Why is Tom Buchanan portrayed unfavorably?

Tom Buchanan is shown in a consistently unfavorable light throughout the novel. He has a beautiful wife, but he is blatantly unfaithful to her. Tom shows bad taste in the woman who is his current mistress. He takes pride in introducing Nick to her right under her husband's nose.
Myrtle Wilson is cheap, ignorant and vulgar but seems suited to her rich lover. She deceives her poor husband without qualms. The love and sincerity of George Wilson only make his wife look more ruthless. Tom Buchanan is a big, brutal man. He shows himself at his worst when he gets into a drunken quarrel with Myrtle at their New York "love nest" and breaks her nose with a blow of his open hand.
Fitzgerald's purpose in creating such an unfaithful, unattractive and unsympathetic husband for Daisy was to soften the culpability of Gatsby in intruding into the life of a married woman with a small child and trying to win her away from her husband. If Tom Buchanan were a better husband, it would make Gatsby look like more of an unscrupulous predator.
Both Nick Carraway and Jordan Baker see Tom as an ignorant man who knows nothing but polo. Tom is rich because he inherited all his money—and he is getting richer all the time because these are the Roaring Twenties and the stock market is soaring. He never earned any money in his life. Gatsby, by contrast, earned everything he has—although he earned most of it through clandestine enterprises with shady associates.

How did the Civil Rights Movement(s) and the 1980s contribute to reshaping conceptions of American identity and the meaning of the nation to different groups of people? Which period was more influential to the transforming of the nation? Select two topics or social groups to respond to this question.

Starting in the 1950s, the Civil Rights movement shaped the idea of American identity as one of greater equality among different groups. While all of the goals of the movement were not met and the struggle for equality is ongoing, African Americans began to push for greater equality with regard to voting rights, legal rights, and economic status. Later, in the 1960s and 1970s, the movement began to stress the importance of Black pride and the celebration of Black identity. Blacks began to wear their hair and dress in ways that stressed their own identity and not simply acceptance of white standards, and they continued to celebrate their distinct history and traditions.
Many groups were inspired by the Civil Rights movement, including LBGTQ+ people in the 1980s. Groups such as ACT UP, or the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (see their website below), began to agitate to direct more funding to solving the AIDS crisis. Protests centered not only on helping people with AIDS and helping to find a cure for AIDS but also on granting greater recognition of and respect for LBGTQ+ people. Therefore, the 1980s continued the development of civil rights organizations that began in the 1960s and continued the quest for the recognition and equality of different social groups.
https://actupny.org/

Were Europeans the only explorers?

This depends on one's definition of exploration. There are some that claim that Polynesians arrived in the New World well before the earliest artifacts from the Bering Strait land bridge. Others claim that the earliest Americans have more in common genetically with early hunters from mainland Asia. These early groups, whether they came via land bridge or whaleboat, can be considered the first explorers of the New World, as they arrived to a land that was untouched and plentiful with game. Not much is known about their arrival, and they are currently a popular topic in anthropology and archaeology. Charles C. Mann has written a series of books on the topic of early Americans and how they interacted with their environment, the first of which is titled 1491. The book describes the culture of early Americans and shows that they were not passive inhabitants of the New World; rather, they adapted the new land to meet their needs in ways similar to what Europeans would do centuries later.

Was Puck a servant of King Oberon?

In Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream, Oberon is the king of the fairies. Puck is a magical sprite or pixie—a sort of supernatural being who belongs to the world of the fairies, but is not quite one of them. He is a servant of Oberon—he explains that his duty is to "jest to" Oberon. He therefore fulfills a similar role to the king's "fool" character we sometimes find in other Shakespeare plays, such as King Lear. Rather than being a manservant or general assistant, Puck is employed by Oberon for the purpose of providing entertainment, and it is generally understood that he cannot be entirely controlled, even by Oberon. Oberon is fond of him, calling him "my gentle Puck," and Puck does usually obey when Oberon calls him, but this cannot prevent him from being a nuisance to other people.

What are five important symbols (tangible or intangible) in Bridge of Clay by Markus Zusak?

There are many symbols in the novel The Bridge of Clay written by Markus Zusak. Five specific symbols are: the bridge, the names of the pets, the clothespin, the piano, and Clay's book written by Michelangelo.
The bridge itself is a symbol for the work that Clay is doing to repair the relationships between his family members. This family was torn apart when their mother died of cancer, and Clay is determined to help his family heal.
The names of the Dunbar family's pets are also symbols. Each pet's name is the same as a character from Homer's writings. This is important because when their mother moved, she brought with her Homer's writings so that she could learn English.
The clothespin is a symbol of Clay's guilt for helping his mother commit suicide when her cancer became too painful. Clay carries this clothespin with him as a reminder of what he did and to remind him of the love he had for his mother.
The piano is a symbol of the love between the Dunbars. Penny bought this piano when she first moves. The piano is sent to Michael's house on accident and is the reason that they ever meet in the first place. Michael proposes by writing on the keys of the piano.
A last symbol is the book that Clay shares with Carey. This book belonged to his father during his first marriage, and it shows that Clay knows about his father's life because his mother shared the stories of their lives with Clay before she died.
All of these symbols represent the story of the Dunbar family.

Management can be defined as "a process of bringing about improvement in knowledge, skill, habit, and attitude of the employees in an organization." Discuss.

Management must be oriented toward the employees’ success, which is crucial to the organization’s success. Clearly established organizational goals play an important role, and the manager is responsible for putting those goals into practice. Employees’ attitudes are the bedrock of the other attributes, for lack of positive attitude will impede their acquisition of knowledge, skills, and habits.
Much of the weight of the employees’ success falls to the individual manager. Their leadership depends on fulfilling basic management functions of planning, organizing, directing, and implementing. Specific to employee performance, once the short and long term plans are in place, the staff must be organized in line with the plans so that each employee understands their role.
Management is responsible for delegation of duties, and should not perform the duties themselves. Not one individual employee but groups or teams are responsible for performance of the necessary duties. The manager must do their best to ensure that they consistently meet quality standards. Effective communication and motivation are both important components of ensuring that outcome. Establishing effective initial training and providing ample opportunity for updating necessary skills and knowledge will further help ensure that habits and attitudes remain positive and that employees contribute most effectively to furthering organizational goals.

Elaborate the significance of the proviso scene in The Way of the World.

In the famous proviso scene in act 4, Millamant and Mirabell discuss the conditions under which they would be prepared to get married. On the face of it, it would appear that a relationship so completely hedged about with conditions is utterly devoid of love; to the uninitiated, the proviso scene seems like a discussion between two lawyers haggling over the finer points of a contract.
Yet in actual fact, Millamant and Mirabell are very much in love. It's simply that in keeping with established conventions they conduct themselves with nothing less than the expected level of decorum. Here, as in many Restoration comedies, a conversation between a man and a woman develops into a battle of wits, an opportunity for both parties to display their verbal dexterity. In such a battle, there is invariably a winner and a loser. Crucially, however, the proviso scene in The Way of the World departs from this dramatic convention. In this case, both sides win in that they agree to abide by the conditions they've set down together.
And the proviso scene doesn't just play with dramatic convention, either; it subverts the norms of polite society by showing that a woman can be the equal of any man. The very idea that a woman can lay down conditions for being married is subversive, to say the least. In so-called polite society at that time, women would've been expected to do as they were told in matters relating to marriage as in much else. Yet here we have Millamant making demands of her future husband, albeit in a spirit of mutual love and respect.
Though she may be very far from approaching contemporary ideals of liberated womanhood, Millamant, by insisting on certain conditions to safeguard her independence after marriage, challenges the prevailing gender relations of her age. And that in itself is significant.

What are some examples of trust and distrust in Lord of the Flies?

One example of trust in Lord of the Flies (though it is misplaced) is when Piggy, understanding himself to be weaker than the other children, tries to ally with Ralph and his cohort. He tries to achieve this by letting Ralph know an embarrassing secret: that people usually denigrate him using the nickname "Piggy." Ralph exploits this for his own gain, immediately announcing it to the tribe. Though Piggy goes on to be Ralph's advisor, this moment helps lead to Piggy's demise, foreshadowed by Jack's later campaign to "hunt Pigs."
An example of distrust is the relationship between Ralph and Jack. They have conflicting agendas on the island: while Ralph wants to establish a form of governance and an ethical code, hoping that they will be rescued, Jack perceives the island as a "survival of the fittest" scenario. As he internalizes the danger of the island, Jack becomes more animalistic and hostile to Ralph, morphing into an antisocial character foil of Ralph and his campaign for society.

What is Gray's attitude towards the elegy?

Thomas Gray's poem "Elegy Written in a Country Courtyard" is a sorrowful poem. The speaker in the poem is observing a cemetery, where he sees a variety of people "each in his narrow cell for ever laid." The mood of the poem from the onset is both sad and contemplative. Elegies, as a general rule, are written to lament the dead, and are normally quite mournful.
The speaker starts off describing both the countryside, and the things the dead will no longer see or hear. The speaker states:

The breezy call of incense-breathing Morn,
The swallow twitt'ring from the straw-built shed,
The cock's shrill clarion, or the echoing horn,
No more shall rouse them from their lowly bed.


This gives both a visual and auditory description of the world that has been lost to the dead. They shall never wake again. The speaker sounds wistful.

The common thread that seems to tie all of the people together in the graveyard is their mediocrity. The speaker describes their lives as quite simple:



Their sober wishes never learn'd to stray;
Along the cool sequester'd vale of life
They kept the noiseless tenor of their way.


This shows the dead lying in the cemetery have lived quiet lives. The speaker thinks of all the mundane lives of the dead, and believes we can "read their history in a nation's eyes."

Toward the end of the poem it seems the speaker is possibly contemplating his own life and death. He uses words like "lonely" and "longing" to bring forth a solitary feel, reminiscent of the solitude experienced in death. The poem goes on to an epitaph, which we can presume to be the speaker's.

Throughout the poem, the speaker remains quite morose and introspective. He does not feel extreme passion for the dead in the cemetery he speaks of because he does not know them. He mourns both our mortality in general, and his own death, which is also inevitable.

What new ideas and techniques resulted in more realistic and accurate portrayals of people in Renaissance paintings?

