What are the two reasons Kenny thinks he would be made fun of if it wasn't for being related to Byron?

Rufus is the new kid at school, the object of mockery from the other students by virtue of his ragged clothing and strong Southern accent—but Kenny thinks he's a godsend because now the other kids will have someone else to pick on instead of him. However, Kenny's feelings soon change after the teacher sits Rufus right next to him in class. Kenny's miffed because he's sure that the other kids will think that he and Rufus are friends, which will make them both the object of merciless teasing.
However, Kenny really has no need to worry. As the super-cool Byron's kid brother, Kenny pretty much gets a pass, despite his close proximity to Rufus. He also doesn't get picked on despite his being incredibly smart and popular with the teachers—schoolchildren hate a teacher's pet—and the fact that he has a lazy eye. Ordinarily, one or both of these would be enough to make Kenny's life an absolute misery, but because he's Byron's brother, he's left alone.

Discuss how stress can cause excessive and prolonged cortisol release and the types of disease states that may develop as a result. How does long-term stress impact the endocrine system and the body over time? Optional: In addition, you may mention and discuss in your response to any characters in the Bible who suffered from disease or disturbances, such as sleeplessness, that might have resulted from endocrine disorders.

Stress causes the adrenal glands to start producing cortisol, among other hormones. The purpose of cortisol is to make more glucose, a sugar, available to the brain while causing the immune system to limit its functioning. The adrenal glands also release adrenaline, which increases one's heart rate and prepares them to take action. The body usually returns to normal after a moment of stress, if the body uses up the cortisol available to it. However, if one is continually in a state of stress and the cortisol is not used, one's bodily functions are interrupted and long-term health problems can result, including heart disease and high blood pressure and reduced immunity from disease. In addition, prolonged stress can result in weight gain, decreased memory, and problems with mental health, including depression, anxiety, and other issues.
King David is a character in the Bible who suffered with what we might recognize with depression and insomnia, particularly after his son Absalom rebelled against him.

What is James Cone's theodicy regarding God, suffering, and evil in a Black Liberation theology?

James Cone believed that God is the liberator of the oppressed. He believed that only the Judeo-Christian God can be considered the liberator, because he has proven to be a champion of the oppressed. For instance, Cone cites the trials and tribulations of the Hebrews throughout the Bible, noting how God has always saved them or led them to freedom. Cone saw similarities between the struggles of the Israelites and the struggles of African Americans. Both had suffered slavery, exoduses, and oppression.
James Cone believed that suffering is part of the struggle toward liberation and truth. Cone's theological literary works, lectures, and sermons usually emphasize how the struggle of the African diaspora relates to the struggles of the Jews in the Bible. Cone believed that, for this reason, a Black Theology was necessary. He believed that the Christianity white people practiced was not in tune with the teachings and stories of the Bible. How could white people relate to the Bible's stories of slavery and oppression?, he wonders in A Black Theology of Liberation.
In regard to evil, Cone believed that "the God of the biblical faith and black religion is best known as the Liberator of the oppressed from bondage. . . . To resist evil is to participate in God’s redemption of the world."
Cone posited that evil causes suffering, and that only God—through an interpretation of Black Theology—could help African Americans reach total liberation.

Write a journal entry for the novel up to page 25.

It looks like you have been tasked with writing journal entries for Cormac McCarthy's The Road. Based on your question, this journal entry should be based on the first 25 pages of the book.
First, your journal entries will reveal how the story has resonated with you so far. Try including your thoughts about the main themes, the structure of the story, and the use of literary devices (characterization, figurative language, imagery, etc.). If your teacher has a list of elements they would like to see in your entries, be sure to include them. Be aware, however, that Cormac McCarthy is well known for his habit of writing dialogue without quotation marks. He uses few, if any, semi-colons in his writing and is notorious for run-on sentences.
Each journal entry should also be dated, and you may choose to only discuss a few pages at a time in any one entry. Take, for example, a journal entry for the first 3 pages:
The Road by Cormac McCarthy (pages 3–5) December 5th, 2018
I have just finished reading the first three pages of The Road. In all, I feel unsettled by them. The unnamed narrator and his son (I presume) appear to be navigating dangerous terrain. McCarthy's dialogue has a stream-of-consciousness feel to it. None of the grammar conventions are in place. Spoken dialogues aren't punctuated with quotation marks, and run-on sentences seem to be the order of the day. The run-on sentences give the impression of events moving too fast for the narrator's liking. He is shell-shocked, and there seems to be no end to the horrors he has to face.
So, the above is an example of a journal entry. You may have anywhere from 6–8 entries altogether. Here are some other elements to consider for your entries:
1) How does McCarthy's use of punctuated short sentences, such as "Barren, silent, godless," contribute to the mood of the story? The narrative highlights a prevailing, stark hopelessness. We get the idea that the narrator's fear is palpable, but for his son's sake, he must do everything he can to rein in his feelings of dread and apprehension.
2) Does the inner dialogue advance the plot? What do you learn about the plot from the narrator's disjointed inner dialogue? Why does McCarthy refrain from punctuating spoken dialogue? Here, you may decide to discuss the post-apocalyptic setting of the novel and how this is reflected in the dialogue and imagery of the first 25 pages.
Take, for example, McCarthy's description of the gas station. Tools and items sit silently. There is dust and ash everywhere. Surprisingly, the narrator picks up the dusty phone and dials the number of his father's house. Is the narrator's behavior a desperate means of holding on to a lost past? We are inspired to ask the same question the son asks the father: "What are you doing?"
3) What does the creature in the dream symbolize? Is McCarthy's use of unique similes to describe the creature significant?
4) How does McCarthy characterize the narrator and his son? Does McCarthy use direct characterization at all, or does he mainly utilize indirect characterization? What do we learn about the narrator and his son through indirect characterization? Explore themes of loyalty, courage, and hope.
Hope this helps!

