex Rodriguez? It might be insightful to explore this dynamic and delve into a comparison of athletes then and now.

The answers to these questions are going to be open-ended, driven by textual analysis and support.

What would George do if he didn't have Lennie in Of Mice and Men?

If George no longer were in the company of Lennie, he would be like so many other Depression Era itinerant workers who travel alone from seasonal job to job, friendless and alone, with nothing to anticipate in the future.

In Chapter One, while George and Lennie camp out in the clearing, George describes what it is like to be a "bindle stiff":

"Guys like us, that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the...

In Chapter One, while George and Lennie camp out in the clearing, George describes what it is like to be a "bindle stiff":

"Guys like us, that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world. They got no family. They don't belong no place. They come to a ranch an' work up a stake and then they go inta town and blow their stake, and the first thing you know they're pound-in' their tail on some other ranch. They ain't got nothing to look ahead to."

George also mentions here and in other situations that having a friend to travel with gives a man a sense of meaning and some worth, but if a man is alone, he has no one to look after him or care about him. With another man, George affirms that a man has someone by whom to "measure himself," as Crooks mentions. With Lennie, George always has someone to validate him, someone who listens to him, laughs with him, mourns with him--someone who keeps alive a dream of having a place of their own.

Without Lennie, George, at times, would have no one with whom to talk, no one with whom to laugh or cry, or simply to be with. Certainly, without a friend, there would be no one with whom to "measure things" and perceive whether experiences are beneficial or not. For George, a man's life has more meaning if he shares his thoughts and experiences.

Without Lennie, George would not have as much to worry about (or to complain about), but he would sense the separateness that others do, and he would be without hope and the strength and meaning of fraternity.

What is the social content of Orwell's Animal Farm?

Like any good satire or allegory, and almost all of George Orwell's work, Animal Farm is full of social commentary. Though he dismissed the book as a "fairy story," Orwell wanted to show how even those popular movements that started with good intentions could become corrupted once they gained power. The pigs launch a revolution in the name of Animalism, an ideology that promotes equality to all animals and the end to exploitation by Man. We see at the beginning of the book that this set of ideas, based on a speech given by Old Major in Chapter One, is sincere and motivated by an honest desire to make a better world (or farm.) But once Jones is driven from the farm, the pigs assume leadership, and begin to use their power to enrich themselves and, most importantly, to pursue more power. The idealism of the early days of Animal Farm, exemplified by the singing of the revolutionary song "Beasts of England" and the Seven Commandments on the barn, quickly becomes corrupted as Napoleon consolidates his power through propaganda and violence. By the end of the book, the pigs are indistinguishable from the humans they overthrew, and the lives of the rest of the animals are, if anything, worse than they were before. Throughout the book, we see serious social commentary. The ability of the state to manipulate information is symbolized by Squealer. The ease with which "the masses" can be swayed by jingoism is represented by the sheep, who drown out dissent by bleating "four legs good, two legs bad" at public meetings. There are countless other examples--every character in the book is intended to say something about society.

Overall, the social message of this book can be interpreted in a number of different ways. You could argue that Orwell was simply denouncing all popular movements, which were doomed to fail because people (symbolized by animals in the book) are inherently corrupt. But Orwell was a democratic socialist for most of his adult life, including when he wrote Animal Farm. It can also be read as a fairly straightforward allegory for the emergence of brutal Stalinism from the communist revolution in Russia. There is no doubt that Orwell had the Soviet Union and the rise of Stalin in mind, and that Animal Farm is a critique of totalitarianism. But, especially when read in tandem with 1984, his other great dystopian novel, Animal Farm has an even more sobering warning: Unless we are vigilant in keeping human rights and liberties at the forefront of our politics, all of our political systems are subject to sliding into totalitarianism.

"Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgiastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that’s no matter—tomorrow...