There is a major difference between the portrayals of human figures in early Renaissance paintings and frescoes (think, for example, of Giotto's The Gift of the Magi and Fra Angelico's The Anunciation) and those which emerged in the 1480s, starting particularly with Botticelli's work. The earlier works mimic the conventions of the Middle Ages, in which figures are rather identical, two-dimensional, and have elongated bodies. More notably, babies in these paintings look like miniature adults.
Later Renaissance artists, however, took an interest in Classical and Hellenistic sculpture. Their predecessors had eschewed the Classical world, due to associations with behavior that the Catholic Church deemed sinful. Humanism, a philosophy that encouraged the view that the human body was not the source of sin but a thing of beauty, resulted in more attention to and appreciation of the human form. Classical sculptors depicted the diversity of the human body in all stages of life. They depicted its dynamism, too. Consider, for instance, Laocoon and His Sons as an example.
The scientific revolution also took place during the Renaissance. Studies in anatomy, especially those by the Belgian physician and anatomist Andreas Vesalius in the 1500s, would give painters and sculptors a greater understanding of the human body.

What is the conflict that happens between Meg and Calvin O' Keefe about?

The conflict between Meg and Calvin is mainly a clash of personalities. Though incredibly bright, Meg doesn't do well at school; she just doesn't fit in. Calvin, on the other hand, is a very popular student and seems in his element both in class and on the basketball court.
Calvin also rubs up Meg the wrong way by spreading unfounded rumors about the Murry family. When he first meets them, he rudely says that Charles is "supposed to be a moron" and that Meg is "supposed to be dumb in school." If there's one thing we know about Meg, it's that she's fiercely protective of her family and its good name. But it's only when Calvin starts mouthing off about Dr. Murry's running off with another woman that Meg leaps to the defense of her family. It's fair to say that Calvin's got off on the wrong foot with Meg, and so it's no wonder she harbors such animosity towards him.

What figurative language devices were used in On the Road by Jack Kerouac? How were they used in the text? Provide examples.

When discussing how figurative language is used in writing, we are looking at devices like metaphors, similes, personification and more. Most good writers will often use many, if not all, figurative language devices across a work the length of a novel, so it would be simple to go through On the Road and just mark out whenever he uses them; however, what is truly important is to find what figurative language is unique or central to the writing. For instance, in The Great Gatsby there is a focus on alliteration, which gives the writing a flowy, dreamy quality.
Similarly, Kerouac relies on hyperbole far more than other authors do, giving the events of On the Road a heightened sense of gravity and importance. Very rarely will the narrator of the story ever just refer to things exactly as they are. Instead, a fun moment is the greatest day of his life; a beautiful woman is the most beautiful woman in the world. Some quick examples of this:

And they were the silliest shoes in America.

Obviously, the narrator has no idea if they are the silliest shoes in America—how could he? Still, this statement conveys the sense that he is fully and absolutely engaged in his life. Nothing is small to him, and everything is the most.

I walked into the least likely place in the world.

This is an interesting use of hyperbole, as it is being exaggerated in a negative sense, showing that hyperbole can go both ways.
In my eyes, Kerouac's use of hyperbole mirrors the mindset of the Beat generation, the writing movement that he was a part of and helped popularize. The Beat generation was all about freedom and fully experiencing life, and feeling like everything you experience is the most it can possibly be in the world gives off the sense that life is being fully experienced.

Why is the concept of center of mass relevant for the radial velocity (RV) method of detecting exoplanets? What is radial velocity? Why is that the only part of a star’s velocity that the Doppler effect allows us to measure? If a certain star’s Doppler shift at a given instance is zero, can we infer that the star must be not moving relative to us at that moment? Explain. What exactly do astronomers measure about a star’s spectrum over time in order to come up with its radial velocity curve?

In astronomy and astrophysics, the observational study of the movements and the motions of the stars is known as stellar kinematics. Essentially, the main goal of stellar kinematics is to measure the stellar velocities of our galaxy (the Milky Way) and the closest galaxies to it, and the internal kinematics of the stars from the more distant galaxies. The motion of a star relative to the observing point is defined as its space velocity. Space velocity is divided into two types: radial and tangential velocity.
The radial velocity is defined as the relative movement or the kinematics of a star toward or away from the Earth. It is, basically, the distance from the Earth to the star, which is usually and often accurately measured with a high-resolution spectrum. Thus, it is called spectroscopic radial velocity.
The radial velocity is the motion of the star along our line of sight. If the star is moving away from the observer, or if the distance between the star and the observer is increasing, then we have a positive radial velocity. This shifts the spectral lines to the red end of the spectrum, which makes the shift a red shift; if the star is moving toward the observer, or the distance between the star and the observer is decreasing, then we have a negative radial velocity. This moves the spectral lines toward the blue end of the spectrum, which makes the shift a blue shift.
This entire shift or effect is defined as the Doppler Effect and is most commonly used to measure the radial velocity and the speed of the stars and/or other astronomical objects as they move toward or away from the Earth.
If these kinds of shifts are regular and fixed, then the star is moving back and forth toward and away from the Earth, usually in a circular or elliptic motion. These motions mean that there is a body orbiting around the star, and if it has a low enough mass, then it can be called a planet. Doppler spectroscopy, also known as the radial velocity method, is also the most reliable and effective method for locating extra-solar planets.
The Doppler Effect and the star’s radial velocity are graphically shown with the radial velocity curve and are mathematically calculated with the following equation:
vrad/c = (lambdashift – lambdarest ) / lambdarest
In which lambdashift is the shifted or the observed value, lambdarest is the rested or the un-shifted value, and c is the speed of light. If a certain star’s Doppler shift or its radial velocity at a given instance is zero, then we measure the tangential velocity.
The majority of stars move at an angle to the observer’s line of sight. The part of the star’s total velocity that is perpendicular to the line of sight is called tangential velocity. Essentially, this is the motion of the star that is perpendicular to the direction to the Sun. If it weren’t for their tangential velocities, the planets of our solar system, for instance, would’ve crashed into the Sun. If an object’s radial velocity is zero, then its orbit must be circular. Measuring the tangential or proper velocity of a star is a challenging process which can take years or decades to complete, as the star moves across our line of sight. Thus, the radial velocity is more often calculated.

What is ironic about the stolen sneakers?

Much of Holes is written in an ironic tone, and irony is much in evidence in this particular part of the story. Stanley has been sent to Camp Green Lake for stealing a pair of sneakers he didn't actually steal—they fell on top of his head from an overpass as he was walking home one day. It turns out they'd been donated to a homeless shelter by his sporting hero, Clyde Livingston, who wasn't best pleased about his donation being stolen.
What's ironic about the stolen-sneaker incident is that it illustrates the false impressions that just about everyone has about Stanley. The prosecution don't accept the likely story that the sneakers just fell on his head from above (though they did); the guards at Camp Green Lake don't believe for a minute that he's innocent; and the boys in his tent are pretty certain that Stanley wasn't arrested for stealing sneakers.

Compare Asagi and George.

Both Joseph and George appear primarily as male objects of affection for Beneatha. While each of them have numerous distinct qualities, they are both young black men. During the course of the play, Beneatha distances herself from George and grows closer to Joseph.
George is African American and apparently well off. We do not learn his back story—in the sense of family history that led to his prosperity. His concerns are for class status, which he identifies with assimilation into dominant white society. Personally, he is overbearing and unpleasant in his interactions with Bennie, mocking her and criticizing her clothes and interest in Africa.
Joseph, who is from Nigeria, is a relatively new friend. As he knows Bennie from college, he seems to have a better grasp of her aspirations. He is heavily invested in teaching her about Africa and even more so in encouraging her interest in her heritage. The idea of her becoming a physician appeals to him, because he knows how great the need is. As the play ends, he proposes marriage and asks that she go to Africa with him.
Hansberry draws an unexpected contrast in that the American man has the more conventional gender expectations than the African man.

Joseph Asagai is portrayed as a genuine Nigerian student, who is extremely attracted to Beneatha and wishes to take her back to Africa with him. Joseph Asagai is a champion of Pan-Africanism and rails against assimilationists. He encourages Beneatha to get in touch with her African roots and even gives her authentic Nigerian attire. Despite Joseph Asagai's affinity for traditional African customs and culture, he is a forward-thinking man, who supports Beneatha's dreams and challenges her to overlook western civilization's perception of success. Joseph Asagai is also a charming, compassionate man, who is both wise and charismatic.
Despite both characters being attracted to Beneatha, George Murchison is Joseph Asagai's polar opposite. George is a wealthy pedant, who values material success and embraces western civilization. He is depicted as a rather callous man with a superiority complex, and he does not support Beneatha's future aspirations. Unlike Joseph Asagai, George has very little in common with Beneatha and is more concerned with his social status than appreciating his African ancestry.

How is the drama of Oscar Wao's life shaped and complicated by the contours of Dominican history, both under Rafael Trujillo and in the long, contentious aftermath of his dictatorship?

The simple answer to this question is that because Oscar's family lived through the trauma of Trujillo's dictatorship, he was raised in the shadow of that pain. His grandfather protected his family for as long as he could, but eventually Trujillo touched even his rich and privileged life. His mother, the only one to survive the fallout, has the bad luck of falling in love with the husband of Trujillo's sister. She is beaten nearly to death for it and grows up to become an exhausted and sometimes cruel mother. The drama of Oscar's sister running away, being dragged home, and then being sent to the Dominican Republic plays out—a long and unending theatrical performance.
Throughout the novel, the importance of fuku is expressed by the narrator. Fuku is the curse laid upon the New World by the European colonizers, and the narrator believes Oscar's entire family is affected by their own personal fuku. This Dominican expression of national grief and struggle is deeply ingrained in history and culture, so one could argue that Oscar's life is shaped by the impact of this family curse. It is the source of his bad luck—why he can't get a girlfriend, why his sister is so unhappy, and a root of his deep depression. It all circles back to fuku, the reason why his family seems cursed, originating with Abelard and Trujillo.

What is the relationship between intercultural communication and intercultural business?

Intercultural communication involves at least two people from differing cultural backgrounds navigating both the spoken and unspoken rules of exchanging ideas. More than simply understanding the language, intercultural communication includes other signals of understanding, agreement (or not), body language, and attitudes which are possibly implied. In some cultures, it is impolite to make eye contact. In some, touching the speaker is not allowed (not even in shaking hands). The same hand symbol that means "okay" in the US means "money" in Japan. The Yoruba culture winks to send their children from a room, and the Chinese find it rude all together. In many countries in the Middle East, showing the bottom of your foot (by crossing one leg over the other) is considered disrespectful. Intercultural communication takes into consideration how situations like these vary from culture to culture.
Intercultural business refers to the formation of business relationships with people of differing cultures. It takes into account the varying cultural influences on business roles and laws. For example, some societies do not allow women to have a leadership role in a business or to even participate in a working environment. Those engaged with business representatives from such cultures would have to find a way to mediate the presence of women in business transactions in order to work effectively. Businesses also must be conscious of laws that differ from one country (or culture) to another and not simply operate in assumptions that the laws of one's own country extend elsewhere, as miscommunication can devastate business efforts. Intercultural business seeks to foster effective business partnerships that cross cultural boundaries.