What happens when Frederick gets to the home of the Aulds in regards to education? Be sure to explain the role of both Mrs. and Mr. Auld.

When he's a young boy about the age of seven or eight, Frederick is sent to Baltimore to live with Mr. Hugh Auld, the brother of Captain Anthony's son-in-law. Initially, all seems well at the Auld residence; Mrs. Auld treats Frederick with great kindness and consideration. For one thing, she doesn't demand the kind of subservience that he's always been expected to show in the past. Moreover, she teaches Frederick his ABC. Again, this is a whole new experience for Frederick, and a welcome one at that.
But when Mr. Auld finds out about this, he's absolutely furious and orders his wife to desist at once. Auld thinks that education of any kind is dangerous for slaves as it puts ideas into their heads. If slaves can get an education, then they'll come to realize that there's a better world out there away from the plantation, where they can be free and where they can make something of themselves. Ironically, Mr. Auld's contemptuous dismissal of educating slaves is itself very educational for Frederick. For he's now witnessed at first hand one of the most effective strategies that white men use to keep black people down. This is a lesson that will stand him in good stead for the rest of his life.

In Life of Pi, Martel suggests that fiction is the selective transforming of reality. How valid is this assertion?

There are many different opinions of what fiction is, but this is not an unrealistic explanation of what it is. The selective transformation of reality means that there is a grain of truth in fiction, but it is distorted to make a different story. In many ways, all fiction has some semblance of reality in it, no matter how fantastical it is.
Think of stories as outlandish as The Lord of the Rings or the film Avatar, and you can find the real world hidden beneath the surface. The Lord of the Rings follows, in part, a fictionalization if the author’s experience in World War I with his three closest friends, which can be seen in the story. Avatar, the film, while even more outlandish, is a critique on real-world practices of environmental destruction and the harming of native cultures for profit. So it can be seen that fiction is always surrounding a kernel of truth. In this way, that quote is sound.

What is the duty of the boatswain in The Tempest? Is he doing his job well?

A boatswain's duties on a sailing ship haven't changed much since Shakespeare wrote The Tempest.
The boatswain is the senior crewman on the deck whose responsibilities include managing the deck crew, maintaining the deck and the rigging of the ship (lines and sails), and managing the anchor.
One of the boatswain's duties is to keep the ship afloat in a storm, something that the Boatswain in The Tempest apparently failed to do. There were, however, extenuating circumstances, real and imagined, which caused the Boatswain to appear to fail in his duties.
First of all, the reality of the situation is that there was no storm. The "tempest" was an illusion, an elaborate magic trick, devised by Prospero and carried out by Ariel.

PROSPERO: Hast thou, spirit,Performed to point the tempest that I bade thee?
ARIEL: To every article. (1.2.228–230)

The crew and passengers were never in any danger.

PROSPERO. But are they, Ariel, safe?
ARIEL. Not a hair perished;On their sustaining garments not a blemish,But fresher than before . . . (1.2.340–342)

The ship, which appeared to be split in half by the wind and waves, was not in any way damaged by the storm.

PROSPERO. Of the king's ship . . .
ARIEL. Safely in harbourIs the King's ship, in the deep nook where onceThou calld'st me up at midnight to fetch dewFrom the still vexed Bermudas, there she's hid; . . . (1.2.264–270)

The Boatswain was happy and probably very relieved to report in act 5 that the ship was in as good shape as ever.