Fitzgerald uses the metaphor of the "green light" to signify the hoped-for future that we continue to believe is a possibility but that actually gets further and further away from us. We think to ourselves, we didn't reach it yesterday, but tomorrow we will be sure to try harder, and so we convince ourselves that we cannot fail to achieve success. We continue to believe that "one fine morning," our dreams will, in fact, be within our grasp and not somewhere in that distant future anymore. However, despite our belief, we are actually pushed backward, further from our dream the more we try to achieve it. Another metaphor compares us to boats that are "ceaselessly" pushed back by the current, a metaphor for reality that would prevent our hopes from coming true, for the failure of the American Dream.

The level of diction here is standard: it exists above conversational/neutral (our everyday speech) and below elevated (language that is often considered sacred and so is rarely changed). It is the kind of language that we often use in formal writing and the like. Words such as orgiastic (instead of emotional or even frenzied, for example), eluded (instead of escaped or outran), and ceaselessly (instead of never stopping) help to indicate the diction level.

Tone, in literature, refers to the author's feelings about the subject. In this case, it does seem as though the author is in agreement with Nick Carraway, the narrator, as we have seen this description play out throughout the text. Therefore, we might describe the tone as knowing or cynical.

This passage essentially describes what Carraway (and, likely, Fitzgerald) believe to be the human condition, at least for Americans living during the 1920s. There's this glitz and glamour about the age that comes from the clothing, the music, the dancing and entertainment industry. However, there's a tragedy about it too: the idea that the American Dream is a fiction that everyone wanted to believe in but that people really were not able to achieve. It was, simply, a "dream" in a true sense of the word. And there is something quite tragic, if naively innocent, about people's commitment to their belief in the possibility that this dream could be made reality when, in reality, we cannot reach it.

How did Wilfred Owen's personal life affect his poetry?

Wilfred Owen once wrote, "The poetry is in the pity," and he spent much of his life feeling sympathy for the oppressed. This sympathy is certainly evinced in his poetry.

When he was near the age of ten, his devoted mother took Wilfred on holiday to Broxton by the Hill, which is near Wales and has a lovely countryside. Owen declared in a poem it was there that his "poethood" was born. While he did go forward in his schooling, Owen was forced because of financial difficulties to leave the University of London and be a pupil and a lay assistant to the Vicar of Dunsden, Oxfordshire. It was thought, then, that Wilfred should take orders, but although he felt great sympathy for the suffering of others, he was not sufficiently convinced of the powers of faith and Christianity to relieve this suffering.

Owen left the religious life and went to teach at the Berlitz school in Bordeaux. The incipience of war made Owen impatient with his life, so he returned to England and enlisted. Owen was later sent to the western front in 1917; then, because it was so cold and the fighting was fierce, Owen became ill and was sent to a hospital where he met the poet Siegfried Sassoon. Sassoon encouraged Owen in his poetic efforts, and he assured Owen that his experiences at the front when he returned would help his poetry. Sadly, Owen returned to the front and died a week before the armistice.

Wilfred Owen once wrote to his mother that his life was composed of "bouts": bouts of religion, bouts of horrifying danger, and bouts of poetry. Always, however, Owen felt affection for his mother and sympathy for the oppressed.

Indeed, there is a poignancy in the Romantic images of the poetry of Wilfred Owen. In his "Dulce et Decorum Est," Owen expresses his sympathy for the suffering of humanity as well as his bitterness at the senseless harm done to men for the selfish purposes of those in power. Likewise, in "Anthem for Doomed Youth," he expresses his anger and pity for the soldiers whose deaths are marked by no choirs or bells, but only "shrill, demented choirs of wailing shells." Other poems, such as "Disabled"--

To-night he noticed how the women's eyes
Passed from him to the strong men that were whole
How cold and late it is! Why don't they come
And put him into bed? Why don't they come?--

and "Mental Cases," a haunting poem, comment with deep pathos upon the ruined lives of soldiers that he, unfortunately, viewed first-hand. Without doubt, his war experiences probably had the greatest influence upon Wilfred Owen's verse.

How does the schoolmaster Kantorek refer to his former students in All Quiet on the Western Front? Why do Paul and Kropp scoff at the term Kantorek...

The schoolmaster Kantorek refers to his former students as "Iron Youth."