What career did Bernard choose and what special opportunity did Bernard achieve later in life?

As a child, Bernard is depicted as an unathletic, intelligent boy, who looks up to Biff and tries his best to warn him about studying for his math exam. Willy looks down on Bernard as a child and believes that he will not be successful in life because he is not well-liked. Unlike Willy, Charley instills positive character traits in Bernard, who learns the importance of hard work and education as a young man. Unfortunately, Biff grows up to be an unsuccessful adult, who cannot hold a steady job or find a meaningful career. In contrast, Bernard grows up to become a successful lawyer, who will be presenting a case in front of the Supreme Court. When Bernard runs into Willy at his father's office, he is depicted as a humble, intelligent man. Bernard serves as Biff's foil throughout the play and illustrates the importance of hard work, commitment, and education.

How were African American slaves coerced into slavery?

African tribes engaged in warfare and regularly took slaves from the tribes they defeated in battle. This was a standard procedure in the ancient world, and it continued in some areas until relatively late in human history. Turning defeated enemies into slaves did not mean turning whole tribes into slaves, but it did mean that captured enemies were considered slaves. As the profits from the slave trade increased, some tribes increased their raids on other tribes in order to capture more slaves for sale.
Slaves were subjected to horrible conditions during the Middle Passage. Those that survived were likely suffering from trauma and in shock by the time they went up for sale. After being sold, slaves were subjected to physical abuse and isolation from other groups. This, combined with the new surroundings, made it difficult for slaves to regain their previous identities and likely caused some depersonalization and other symptoms of severe trauma that may have looked like merely giving up.

Why were the New England colonies founded?

The colonies of New England were established in order to provide a home for English religious dissenters. The Pilgrims initially went to Holland but they soon realized that they wanted to retain their English culture but practice their religion the way they wished. In 1620 they arrived in Plymouth where, after months of hunger and attrition, they sought to create their own "city on a hill" which would serve as a model for the rest of the world. The Pilgrims sought to leave the Church of England as they thought it too similar to the Catholic Church. England was more than happy to see them go as it would later become English habit to allow troublemakers to leave rather than persecute them. Over time, the descendants of these Pilgrims became quite successful. They believed in the Elect meaning that God preordained some people to go to Heaven. In order to show that one was in this group, one was successful since it made sense to them that God would smile upon those called the Elect. Through hard work and thrift, the New England colonies thrived. England benefited from this as it got rid of potential problems as well as gained foodstuffs and timber from New England. As New England grew due to population growth, England could also claim a larger portion of North America and have a stronger claim to it than the Spanish or French who claimed large portions of land that were barely inhabited by Europeans.

What obstacles challenge Lysander and Hermia's love?

The main obstacle to Hermia and Lysander's love is Hermia's father, Egeus. Egeus doesn't want Hermia to marry Lysander; he wants her to marry Demetrius. To overcome this obstacle, Hermia and Lysander decide to run away and get married in secret. It's left unclear why Egeus prefers Demetrius to Lysander, given that both Lysander and Demetrius are of equal social standing.
Another obstacle to Hermia and Lysander's love is the love potion that Puck sprinkles over Lysander's eyes while Lysander sleeps. This potion makes Lysander fall in love with Helena, and while he is magically in love with Helena, he abandons Hermia. This obstacle is overcome at the end of the play when another potion, an antidote, is given to Lysander. Lysander duly discovers that he doesn't really love Helena and loves Hermia once more.

Describe Ginger’s mistreatment by her owners prior to coming to Bertwick Park and the change in her behavior after coming to Bertwick Park.

Black Beauty relates the tale of when he lived with Squire Gordon at Birtwick Park. When the young colt arrives at his new home, he's led by the groom into a loose box, so-called because the horse that's put into it isn't tied up and is left loose to do as he pleases. At first, all seems well. Black Beauty's given some nice oats to eat, and then meets a kindly gray pony by the name of Merrylegs.
But the pleasant atmosphere doesn't last for long. A tall chestnut mare called Ginger gives Black Beauty a piece of her mind. It's her box he's standing in, and she doesn't like it one little bit. She thinks it's outrageous that a young colt should turn a fine lady horse like her out of her own home. Black Beauty points out that he's done no such thing; he was put in Ginger's box by a man. He tries to placate Ginger, but it's clear that he's going to have more than a little trouble with this proud, pompous mare.
After Ginger goes out for the afternoon, Merrylegs tells Black Beauty all about her. Apparently, Ginger has a bad habit of snapping and biting; that's why the stable hands removed her from the loose-box and put Black Beauty in there instead. Ginger's quite a violent horse; and after she bit James the stable boy, Squire Gordon's children became too scared to go anywhere near the stables. Merrylegs says that Ginger told her that she'd been treated very badly before she arrived at Birtwick Park; this would account for the nasty biting habit that she's developed.
Later on, Ginger opens up to Black Beauty about the appalling treatment she's received in the past. Since being taken from her mother at an early age, and forced to mix with a lot of young colts, she's never been cared for by any horse or man. With her wild, noble spirit, Ginger deeply resented being treated as nothing more than a piece of horseflesh by Samson, the son of one of her previous owners, Mr. Ryder. As well as being an alcoholic, Samson was also very cruel, and used to run poor Ginger ragged, making her run around the training field all day. If Ginger ever refused to do as he asked, Samson would subject her to brutal physical punishments, using whips and spurs. Thankfully, Samson's old man took over the reins and Ginger was able to receive proper training. But by then, the damage had been done, and from then on, Ginger's instinctive reaction is to lash out at anyone she perceives as a threat.
After being broken in, Ginger worked as a coach-horse for a fashionable gentlemen. But she hated the work; the cruel check-rein that was used on her caused considerable pain and restricted her movement, a serious problem for such a free-spirited horse. But Ginger's master couldn't care less; all he wanted was a fancy horse that looked good; he never once thought of Ginger's welfare. Ginger responded by kicking herself clear of the harness and so ended up being sold; that's how she wound up at Squire Gordon's stables. Kicking is clearly an instinctive expression of Ginger's desire for freedom, and it makes her rather difficult to handle.
On the whole, things are much better for Ginger at Birtwick Park. Here she receives much more kindness and understanding. But because of all that she's been through in the past, all the cruelty she's had to endure, she will never fully be able to trust another human being as long as she lives.

What the difference between the novel Animal Farm and Animal Farm Revisited?

Great question! George Orwell’s 1945 novel Animal Farm is an allegorical critique of Soviet Communism. Orwell tells a simple story of farm animals ousting their human owners and attempting to govern based on the principles of "Animalism." As the pigs become increasingly authoritarian, Orwell uses his tale to demonstrate the corrupting influence of power, the importance of mass-education, and the potency of propaganda, among other themes.
One of the primary ways Orwell explores these ideas is with the inclusion of the precepts of Animalism, as provided by Old Major in the opening chapter. Old Major establishes the “Seven Commandments” of Animalism as guiding principles for all inhabitants of the farm. These rules are:

1. Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.2. Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.3. No animal shall wear clothes.4. No animal shall sleep in a bed.5. No animal shall drink alcohol.6. No animal shall kill any other animal.7. All animals are equal.

The parallels between Communism and Animalism are clear, particularly in the first and seventh commandments. What is interesting about Orwell’s story is how these commandments are slowly twisted and altered until, at the end of the story, the philosophy practiced by the ruling class of pigs is antithetical to the original intent of Animalism.
Animal Farm Revisited, written in 1971 but only published in 2008 by Irwin Friedman, is a relatively unknown pastiche of Animal Farm. In this “tribute” to Orwell, Friedman criticizes the values espoused by Western democratic powers to show that even the noblest of ideas can be corrupted for evil.
Irwin’s story closely follows the original in many respects. For example, the characters are identical. Napoleon, Boxer, Clover, Benjamin, and the whole host of familiar animals inhabit the story. There are wars with the neighboring Mr. Pilkington, as in Orwell’s original. Even the propagandistic slogans are similar. In Irwin’s Animal Farm Revisited, one of the slogans repeated by the dumber animals is “Two legs make a better leader,” which is similar to the sheep’s slogan of “Four legs good, two legs better!” at the end of Orwell’s story.
There are, however, numerous differences in the plot. Squealer, for example, is a war-mongering general rather than a smooth-talking propagandist. Clover is executed for desertion early in the novel instead of surviving to the end. In Friedman’s version, controversial changes to the laws of the farm happen with the guise of free political discussion and consensus rather than in secret.
This final example broaches the primary difference between Orwell and Friedman’s versions of the story: Friedman is deeply cynical of Western values and shapes his “Seven Commandments” to explicitly reflect this distrust. Here are the precepts followed by the animals in Friedman’s Animal Farm Revisited.

1. Fight only just wars.2. Democracy, equality & fraternity!3. Progress and enlightenment at all costs.4. Justice will always triumph.5. Speak nothing but the truth.6. Viva free enterprise (aka capitalism).7. Never lose faith.

Notice the mixture of Enlightenment values and Christian virtues. Much as the Seven Commandments are twisted in Orwell’s story, Friedman twists these Western values in his Animal Farm Revisited. Friedman’s version ends differently, but no less hopelessly, than Orwell’s.
This highlights the major difference between Orwell and Friedman: they are critiquing different things. George Orwell uses his story of Animal Farm to attack Soviet Communism, as practiced by Stalin. Irwin Friedman employs pastiche in Animal Farm Revisited to critique the core Christian, capitalist, and Enlightenment values and beliefs of the Western World.

What did Herbert Hoover think of FDR?