BOATSWAIN: . . . our ship,Which but three glasses since we gave out split,Is tight and yare and bravely rigged as whenWe first put out to sea (5.1.258–261)

In the face of the imagined circumstances, the Boatswain did remarkably well, With the "tempest" raging around him, the Boatswain remained remarkably calm, and he ably managed the crew, even with the constant distraction and interruptions of the King of Naples, Antonio, Sebastian, and Gonzalo, who seriously interfered with the Boatswain and the ship's crew doing their jobs.
The Boatswain did everything he could to save the ship, under the real and imaginary circumstances, for which he should be commended, particularly considering that he was going to lose the ship no matter what he did, because Prospero had already planned it that way.

What is dark romanticism? Discuss at least three characteristics of dark romanticism found in “ Rappaccini’s Daughter” explaining their use in the story with details and examples.

Dark Romanticism is a literary trend that combines general elements of Romanticism with supernatural and Gothic motifs to create an atmosphere of what we routinely label as "horror." Much or even most of Hawthorne's fiction conforms to this formula to a degree, though not so much as that of his contemporary Edgar Allan Poe. But "Rappaccini's Daughter" is one of the best examples we can focus upon as typifying the essence of this particular type of Romantic literature.
At the heart of the story is a basic Romantic concept, that of man's striving for something beyond the ordinary, beyond what human effort is normally thought capable of achieving. What we very often see in the works of nineteenth-century writers is an emphasis upon science, unsurprisingly so given that in the real life of that period science and technology had begun to transform the world. Rappaccini's unfortunate daughter is similar to the monster in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. She is a creation of science, but in this case, as in Shelley's novel, science has gone amok. Beatrice is a magical being, beautiful but poisonous. The juxtaposition of science, man's progressive tendency, with horror is a standard element of Dark Romanticism. So is the combination of genius, in the person of Rappaccini, with human weakness and failure. Though Romanticism concerns itself with man's striving for the impossible, for that which is beyond the bounds of what the religious beliefs of previous ages had imposed upon man, it also overlays this concept with a pessimistic forecast of man's failure due to his own frailty.
So, we have in the story man's attempt to overstep the limits of what had previously been thought feasible, along with an interest in speculative science and in the horrific possibilities to which science can lead when man fails to achieve the positive results he has intended. Finally, the scene of "Rappaccini's Daughter" is remote from us (and from Hawthorne's first readers) in both time and place. The setting is Italy, apparently in the distant past. To nineteenth-century English and American writers, Italy was an exotic, mysterious place in which the "rules" and standards of the Anglo-Saxon world did not apply. The remoteness of the setting enhances the Gothic atmosphere of the narrative, in which Giovanni falls in love with the beautiful but deadly Beatrice. Hawthorne's tale is thus a kind of Dark Romantic version of Romeo and Juliet, an updating of the ultimate tragedy of star-crossed lovers.

What is Bertha frustrated about?

Bertha has been living most of her life in a dream world, where, to her mind, everything in her life is lovely and perfect. On the evening this story takes place, she is having a dinner party, and everything seems more perfect than ever. She loves her beautiful house, loves arranging her fruit, loves her baby, and loves the beautiful pear tree outside the window.
During the evening, one last obstacle to her perfect happiness falls away:

For the first time in her life Bertha Young desired her husband. She'd been in love with him, of course, in every other way, but just not in that way.

She now sexually desires her husband.
She is frustrated, however, at the end of the story, when she goes out into the corridor where her husband is saying goodnight to Miss Fulton, because she realizes they are having an affair. His lips form the words "I adore you" to Miss Fulton, and she touches his cheek tenderly with her fingers. He whispers "tomorrow" to her.
Bertha recognizes that her "bliss" is hardly perfect. The title of the story is, in fact, ironic.

In Diary of a Wimpy Kid, where does Greg's father work?

We learn that Frank Heffley, Greg's father, works in an office, but beyond that, we don't know what his specific job is or the name of his company. At least one illustration shows him seated and working at a computer, which suggests he is a white collar employee. We also learn that it is important to him that his children make a good impression on his boss, which shows he both cares about his job and about how his family appears to the people he works with. Frank also seems to be a hard worker.
Mostly, however, we see Frank at home, where he wants his kids to be strong, self-sufficient, and do things right. For example, he gets upset at Rodrick's mistakes when typing. It seems that Frank, a caring if sometimes overwrought dad, wants his sons ultimately to be able to be successful on a job.