Paul and Kropp scoff at the term Kantorek uses because it is incongruent with what the young soldiers have become. The word "iron" conjures up images of strength and durability, while the word "youth" conjures up images of innocence and life. Yet, Paul, Kropp, and the other soldiers are no longer the innocent, trusting youth they once were. Many of them have been physically...

The schoolmaster Kantorek refers to his former students as "Iron Youth."

Paul maintains that it was men of the older generation like Kantorek who taught him and his peers that "duty to one's country is the greatest thing." To Paul, the older generation were "very free with all these expressions" of duty and patriotism. However, they were never the ones who had to sacrifice life and limb to fulfill the dictates of their philosophy. In other words, Paul and Kropp think that the older generation has betrayed them.

They surpassed us only in phrases and in cleverness. The first bombardment showed us our mistake, and under it the world as they had taught it to us broke in pieces. While they continued to write and talk, we saw the wounded and dying. While they taught that duty to one's country is the greatest thing, we already knew that death-throes are stronger.

The horrific experiences of war have essentially made the young soldiers old before their time. They no longer stand upon the threshold of life, as Kantorek would have maintained. Instead, adrift on a sea of confusion and pain, they are bereft of any hope for a better future. Both Paul and Kropp are powerless as they watch their fellow soldier, Kemmerich, die. They can do nothing for him; all the patriotic catchphrases are impotent in the face of youthful death.

While the older men have "wives, children, occupations, and interests... a background...so strong that the war cannot obliterate it," young men like Paul and Kropp have nothing to hold on to. So, the idea that they are "Iron Youth" is ludicrous to them because it is incongruent with what war has reduced them to.

I have an essay due in a couple of days on Shakespeare's Macbeth. We must compare a scene that stood out to us in the movie and compare that same...

There have been many movie versions of Macbeth, including one by Orson Welles. If I had your assignment, and your tight deadline, I would choose a movie scene that was very different from the same scene in the play. This would make it easy to point out the differences. Movies can do visual things that are vastly different from stage plays. The film makers have all kinds of technical effects available. Two scenes I...

You might compare a movie version of the scene in which Banquo appears at Macbeth's banquet to Act 3, Scene 4 in the play. Shakespeare was very limited in props and effects. He could only show Banquo with tattered clothes and a lot of blood on him. Any movie version would make Banquo more ghostly and the whole scene more spectacular. You could focus on the visual effects and ignore the dialogue if you wanted to make your job easier. I am thinking that you have very little time.

Another possibility would be to compare the scene in the movie in which Macbeth confronts the three witches and they show him the three apparitions. This would correspond to Act 4, Scene 1 in Shakespeare's play. No doubt any movie version of the apparitions would be far more spectacular because the film makers could employ all kinds of special effects. Therefore it would be easy to point out the differences.

Movie versions of plays always tend to do things that can't be done on a stage. The filmmakers will try to "open up" the play by showing outdoor scenes. For example, in Act 1, Scene 6, King Duncan can only pretend to be looking up at Macbeth's castle. But in a movie version they would probably show Duncan outdoors looking up at a real castle.

It seems to me that you would be well advised to stay away from scenes in which there are just two or three people talking to each other and pick a scene in which there are lots of visual effects.

The distance between the object and the eyepiece of a compound microscope is 25.0 cm. The focal length of its objective lens is 0.200 cm and the...

In the problem, the near point of the person using the microscope is 25 cm. And the object is located 25 cm from the eyepiece.

Since the object is located at the near point, the angular magnification is at its maximum.

The formula of maximum angular magnification of a lens is:

`m_(max) = 1 + 25/f`

where f is the focal length of the lens.

Since the focal length of the eyepiece is 2.60cm, plug-in...

In the problem, the near point of the person using the microscope is 25 cm. And the object is located 25 cm from the eyepiece.

Since the object is located at the near point, the angular magnification is at its maximum.

The formula of maximum angular magnification of a lens is:

`m_(max) = 1 + 25/f`

where f is the focal length of the lens.

Since the focal length of the eyepiece is 2.60cm, plug-in f=2.60.

`m_(max) = 1 +25/2.60`

`m_(max)=10.6`

Therefore, the maximum angular magnification of the eyepiece is 10.6 .