It's fair to say that Hoover didn't have much time for FDR, either personally or politically. He thought FDR a bit of a lightweight, a shameless populist who would say anything and do anything to get elected. He contrasted what he saw as FDR's chameleon-like position on a range of issues with his own deeply held commitments, onto which he held with such tenacity, however unpopular they were with the American people.
In keeping with the prevailing prejudice, Hoover also didn't like the idea of someone as severely disabled as FDR running for high office. The fact that he actually lost to someone with such serious disabilities—and by a huge margin, too—rankled with him further.
On a political level, the two men were miles apart in their respective philosophies. Hoover stuck tenaciously to the rugged individualism to which he'd devoted his entire adult life, whereas FDR proposed the biggest single expansion of federal government in the nation's history as a means of saving the country from its worst ever economic crisis.
Relations between the two would almost certainly have been frosty in any case, but they degenerated further during the four month hiatus between FDR's election and his inauguration. During that time, Hoover asked FDR to support his policies for dealing with the banking crisis. FDR flatly refused, believing that they didn't go far enough in addressing the serious problems of the American banking industry.
On the eve of FDR's first inauguration, the two men and their wives had a less than cordial tea at the White House. The following day, Hoover virtually ignored FDR as they drove together towards the Capitol. After failing to engage Hoover in any meaningful conversation, FDR eventually gave up trying to talk to him altogether and turned to the adoring crowd that had lined the streets of Washington, waving his hat in the air as the car drove by.

List the places in the text where one can find examples that illustrate the dynamic of appearance vs. reality in The Merchant of Venice.

This particular play definitely has a theme dealing with the relationship between appearances and reality.
One simple illustration is when Portia dresses up like a man in order to argue Antonio's defense at the trial.
Another place to look is in Bassanio's character. On one hand, he seems to be in love with Portia, but it also seems like he is in love with her beauty and money. You could argue that he is truly in love with her, but you could also argue that he's a gold digger who is only interested in her fortune.
Another character that I think works well for this answer is Antonio. He seems like an honorable man; he puts up with Bassanio, and Antonio is incredibly generous with his money and forgiving of his friends. Unfortunately, Antonio isn't always as honorable as everybody gives him credit for being. Antonio treats Shylock horribly for no other reason than the fact that he is a Jew.
Finally, the contest for Portia with the three caskets exemplifies this theme: the nature of the contest is to discern between the appearances of the caskets and what they really contain.

Compare and contrast William Wordsworth's "We Are Seven" with Percy Bysshe Shelly's "The Masque of Anarchy" in terms of writing style, form, and content.

Despite both poems being considered lyrical ballads, when read side-by-side, they appear to be very different from one another. Interestingly, they share a common theme: hope. How they portray hope, however, is not the same. Let us examine the writing style, format, and content of each poem to see how the theme of hope is represented in each poem.
Wordsworth writes “We Are Seven” using a consistent rhythm throughout his poem. He uses a discussion between an adult and an 8-year-old child to show how both speakers feel and react to loss and death. The discussion is civil, with the adult somewhat in disbelief that she could be so matter-of-fact that she considers her dead siblings still part of her family. Shelly’s poem, “The Mask of Anarchy,” on the other hand, is one-sided. There is no conversation. Rather, it is a frustrated speaker trying to make a point to a large audience—an entire country as a matter of fact. The tone of the speaker is one of frustration. It is not conversational; it is didactic.
The format of Wordsworth’s poem comprises 15 stanzas written in the ABAB rhyme scheme. The poem is in a traditional ballad format with four lines per stanza and regular, iambic tetrameter lines alternating with iambic trimeter lines. Listen to the beat of the poem and how it rolls merrily along (da Dum, da Dum, da Dum, da Dum…). The effect of the beat is conversational in and of itself. But look carefully. Are all the beats the same from beginning to end? No. The first stanza and the last stanza veer from the normal course. Why do you think this is? You will see this also happen in Shelly’s poem, “The Mask of Anarchy.” Consider why Wordsworth does this and why Shelly does the same in his ballad. Why does each divert from consistency?
Shelly’s poem is writing in a longer format, although he still uses quatrains. His poem comprises 38 stanzas with a different rhyme scheme of AABB. The poet uses words to display his urgency and frustration. Examples include the words “destruction,” “blood,” and “Apocalypse.” Consider how he uses the rally cry in this political call-to-action poem. See how different this style of poem is in terms of the poets’ choices of words and rhyme? How the words sound and how the meter courses throughout the poem emulate the strong call to action.
The content of each poem varies dramatically, but interestingly, they both come to a similar conclusion. Wordsworth’s 8-year-old speaker is insistent throughout the poem, but she is calm in demeanor. The adult speaker is also insistent, but neither grows exasperated with the other. The girl simply states that she considers her two dead siblings to be part of her family, even though they are buried and no longer playing and singing with her. She represents a sense of hope that life goes beyond death—one that an adult who has not experienced such death can comprehend. It is too simple. Compare this with the content of Shelly’s poem. He, too, concludes with a sense of hope. His war cry is one that urges his listener to use justice, love, and other positive values to overcome the British anarchy (the king). Yet he writes that the audience should use rationale thought—one that involves science and intellect—to rescue themselves. The young maid in Wordsworth’s poem does not need to rely on adult concepts and beliefs to see the hope. Shelly, however, believes his adult readers need to be much more rational.
https://www.britannica.com/event/Peterloo-Massacre

What are the names of Zaroff's two guests?

General Zaroff has one guest in the short story "The Most Dangerous Game" and he lives alone with his loyal servant, Ivan. Ivan is depicted as an extremely large, strong man, who is both deaf and dumb. General Zaroff remarks that Ivan is a Cossack and is responsible for torturing the captives if they refuse to participate in the most dangerous game.
General Zaroff's only guest in the short story is the protagonist, Sanger Rainsford. Sanger Rainsford is a world-renowned hunter, who has published books on his numerous hunting expeditions. Rainsford accidentally falls off the yacht at the beginning of the story and swims to Ship-Trap Island, where he ends up visiting the general's impressive chateau. During their first dinner, General Zaroff explains the most dangerous game to his guest, and Rainsford spends the next three days being hunted by the armed general. The other guests, or captives, are relatively unimportant and the general hunts one of them the night before Rainsford begins the most dangerous game.

In The Most Dangerous Game, General Zaroff has one guest, Sanger Rainsford, and one house servant, Ivan.
Rainsford, a hunter, had been traveling by boat when he fell overboard. He arrived at Zaroff's estate when he washed up on the island where Zaroff lives in isolation.
We learn very little about Ivan except for a basic description. He answers the door when Rainsford knocks. Ivan is the largest man Rainsford ever saw, and is holding a gun. He is

a gigantic creature, solidly made and black bearded to the waist.

Zaroff mentions that Ivan is a Cossack and incredibly strong, and refers to him as deaf and dumb. He participates in the hunts and is apparently a sadist.
A previous guest, who had been imported as prey, we do not meet. Rainsford had heard him screaming in his death throes when he was swimming toward the island.

I need a quote from Ignatius Sancho on abolitionism.

Ignatius Sancho (1729–1780), who was born on a slave ship bound for England and worked as a slave until he eventually escaped, is famous today for his published letters, in which he eloquently expressed his thoughts on the evils of slavery.
Sancho essentially set himself free by escaping from his slaveholders, and his self-taught expertise as a writer positioned him as an outspoken critic of slavery.
It’s important to note that, though Sancho certainly would have agreed that slavery must be abolished, his works do not generally touch on the idea of abolition or abolitionism directly. (Abolition is the act of legally doing away with the system of slavery, and abolitionism is the idea or philosophy that slavery must end and that slaves must go free.)
As far as my research has uncovered, the closest that Sancho appears to come to outright calling for abolition is when he wrote an urgent appeal to a famous author, Laurence Sterne, for Sterne to write more about abolition. This urging appears in a publication titled Letters of the Late Ignatius Sancho, an African, specifically in letter XXXV:

The subject [of abolition], handled in your striking manner, would ease the yoke (perhaps) of many.

So, in lieu of finding Sancho’s explicit comments on abolitionism, let’s explore some of his statements that condemn slavery.
Here’s something Sancho wrote to a friend of his:

In Africa, the poor wretched natives blessed with the most fertile and luxuriant soil- are rendered so much the more miserable for what Providence meant as a blessing: the Christians’ abominable traffic for slaves and the horrid cruelty and treachery of the petty Kings encouraged by their Christian customers who carry them strong liquors to enflame their national madness – and powder – and bad fire-arms – to furnish them with the hellish means of killing and kidnapping.

As you can see, Sancho’s writing style is balanced and eloquent, his words carefully chosen, his tone as dramatic and intense as the subject matter demands. In the quote above, Sancho calls attention to the ostensibly “Christian” nature of the slave traffickers, pointing out how cruel and detestable their actions are. With his use of alliteration, and with his careful placement of the most explosive words at the very end of his sentence, Sancho draws the reader’s attention to the “killing and kidnapping” that constitutes slavery—a prelude to an outright claim that it must be abolished.
Here, Sancho continues to condemn the odious effects of slavery as he addresses a friend’s son:

In some one of your letters which I do not recollect - you speak (with honest indignation) of the treachery and chicanery of the natives. - My good friend, you should remember from whom they learnt those vices: - the first Christian visitors found them a simple, harmless people - but the cursed avidity for wealth urged these first visitors (and all the succeeding ones) to such acts of deception - and even wanton cruelty - that the poor ignorant Natives soon learnt to turn the knavish - and diabolical arts which they too soon imbibed - upon their teachers.

Above, Sancho acknowledges the corruptive influence of slavery on the slaves themselves as well as on their “Christian” captors, again calling attention to the excessive greed of the slaveholders. Notice the heavy religious tone of Sancho’s statement, which is evident in his choice of words like “cursed” and “diabolical.”
For more examples of Sancho’s eloquent condemnations of empires and of slavery as a practice, please refer to the links below.
http://www.brycchancarey.com/sancho/letter4.htm

https://ia802503.us.archive.org/32/items/lettersoflateign00sanc_0/lettersoflateign00sanc_0.pdf

https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/letters-of-the-late-ignatius-sancho-an-african-1784/

What are some interesting facts about William H. Taft?

William Howard Taft was the twenty-seventh president of the United States of America, serving from 1909 to 1913. Taft studied at Yale University, where he was part of the wrestling team, and where he was also a member of Skull and Bones, a secret student society which conspiracy theorists have suggested is a branch of the infamous Illuminati.
President Taft was also a rather large man, who at his heaviest weighed in at over 350 pounds. He was nicknamed "Big Bill" and "Big Lub." Some time after he died, in 1930, rumors circulated that he once became stuck in the White House bath tub. This story seems to endure even today, although some rudimentary research suggests that it has no truth to it.
In 1910, President Taft threw a baseball from the stands at the beginning of a Washington Senators game. The ball was caught by Walter Johnson, and so President Taft became the first president to throw a first, Opening Day pitch.
President Taft was not a supporter of the suffragists, declaring that the vote for women would be a dangerous precedent, and that if the vote were given to women, then “power might be exercised by the least desirable person.”
While president, Taft also sported a conspicuous, bushy moustache and remains to this day the last serving president to have had facial hair.

What does Mattie Campbell looking for when she comes to the board house?

Mattie Campbell turns up at the boarding house looking for Bynum. The old man has a reputation for being a folk magician, and Mattie wants him to use his reputed special powers to help bring back her lover, Jack Carper, who's recently left her. It would seem that Jack's every bit as superstitious as Mattie, believing her to be cursed. That's the only explanation he can come up with for the loss of their two babies. Mattie's convinced that the only way to win back Jack is through some kind of mystical binding process set in place by Bynum's crazy magic.
Mattie's soon to be sorely disappointed, however. Bynum tells her that as the babies have died, Jack is in no way bound to her. What's more, his taking off like that indicates rather that he's being called towards someone else. Either way, it appears that Mattie and Jack are not really meant to be together, and so there's not much that Bynum's magic can do to effect a reconciliation.

In May 1940, what happens to the Jewish population of Amsterdam?

On May 10, Germany invaded the Netherlands (as well as Belgium and France), and everything changed for the Jews of Amsterdam. This was a couple of years before Anne Frank started her diary, so we do not know exactly how she and her family experienced this event from her point of view.
For the Jews in Amsterdam, this invasion ushered in a period of fear and uncertainty. At the time, there were as many as 80,000 Jews in the city, including a number of refugees from other parts of Europe. Soon after the Nazi occupation, the Germans began concentrating the city's Jewish population into certain neighborhoods in order to facilitate their inevitable deportation to the death camps. Around this time, many Dutch Jews attempted to flee the country or go into hiding. Most, however, could not believe that the coming atrocities would ever come to pass and attempted to lead their lives as normally as possible. Jews were forced to register with the Nazi authorities and wear identifiable stars on their outer garments when out in public.
While mass arrests of Jews did not begin until 1942, there was a strong but ultimately futile general strike by the residents of Amsterdam in protest of this. In the end, though, as much as 80 percent of Amsterdam's Jewish population was deported and murdered by the war's end.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/annefrank/timeline.shtml

https://jewishhistoryamsterdam.com/the-jewish-history-of-amsterdam/

What is the hero's quest in The Buried Giant?

In The Buried Giant, the two main characters (our heroes), Axl and Beatrice, live in a landscape over which a mist has fallen during a period after a war between the Saxons and Britons. The mist is caused by the breath of a dragon who lives in the hills. This mist seems to cause mass forgetfulness and changes memories of bad events to seem to be scary visions.
Axl and Beatrice, although they hardly remember him or why he disappeared, set out to find their lost son. Their quest, which seems at first to be locating their son, becomes a quest to defeat the mist and slay the dragon.
Once the dragon is slain and the mist is gone, people will get their memories back, good and bad, and recover their pasts. However, the period of forgetfulness also created a period of peace between the Saxons and Britons, who’d been able to forget their hatred. With the memory of the land recovered, the possibility of war and bloodshed is great.
A hero’s quest typically involves a journey which ends in victory. The couple does succeed in vanquishing the dragon, but the idea that this is a total victory can be debated. If it isn’t a victory, does this journey count as a “hero’s quest”?

What is the one thing that God holds back from man? Is it rest?

Yes, you are right. In George Herbert's "The Pulley," God pours out an abundance of gifts on humankind but decides to withhold the gift of rest.
God has good reasons for this, which he explains in the poem. First, if he gave humans rest—in other words, if we never got tired—we would "adore" all God's gifts but not God, the giver of the gifts. We would think the gifts came from nature, not from God. We would not need to make space in our lives for God.
God, according to the poem, counts on humans to turn to him when we grow weary. God hopes that "goodness" will bring people to lean on him, but he also knows that this is not always going to be the case. Therefore, he has withheld rest so that, if goodness doesn't drive people to him, exhaustion will.
On some level, this seems odd or counterintuitive. However, in many testimonials, it is the case that it is not until people get so exhausted and feel like they can't go on that they turn to God. It is true too that, if people never got weary, they would think that everything would be in their own power; hence the disregard for turning to or relying on a higher power.

What are the dramatic devices used in The Merchant of Venice, and how do they evoke the audience's emotions?

In Act II, scene 5, there's a classic example of dramatic irony. This is where the audience knows something that one or more of the characters in the play doesn't. Shylock has been invited to dinner by Bassanio. Before he leaves, he instructs his daughter Jessica to lock all the doors and windows. He also instructs her not to stick her head out of the window and stare at what he calls "Christian fools" with painted faces participating in the masquerade.
Just before Shylock leaves, his sneaky servant Launcelot turns to Jessica and gives her a secret message:

Mistress, look out at window, for all this.
There will come a Christian by
Will be worth a Jewess' eye.

Launcelot has already carried a secret letter from Jessica to her gentile lover, Lorenzo. And now he's giving Jessica a verbal reply to that letter; Lorenzo will come visit her this very evening while her father's out dining with Bassanio.
This is an example of dramatic irony because we the audience know what's going on, but Shylock is blissfully unaware that he's being taken for a fool. In terms of the audience's emotional response, it all rather depends on what we think about Shylock. If we don't like him, then we'll feel pleased that he's getting his comeuppance. However, if we find him a much more sympathetic character, then we'll be rightly appalled at Launcelot and Jessica's betrayal.

Why would anyone want to own a firm that didn’t earn economic profit in the long run? Is there a compelling reason for wanting to operate a business in this earnings environment? What are the implications for society in terms of efficiency? Are zero economic profits good for society?

This question isn't as difficult as it might first appear. The initial question is essentially asking if there is any reason why a person, firm, or company would operate with zero economic profit. As long as you come up with some kind of viable reason to do this, then you have answered the question. It's conceivably possible that a company owner wants to run his business from a completely altruistic motivation. He wants his company to "make the world a better place." Money that the company earns goes into paying salaries and the necessary things to run the business, and the money could also go into things like charities or organizing community events. Those things won't necessarily give any return on investment. It could help the company image which would then possibly increase income, but the company could then just pump more money back into the community vs. salaries and savings. As for whether or not you think this kind of business model is good for society is up to you. Personally, I think it is. I look at nonprofits like Khan Academy, Planned Parenthood, American Heart Association, and Kiva, and I see a lot of wonderfully positive work happening that is directed at improving people's lives instead of intentionally trying to improve the value of a market share.

Why did Steinbeck include the Boss as a character?

The boss deliberately put the little book in his pocket. He hooked his thumbs in his belt and squinted one eye nearly closed. "Say--what you sellin'?"
"Huh?"
"I said what stake you got in this guy? You takin' his pay away from him?"
John Steinbeck could have left the Boss out of the story altogether and skipped directly to the bunkhouse where George and Lennie meet Candy. But the short interview with the Boss serves several purposes. For one thing, it illustrates what a hard time George has in life because of having to take care of Lennie. George not only has to get jobs for himself, but he has to use his wits and persuasive powers to get jobs for Lennie. The scene also brings up the question of why these two men pal around together. As the Boss says, "Well, I never seen one guy take so much trouble for another guy." George lies about this, but later Slim will ask him more or less the same question, and George will tell him the whole story about Aunt Clara.
Steinbeck needed two main characters rather than just one, because he intended to turn his book into a play immediately. In a play most information is conveyed through dialogue, so George needed a companion to talk to. Steinbeck called his book "a playable novel" because it was written in such a way that it could easily be turned into a stage play. Steinbeck devises scenes in which exposition is conveyed through dialogue, as here with the Boss. He also introduces conflict in order to make the scene dramatic. The scene between George and the Boss is one of many illustrations of the fact that George is having an increasingly hard time handling Lennie. After they are hired, George tells Lennie:
"So you wasn't gonna say a word. You was gonna leave your big flapper shut and leave me do the talkin'. Damn near lost us the job."
And finally, the scene with the Boss illustrates the kind of abuse that downtrodden men like George and Lennie have to take in order to scratch out a bare existence as unskilled itinerant laborers. After traveling all the way to the ranch in the Salinas Valley, George and Lennie could have lost the job they needed so desperately. They had no money and they had eaten their last three cans of beans by the river the night before. This kind of humiliation helps to explain George's dream of owning his own little farm and becoming independent. The Boss embodies all the bosses who exploit unskilled, uneducated, homeless working men.

Look at page 11, at the middle of that long paragraph in “What I Saw at Shiloh” where Bierce starts to describe being attacked. He says, “[t]hen—I can’t describe it—the forest seemed all at once to flame up… .” Also, examine page 14, the end of the top paragraph, where he writes, “[f]augh! I cannot catalogue the charms of these gallant gentlemen… .” Also, examine the last three paragraphs of the story, “Chickamauga,” where the reader discovers the child is a deaf mute. Why is this point relevant? How does the child’s garbled reaction to the violence comment on the limits of language? Why does Bierce use these interruptions: “I can’t describe it” and “faugh!” in “What I Saw at Shiloh”? What do they indicate about his attitude towards language?

Bierce shares with Stephen Crane the soldier’s appreciation for an essential truth of battle—that things rarely are what they seem. In the first example, the woods that the narrator's platoon scouts appear to be quiet, but suddenly seem to “disappear with a crash like that of a great wave upon the beach.” Shooting breaks out, and, with the “sickening ‘spat’ of lead against flesh,” a dozen of his soldiers are killed in an instant. Your question about the ”limits of language” refers, I think, to this difference between appearance and reality, or to the notion that the hidden “reality” of battle—the instant in which the woods become a killing field—can’t be fully captured in words. Bierce nevertheless uses some potent sensory details here: not just the sound of lead hitting bodies (“spat” is a disturbing, almost comical way of describing it), but also the “little jet of mud” caused by bullets hitting the ground. These descriptions are visceral but also incomplete. This incompleteness is characteristically emphasized by the “ludicrous” understatement of the officer’s report that the enemy is “just beyond this field.”
The same dynamic is at work in the second example. The exclamation “Faugh!” does suggest impatience on the part of the narrator at the inadequacy of words to explain the horrors of the ravine, but he then goes on to render some gruesome details, nevertheless, like describing the bodies “half buried in ashes,” clothing and hair burned away, facial muscles contracted into “hideous grins.” Once again, Bierce acknowledges the inadequacy of his description with a kind of bitter irony: “I cannot catalogue the charms of these gallant gentlemen who had got what they enlisted for.”
The final example perhaps best demonstrates the strangeness of war. The child’s surreal experience in the forest, his encounter with the crawling soldiers, and his final recognition that his home is burning, are in part “explained” by his being a deaf mute, but his lack of hearing and speech underlines the narrator’s own inability to express what has happened to him in real terms. The final image—of the woman, her skull broken like a shell—is shocking in its graphic nature but also in its incompleteness: is this his mother? The child’s inarticulate cry is described as “the language of the devil.” Perhaps such a language is needed for the atrocities of war.

What are the themes of The Kitchen House?

One of the book's most notable themes is the lack of freedom that so often ruins poor people's lives. After being orphaned, Lavinia is forced to work as an indentured servant on a large Southern plantation called Tall Oaks. Indentured servitude essentially involved working for your keep and was a common practice at the time. It was a very hard life, as Lavinia discovers for herself growing up during her time at Tall Oaks.
Initially, she doesn't understand the difference between indentured servitude and slavery; both servants and slaves alike are treated abominably. But as she gets older, the differences between the respective states become all too apparent. Life may be hard for a (white) indentured servant, but it's a walk in the park by comparison with what slaves such as Belle must go through.
Nevertheless, Lavinia experiences her own form of domestic slavery when she winds up getting hitched to the violent, overbearing Marshall. As a member of the privileged white race, Lavinia cannot, of course, be a slave. But as a woman, and a poor woman at that, she can still be deprived of freedom by a society that regards her as a second-class citizen and by a brute of a husband who thinks he's entitled to control every aspect of his wife's existence.

How do epinephrine and norepinephrine act together to increase cardiac output?

Answer
Epinephrine and Norepinephrine are compounds grouped under Adrenergic system. These are the neurotransmitter for the sympathetic system. These act by binding on the alpha and beta Adrenergic receptors present on the membrane of the Effector cells. These bind to the receptor and produces their effect. In heart, beta 1 Adrenergic receptors are present, when these are stimulated by epinephrine, they increase the heart rate by increasing the discharge of SA Node and also increases the contractility of the heart muscle. Also alpha receptors are present on the blood vessels. Stimulation of the these receptors of blood vessels result in vasoconstriction. This vasoconstriction increases peripheral resistance to blood flow
Cardiac output = heart rate * stroke volume

Epinephrine and norepinephrine are both stress hormones that are produced in the adrenal medulla. When epinephrine and norepinephrine act together, they cause a constriction of the blood vessels leading to the nephrons of the kidneys. This effectively halts the function of the kidneys during acute stress response that triggers flight/fight/freeze response. While this is occurring, blood pressure is increased, which in turn increases the cardiac output. The heart rate is also increased as both these hormones are cardio accelerators. This sudden heart rate acceleration is called tachycardia. As these hormones are released together in times of acute stress, there is often both an increased heart rate response as well as an increase in blood pressure through the sympathetic nervous system reaction.

From the book The Crossing, why does Manny want to go to America?

Like many Mexicans, Manny wants to go to America because he seeks a better life for himself. He's a poor, homeless orphan, forced to live on the streets of Juarez. The United States and all the hope and opportunity it represents is just a short distance away, acting as a magnet for those like Manny desperate to escape lives of grinding poverty.
Aside from anything else, Manny feels that he's wasted in Juarez. He may only be a street kid, but he has a strong sense of pride and self-worth. He knows that he has the skill, the determination, and the street smarts to succeed in life. All he needs is to find the right place; and that place is America. The word on the street is that if you're willing to work hard, then you can make it in El Norte ("The North," i.e., the United States). And Manny has already shown in his short life that he has the capacity for serious graft. It's just that he's never been adequately rewarded for all his hard effort.

How did the Enlightement influence America?

The intellectual and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment influenced America in lots of different ways. One of the key components of Enlightenment thought was the belief that everyone was endowed with natural rights which could not be breached by any government. Among other things, this meant that if governments did try to breach such rights, then the people were entitled to rise up and overthrow them, replacing them with governments that would respect those rights.
Indeed, this is precisely what happened in America under British colonial rule. As set out in the Declaration of Independence, the American colonists believed that their inalienable natural rights—to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—had been violated by the British. Therefore, they believed themselves entitled to change the form of government under which they lived, which meant breaking free from the British once and for all.

Why do you think Mark Twain uses a young boy as the main character and narrator of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn?

Huckleberry Finn is an appropriate and complex character who approximates many of the quintessential features of the United States in the mid-19th-century era when Mark Twain lived and about which he was writing. Featuring a boy in the protagonist role gave Twain considerable flexibility in the plotting, exposition, and satirical humor that are notable aspects of this work. Huck’s physical journey down the river has become a classic—some would say, the classic—statement of personal growth and the development of the US through westward frontier expansion. He can also embody some ethical contradictions that Twain wanted to put forward about slavery.
If we think about the pairing of Huck with Jim, an escaped slave, we can see that an adult male could not occupy Huck’s role. As a poor boy who has suffered at his father’s hands, Huck empathizes with Jim in a way that an adult probably would not admit to feeling. From Jim’s perspective, he can reasonably believe, if not absolutely trust, that the boy will not turn him in. Huck’s innocence extends to his lack of full understanding of what slavery is and his acceptance/belief that helping Jim might mean he'll go to hell. This decision has often been taken for a metaphor of the United States moving toward emancipation.
Huck is a good-hearted person, if not completely honest, but he is not clever like his friend Tom Sawyer. Huck is more of an Everyman character, in whose good nature Americans could see themselves. He much resembles the heroes of Charles Dickens, such as Pip, who negotiate a variety of social roles and depend upon the goodness of adults to help them realize their goals and grow into decent men.

Who is Caius?

Caius is the assumed name of the Earl of Kent, Lear's most loyal and devoted servant. Kent is a wise, decent man, a man of great integrity. When Lear makes the foolish mistake of banishing Cordelia from his kingdom, Kent tries to intercede on her behalf, only to suffer the same fate. Despite this shabby treatment, Kent still wants nothing more in life than to serve his king. Only he can't do this as the banished Earl of Kent. So he disguises himself as a servant called Caius to be close once more to his beloved master.
Kent always was a servant of the king, to be sure, but in a much more exalted capacity. His lowlier state in life mirrors that of Lear himself. Just as Lear has come down in the world, so has the Earl of Kent (Caius). This shows us how seriously Kent takes his loyalty; he served his master during the good times, and he'll gladly do so now that times are bad. Kent loves his king dearly, and disguising himself as a humble servant shows that he accepts that his fate is inextricably bound to Lear, come what may.

In chapter 1 of Of Mice and Men, what makes George and Lennie different from other ranch laborers, according to George? Support with evidence from the text.

Look towards the end of the chapter, and you will find Lennie asking George to tell him "about the rabbits." At this point, George begins to tell a story which is obviously very well rehearsed -- it's something he has been thinking about for a long time, and which Lennie likes to hear.
George explains that he and Lennie are different to other ranch workers for one very fundamental reason: other ranch workers don't have "fambly" (families) and George and Lennie do. While other ranch workers are lonely, and have nobody to care for them and nothing to do but work and then blow their money in town and then move on to another ranch, George and Lennie have something to look forward to. In the form of each other, they also have a family, a support system, and somebody to care about them.
George says that he and Lennie, by contrast to the other ranchers, have "a future." They have someone "that gives a damn" about them. With other ranch workers, they could end up in jail and simply be left there to rot, but George has Lennie, and Lennie has George, which makes all the difference.
Lennie has heard this story told to him so many times that he could, George says, tell it himself, but he wants to hear George tell him about their imaginary future. In this future, the two men would live in their own little house, with a vegetable patch and a cow and acres of land. They would have chickens and rabbits to tend.
In many ways, this is only a fantasy which is unlikely ever to happen, as George knows, but in other ways he is right that he and Lennie are very different to other ranch hands. They certainly support and care about each other.

What does Lily compare the bees to in The Secret Life of Bees?

Over the course of the novel, Lily compares the bees, their society, and their work to various aspects of her own life. Even in the first chapter, the influence of bees is clear:

The queen, for her part, is the unifying force of the community; if she is removed from the hive, the workers very quickly sense her absence. After a few hours, or even less, they show unmistakable signs of queenlessness.

This is the chapter when the reader learns that Lily may have accidentally killed her mother when she was very young. She isn't clear, and her memories are blurry, but she has lost her "queen," the one who was the unifying force of her life. In her mother's absence, she is left to T. Ray's abuse—the same abuse he doled out on her mother. So we see the implicit connection here of the queen bee's impact reflected in the loss of her mother at a young age.
In this same chapter, Lily finds a swarm of bees inside her room. When she leaves the room to get T. Ray, she finds that they have disappeared when she returns. She initially traps them in a glass jar as proof to T. Ray that she was telling the truth, but she releases them later, thinking that the bees would want and deserve their freedom. In chapter two, she faces the decision of leaving T. Ray in order to help Rosaleen and perhaps find a better life for herself as well. She finally realizes what to do by remembering her trapped bees:

But I had such a moment right then, standing in my own ordinary room. I heard a voice say, Lily Melissa Owens, your jar is open.

Her freedom is wrapped up with the bees' freedom. She realizes that just as those bees didn't realize the freedom that awaited them when she removed the lid, she has a greater freedom awaiting her that is yet to be realized, as well.

In the poem "Writing in the Afterlife" by Billy Collins, what insights does he offer about writing and revision?

In “Writing in the Afterlife,” Billy Collins compares eternal suffering in the afterlife to the process of writing. The afterlife in Collins's poem is the afterlife of Greek mythology—complete with river and ferryman. The poem sets the idea of the afterlife as being an unpleasant place that is filled with people on boats, never reaching the other side, furiously writing under the guidance of a Chiron that is always chiding them to do more.
Collins makes writing and revision seem unpleasant. He adds in the pedantic voice of the writing teacher to chide the tormented souls on the boats,

Our next assignment would be
to jot down, off the tops of our heads,
our thoughts and feelings about being dead,
not really an assignment,
the man rotating the oar keeps telling us—
think of it more as an exercise . . .

The teacher is continuously scolding them to do more things. The tone of the piece is depressing, brought on by the almost sarcastic comments of the boatman. The idea that it's not an “assignment” but an “exercise” implies that it's for the good of those trapped souls, but it is clear from the language that it isn’t done by choice. It's a chore and a struggle rather than something people would prefer to do.
The idea is that the writing process is like a prison—something people must continually do against their wills. The boatman has a candid moment in the poem where he says,

Think of writing as a process,
a never-ending, infernal process . . .

Writing is like eternal, infernal torture.

What happens when Watson makes deductions about the walking stick?

Deductions are more Holmes's thing really, so when Watson tries his hand at the art of deduction, it's not surprising that he often gets the wrong end of the stick. (No pun intended.) However, one shouldn't be too critical, because on this occasion, Watson does at least correctly deduce that Dr. Mortimer must practice medicine in the country, as his walking stick shows signs of having been used quite a lot.
As we might expect, though, it takes the legendary Sherlock Holmes to flesh out the details and provide us with a much more complete picture. He deduces that the initials on the walking stick, C.C.H., indicate that Dr. Mortimer was a student at Charing Cross Hospital in London. From this seemingly unimportant nugget of information he deduces the fact that Mortimer is a young man who's not especially ambitious in his career, as he's chosen to practice medicine in the countryside rather than the city. Most impressively of all, Holmes is able to establish from the tooth marks on the walking stick that Dr. Mortimer is the owner of a medium-sized dog.
There's a reason why Holmes is the detective and Watson is his assistant. This episode shows us what that reason is: Holmes's vastly superior powers of deduction.

Why was Sir Simon chained and who chained him?

Sir Simon was chained because he killed his wife. We can piece this together from the evidence in the story. First, Sir Simon tells Virginia that his wife's brothers left him to starve in retaliation for murdering their sister. He says:

I don't think it was very nice of her brothers to starve me to death, though I did kill her.

Later, after Virginia prays that Sir Simon be released to die and go to his grave in peace, she takes her family to a room where he was chained up just out of reach of food and water:

...a little low room, with a vaulted ceiling, and one tiny grated window. Imbedded in the wall was a huge iron ring, and chained to it was a gaunt skeleton, that was stretched out at full length on the stone floor, and seemed to be trying to grasp with its long fleshless fingers an old-fashioned trencher and ewer, that were placed just out of its reach. The jug had evidently been once filled with water, as it was covered inside with green mould. There was nothing on the trencher but a pile of dust.

From this, we can can determine that the brothers chained Sir Simon up to die of starvation for murdering their sister, tantalizing him with the food he couldn't eat. Now, however, his ordeal is over.

Heidi was not easy in her dress, and she wanted to be free from it. Why is this?

When Heidi arrives on the mountain, she is dressed in three dresses and a shawl to save others the trouble of carrying her extra clothes. However, it is a hot June day, and she is extremely warm. She sees Peter springing about with his goats, barefoot and dressed only in a pair of lightweight short pants.
Seeing him gives Heidi the idea that she, too, can shed her many layers of clothing and run free, so she strips down to her short sleeved undergarment and feels much much better. In fact, she is described as stretching out her bare arms with "glee."
Her older cousin, Dete, who dressed her and is taking her to her grandfather's, is upset that Heidi has shed her clothes, shoes, and stockings. She says to her:

"You good-for-nothing little thing! . . . what could have put it into your head to do like that? What made you undress yourself? What do you mean by it?"
"I don't want any clothes," said the child, not showing any sign of repentance for her past deed.

This helps characterize Heidi as a spontaneous child of nature.

What were Aram's earliest memories?

Aram does not actually tell us anywhere in this story what his earliest memories were. The story itself represents a memory from "the good old days" when he was a nine year old child, and still felt the world to be a place full of mystery and imagination and life to be a "mysterious dream." He remembers the day when his cousin rapped on his window and revealed that he had picked up a white horse from somewhere. The two boys then keep this horse until the owner of the horse comes looking for it and identifies the horse as his. Although he does not accuse the boys of having stolen the horse, he makes clear to them that he knows the horse is his. This causes the boys to be either guilt-stricken or fearful of being revealed, and they return the horse to its owner under cover of darkness.
The family themselves have earlier memories than this—the boys' uncle Khosrove tells stories about "the old country" in the parlor of the house. But Aram does not tell us anything about his life before the white horse arrived, except that his family was poor and that the whole tribe, in fact, was "poverty stricken."

What are the supernatural elements in "The Eve of Saint Agnes"?

Supernatural elements abound in John Keats’s poem. "The Eve of St. Agnes" centers on a girl, Madeleine, who dreams of her desired lover, Porphyro. He enters her bedroom and looks at her while she dreams, and then when she awakens, they flee together. Two large questions remain, however—whether the whole poem is a myth or folktale, and this event never happened; and, if it is an actual event, if the girl is dreaming the lover and their escape. The use of multiple references to supernatural states, such as enchantment and spells, and beings, such as faeries and dragons, exaggerates the mysterious effect.
The old man who admits Porphyro recommends he safeguard himself with supernatural means: “Thou must hold water in a witch's sieve, / And be liege-lord of all the Elves and Fays.” “Fay” here is another word for “fairy.”
While Porphyro enters Madeleine’s room and watches her, he sees fairies on her coverlet and that

pale enchantment held her sleepy-ey'd....
'twas a midnight charm....
It seem'd he never, never could redeem
From such a stedfast spell his lady's eyes.

He mentions the legendary sorcerer Merlin, who fought a Demon. Then, rather than just watching her, Porphyro joins into that enchanted state: “Into her dream he melted, as the rose / Blendeth its odour with the violet." When she wakes up, Madeleine sees him but wonders if she is still dreaming, saying he looks “immortal” more than human. She frets that he will leave her.
After they flee the palace, which is guarded by dragons, the narrative switches away from them and emphasizes that these events happened “ages long ago.” The poem states that “These lovers fled away into the storm,” but earlier, Porphyro had called it “an elfin-storm from faery land,” implying that the whole episode may be unreal.
Finally, the action switches to the Baron who lives in the palace, who “dreamt of many a woe.” Not only he but his guests have long nightmares featuring images “Of witch, and demon, and large coffin-worm.” These associations with the supernatural and death further suggest that the story does not depict a dream or fabulous tale rather than real events.
http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/cs6/st_agnes.html

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44470/the-eve-of-st-agnes

How did the Buntu Education Act affect people's lives?

The Bantu Education Act of 1953 was an apartheid law that effectively created separate educational systems for white and black South Africans. In doing so, this law placed educational institutions under the direct control of the state. For the black population, it created a sub-standard system of schools and universities. Many facilities lacked proper utilities like electricity and plumbing. The salaries of black teachers and their training standards lagged far behind their white counterparts. The majority of educational resources were funneled to the white schools at the expense of the black and schools.
An obvious effect of this law was that non-white South Africans received a poor formal education. Literacy rates were much lower and their job prospects were limited as a result. Much of the black educational system was designed to train students for semi-skilled factory jobs. It also served to drive a deeper racial wedge in society, further highlighting the inequities and disparities between the different populations of the country.
Psychologically, it led many black South Africans to feel inferior to the white population in their country. The law also required that schools teach a majority of the coursework in Afrikaans, despite South Africa always having been a multi-lingual country. By forcing children to forego their native language in favor of the language of their oppressors, many black South Africans felt that this system was eroding their ethnic identity.
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/48615514.pdf

https://web.stanford.edu/~jbaugh/saw/Chloe_Bantu_Education.html

What makes Montresor's entrapment scheme successful?

Montresor's scheme to lure Fortunato to his death may be understood from the few lines of dialogue between the two men when they first meet. The following is what Montresor says, with Fortunato's dialogue left out.
I said to him—“My dear Fortunato, you are luckily met. How remarkably well you are looking to-day. But I have received a pipe of what passes for Amontillado, and I have my doubts....I have my doubts,” I replied; “and I was silly enough to pay the full Amontillado price without consulting you in the matter. You were not to be found, and I was fearful of losing a bargain....I have my doubts. And I must satisfy them. As you are engaged, I am on my way to Luchesi. If any one has a critical turn it is he. He will tell me—”
Montresor has honed his story to perfection. He wants to get Fortunato to come to his palazzo immediately. Otherwise Fortunato might have time to check on the story and find there was no newly arrived shipment of Amontillado in port. Fortunato might also tell other people that he was going to Montresor's home at his request to sample some wine. But Montresor's story forces Fortunato to come immediately if he wants to come at all. Montresor says he is on his way to see Luchesi. He pretends to be in a big hurry to have an expert sample his totally fictitious cask of wine and tell him whether or not it is genuine Amontillado. Why? Because he got it at a bargain price. He only bought one cask because he wasn't sure it was genuine. But he would like to buy more if he can get an expert to taste it and reassure him.

What do the characters of Cordelia and the Fool have in common?

In Shakespeare's King Lear, Lear's youngest daughter, Cordelia, and Lear's Fool are the resident truth tellers. Both of them speak truth to power (that is, to Lear), and they also speak truth to just about everybody else in the play.
Many of the characters in King Lear are devious and duplicitous, either by their own nature or by circumstance (e.g., Goneril, Regan, Cornwall, Edmond, Oswald), but Cordelia and the Fool aren't afraid to tell the truth—they both seem incapable of not telling the truth—and they're both willing to face the consequences for doing so.
Cordelia speaks the truth in the first scene of the play, and the consequence for her failing to be hypocritical and flatter and fawn over her father (as her sisters, Goneril and Regan, do), is banishment without an inheritance, land, or a dowry. Telling the truth ultimately leads to her death.
Likewise, Lear threatens the Fool with whipping almost daily. The Fool speaks the truth even in response to being threatened with whipping.

KING LEAR: An you lie, sirrah, we'll have you whipped.
FOOL: I marvel what kin thou and thy daughters are: they'll have me whipped for speaking true, thou'lt have me whipped for lying; and sometimes I am whipped for holding my peace. I had rather be any kind o' thing than a Fool: and yet I would not be thee, nuncle . . . (1.4.172–176)

Another thing that Cordelia and the Fool have in common: they don't appear in the play at the same time. They're never on stage together. This leads some Shakespeare scholars to speculate that the roles of Cordelia and the Fool were played by the same actor—keeping in mind that in Shakespeare's time female characters were played by male actors, either men or boys.
It wouldn't be unusual for the same actor to play both characters. Actors often doubled roles (played more than one part) in Shakespeare's plays for the simple reason that there were often more characters in a play (up to thirty or more) than the number of actors in Shakespeare's acting company (usually about sixteen actors). Just about every character, except the lead characters, was doubled.
Another theory is that Cordelia actually acts the part of the Fool in the play in order to stay close to Lear and care for him even after she's been banished.
It's generally accepted, however, that Robert Armin (c. 1563–1615), a well-known comic actor and a member of Shakespeare's acting company, played the Fool in King Lear. In fact, some scholars believe that Shakespeare wrote the character of the Fool with Armin in mind.
If Armin played the Fool, it's doubtful that he also doubled the role of Cordelia, but it's not out of the question that another actor might play both parts.

What connections are there between the stories of A Rose for Emily by William Faulkner, The Story of an Hour by Kate Chopin, and Barn Burning by William Faulkner?

ln all three stories, the central character finds freedom from male control. Each of the three characters, however, achieves freedom in a very different way.
In "A Rose for Emily," Emily is initially under the dominion of her father, who chases potential husbands away, forcing her to remain single. After he dies, Emily takes up with Homer Barron. Everybody expects them to marry. However, after Emily's death, the townspeople find she has killed him and kept his decaying corpse with her. This way, she could exert power and control over him as her father once controlled her. Homer, like her father, could not ruin her life. Nor could he leave her:

For a long while we just stood there, looking down at the profound and fleshless grin. The body had apparently once lain in the attitude of an embrace, but now the long sleep that outlasts love, that conquers even the grimace of love, had cuckolded him. What was left of him, rotted beneath what was left of the nightshirt, had become inextricable from the bed in which he lay; and upon him and upon the pillow beside him lay that even coating of the patient and biding dust.
Then we noticed that in the second pillow was the indentation of a head. One of us lifted something from it, and leaning forward, that faint and invisible dust dry and acrid in the nostrils, we saw a long strand of iron-gray hair.

In the shortest of these three stories, Chopin's "A Story of an Hour," the central character, Josephine Mallard, finds freedom in the most passive of ways. When she hears the news that her husband, Richard, has been killed in a railroad accident, she is at first grieved. Later, she finds herself overjoyed to be free of him, even though he had loved her:

"Free! Body and soul free!" she kept whispering.

As she absorbs the reality of his death, she looks forward to no longer having to bend her will to his:

Her fancy was running riot along those days ahead of her. Spring days, and summer days, and all sorts of days that would be her own. She breathed a quick prayer that life might be long. It was only yesterday she had thought with a shudder that life might be long.

When Richard returns and she finds out the news of his death was a mistake, she can't face giving up her newfound freedom even though it has only lasted an hour. That hour has changed her, and she can't go back to her former life. She therefore achieves a different form of freedom—or escape—through dying. Having tasted freedom, she prefers death to its loss. She gains this freedom passively. She does not actively kill herself, Nevertheless, her sudden death liberates her.
In "Barn Burning" Sarty also breaks free of a patriarch. In this case, it is his arsonist father, who beats Sarty when he thinks he is going to betray him as a barn burner. His father expects him to always stand by the family.
However, when Sarty believes his father has died (although he hasn't) in yet another barn burning, he runs away from his family, breaking free from patriarchy's grip:

He began to run, stumbling, tripping ... without ceasing to run, looking backwards over his shoulder at the glare... running among the invisible trees.

In all three cases, the freedom comes at great price. Josephine dies, Emily lives with a corpse, and Sarty runs off without money or protection into the woods to fend for himself. Nevertheless, all three find freedom.
All three stories also use omniscient narration. In both "A Rose for Emily" and "Story of an Hour," this allows the author to surprise the reader: in "A Rose for Emily" we don't expect Emily to be sleeping with her husband's corpse. In "Story of an Hour," we initially believe Josephine is overcome with grief. The revelation that she is happy about it is shocking. "Barn Burning" sticks much closer to telling the story through Sarty's eyes, but there are places where Faulkner inserts a narrative voice that could not be that of a ten year old boy, such as when the narrator comments the following:

There was something about his [Sarty's father's] wolflike independence and even courage when the advantage was at least neutral which impressed strangers, as if they got from his latent ravening ferocity not so much a sense of dependability as a feeling that his ferocious conviction in the rightness of his own actions would be of advantage to all whose interest lay with his.

By using omniscient narration, the authors achieve freedom: the freedom to tell their stories in the most powerful possible way.

What is the summary and major themes of Robert Frost's "A Fountain, A Bottle, A Donkey's Ears, and Some Books"?

Robert Frost's poem, "A Fountain, A Bottle, A Donkey's Ears, and Some Books" is not a well-known Frost poem.
In this poem, the speaker is speaking with a man named "Old Davis". This man is a tour guide. When the original speaker is not excited about seeing what Davis has to offer, he asks Davis to take him to the place where the Mormon religion was first created. Although Davis is not eager for this opportunity, they begin searching for this place.
While the men are looking for the birthplace of Mormonism (the fountain), they stumble upon a bottle-shaped image on the side of a cliff. Davis wishes to look more closely at this image. At this time, donkey's ears are also mentioned when Davis is describing the sides of the cliff. The speaker is not interested in investigating further.
Next, the men go to the home of Clara Robinson. At this house there are many books laying around. The speaker takes one of these books with him.
This poem has two major themes, religion and freedom. Religion is a more obvious theme as Frost is searching for the original Mormon settlement yet is unable to find it. This theme also ties into art as the search for the settlement ultimately ends with the speaker finding an abandoned house of books of poetry. Frost creates a theme of freedom in this poem as well since he describes a day in which two men are free to wander around discovering what the world has to offer them. This could be an allusion to the freedom of religion as well as the freedom to choose for oneself.

"Tom came sadly out of the house." Why was Tom sad?

In the book, at the beginning of chapter two page ten, it states that Tom "surveyed the fence and all gladness left him." It is a beautiful Saturday morning. The sun is shining and "there is a song in every heart," but Tom Sawyer has to spend the day painting a thirty-yard nine-foot fence. Worse, he knows it's his fault. The previous night, he had come back late to find his aunt waiting for him in his room. Any excuses he may have had became invalid as soon as his aunt saw the poor state of his clothes.
Tom Sawyer, however, is nothing if not ingenuous. When Ben Johnson arrives to ridicule him, Tom makes him believe he enjoys the work and would prefer to whitewash the fence than go swimming.

That put the thing in a new light... Ben watching every move and getting more and more interested, more and more absorbed. Presently he said:"Say, Tom, let me whitewash a little."

After Ben tires out, Tom gives Billy Fisher the "chance" in exchange for a kite. After Billy Fisher, Tom gives Johnny Miller his opportunity in exchange for a dead rat. All the time Tom is sitting on barrel in the shade, idly playing with his new toys.

It's a beautiful Saturday morning. The sun is shining, the birds are singing, and all the trees and flowers look so fresh and lovely. It sure is a morning to gladden the hearts of everyone in St. Petersburg. But not Tom Sawyer; he's feeling incredibly sad. Because while all the other boys are out having fun swimming, Tom's going to be spending his Saturday whitewashing the fence. This is his punishment from Aunt Polly for getting into a fight with a boy and coming home with his clothes all dirty and torn.
But Tom's not miserable for very long. He figures out a way to turn lemons into lemonade, so to speak, making his punishment an unusually enjoyable experience as he tricks a number of children into whitewashing the fence on his behalf.

The stroy has traditionally been called "The Parable of the Prodigal Son." What does prodigal mean? What position does the younger son expect when he returns home to his father's house? What does the father give him? When the younger brother sees the celebration for his younger brother's return, he grows angry. He makes a very reasonable set of complaints to his father. He has indeed been a loyal and moral son, but what virtue does the older brother lack? Is the father fair to the elder son? Explain your answer. Theologians have discussed this parable's religious significance for two thousand years. What, in you own words, is the human theme of the story?

Prodigal means wasteful, extravagant, or imprudent. This is used to describe the younger brother because has behaved this way.
The prodigal son expects his father will want him to be a servant.
The older brother is envious of his brother for the attention heaped on him. He lacks empathy and compassion.
The question of the father's fairness is central to the interpretation of this story. On the one hand, it is the father's weakness that contributed to the problem: he gave in rather than hold the money for inheritance. On the other hand, the young son has free will and no one forced him to squander the money.
The question of the central message relates to point 4. It is really a matter of personal views, and may depend on the reader's personality and birth order, or position as parent or child at different life stages. Most children would probably want their parent to welcome them home with unconditional love, but many siblings would relate to the older brother's feelings.
http://famouspoetsandpoems.com/poets/rudyard_kipling/poems/14457

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+15%3A11-32

Two people are jogging around a circular track in the same direction. One person can go completely around the track in 14 min. The second person takes 12 min. If they both start running in the same place at the same time, how long will it take them to be together if they continue to run at this pace?

At first glance, this seems like a "distance = rate x time" problem; however, it's actually a problem involving only the Least Common Multiple (LCM). We are not concerned with how far each travels; only with when their rates will allow their position to coincide again. To find the LCM of 14 and 12, we can complete a prime factorization of each.
Here, if we want to find the LCM of 14 and 12, we can produce a prime factorization of each number:
14: 2 x 7 (prime factorization)
12: 2 x 2 x 3 (prime factorization)
The product of the sets of primes with the highest exponent value of both of the two integers produces the following:
7 x 3 x 2^2 = 84, which is the LCM. We can interpret this to mean that it will take 84 minutes for them to reach the same spot.

Explain the symbolism of "The Road Not Taken" by Robert Frost. What is the moral of this poem?

The poem "The Road Not Taken " by Robert Frost is symbolic to its core. It provides a deep insight into the process of decision making. The two roads diverging in the forest are symbolic of life's choices and portrays the life's journey itself.
Life requires choices to be made and making choices can be very challenging and difficult. But one has to make a choice as making difficult choices is a part and parcel of life. The speaker in the poem made his choice after a careful consideration. He took the road that has been travelled less thus suggesting his uniqueness of choice. His choice of "less travelled road " symbolises his independent bent of mind.
Similarly, one should weigh up the options and reason out the consequences before making a choice. Once we make a choice, we cannot go back but have to face the consequences whatever it may be. It is only in future, some years hence, one can know the difference his choice had brought to his life.

I'd suggest that the symbolism of the two forest paths is ultimately about choice. Within the poem, a traveler is described as walking through a wood when the road diverges into two paths, each of which stretch on out of sight.
This entire poem hinges around the image of the two roads, where the traveler must choose between them within this singular point in time. As Frost writes in the third stanza, the traveler will, in all likelihood, never return to this place. Even so, in the very next stanza, the same traveler expects that they'll still be thinking upon this moment years into the future:

I shall be telling this with a sigh / Somewhere ages and ages hence: / Two roads diverged in a wood, and I — / I took the one less traveled by, / And that has made all the difference.

On the literal level, the traveler is walking along a road when the road splits and must choose between those two paths. On the symbolic level, it seems as though this divide refers to the choices one must make through life, whether major or trivial, and the necessity of making those choices. At the same time, the poem expresses the ways in which these past choices will still linger on long afterwards via regrets and second guessing. Everyone makes choices in their lives, and much like the traveler in the wood, they can only make them once.