Information about Jacob Lawrence's Migration. Phillips Collection

Jacob Lawrence’s Migration Series, completed in 1941, depicts African Americans’ movement from the South to the North associated with the first and second World Wars and the years between them, approximately 1914–1941. The series consists of 60 tempera paintings. The complete series was first shown in Manhattan in 1941. With his solo exhibition at the Downtown Gallery, Lawrence became one of the first African American artists to have a New York gallery show. He was also one of the few artists until that time to focus on the Great Migration. The instant success of the exhibition and recognition of Lawrence’s unique talent drew the attention of the art world. The Phillips Collection in Washington, DC, and the Museum of Modern Art in New York both decided to acquire the series; each museum now owns 30 paintings.
The individual works, along with the people involved, depict a wide range of places, environments, nature, transportation, life ways, and working conditions both in the southern sending communities and in northern locations, especially the African American neighborhood of Harlem in New York. They explore the impact of the Great Depression, one reason that people left the South, and the growth of industry that attracted workers to the North. From small details of crops dying in the field, through crowds of people in train stations, to discrimination and race riots, Lawrence shows key aspects of this complex period of upheaval and adjustment in African American lives.
Creating such a large number of works was both a conceptual and technical challenge. Before beginning the paintings themselves, Lawrence created the preliminary materials, including drawings and captions. Gwendolyn Knight, his wife, was an artist as well; she worked with him on preparing the boards. Lawrence worked on all 60 paintings at once, applying the same color to each one. The bold colors, striking compositions, and a graphic style that is more typical of prints are among their distinctive aspects.
Online exhibitions were launched in 2015, connected to a People on the Move exhibition that was jointly curated between Phillips Collection and MOMA, along with the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture. The Phillips Collection’s interactive website includes, in addition to images of all 60 paintings, materials related to the migration process and Harlem in Lawrence’s time, as well as interviews with Lawrence and letters from migrants.
https://lawrencemigration.phillipscollection.org/

https://www.moma.org/interactives/exhibitions/2015/onewayticket/

How does the realist theory of international relations in the article “structural realism” by John Mearsheimer answer the question of what causes war between two states?

"Structural Realism" is an article written by John J. Mearsheimer.
In the article, Mearsheimer posits that structural realist theory does not quantify cultural differences or government regime types between nations. Mearsheimer argues that the international system gives all nations the same incentives to gain more power, disregarding whether those nations have a democratic government or an authoritarian one.
Mearsheimer argued that, in structural realist theory, nations are not always pushed toward war because of survival, or because of a "kill or be killed" mentality. Mearsheimer states that "security is not always the principle driving force behind a state’s decision for war. Ideology or economic considerations are sometimes paramount." He cited Germany's motivation during World War I as an example.
Some structural realist theorists believe that nations that increase their military and geopolitical power eventually leads to self-destruction, as in the case of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, who initiated World War II but ended up being defeated with their respective economies and global political powers decimated.
Realist theorists believe that modern-day China's rise in economic power will also lead to increased military might, and that this will cause instability in the Asia-Pacific region, and in the international system as a whole. They theorize that China's Asian neighbors and the United States could react in irrational ways to China's increased military power, and which could lead to warfare or, at the very least, diplomatic conflicts.
https://www.mearsheimer.com/

How is hospitality an example of a Greek cultural value in The Odyssey?

The theme of hospitality occurs in numerous places. As Odysseus and his men are traveling, they must rely on the generosity of those whom they encounter, both gods and mortals alike. Sometimes they are not the best guests, such as when they disobediently eat the cattle of the sun god, Helios. At the other extreme, when the travelers meet Polyphemus, and Odysseus requests the culturally expected hospitality, the Cyclops decisively violates the norm: he eats some of Odysseus’s men.
The main place where hospitality figures prominently, however, is back home in Ithaca. Penelope must uphold her position as Odysseus's wife and keep a hospitable environment in their home. The suitors cluster around her, waiting for her to declare Odysseus dead and marry one of them. They test her patience with their bad behavior, which ranges from merely opportunistic to rude to homicidal. Penelope understands, however, that the honor of her and Odysseus’s family depends on her magnanimity. When their son, Telemachus, returns home from Troy, he loses his patience and starts to make the suitors feel unwelcome.
Hospitality is so crucial, in fact, that the entire resolution of the epic rests on it. Tired of waiting and concerned about Telemachus’s objections, several suitors conspire to kill him. Finally, when Odysseus himself returns disguised as a beggar, the suitors torment and attack him. Distressed that they dare to do this in her home, Penelope calls the beggar to an interview, thus beginning the process of reunion with her husband that will also result in him and Telemachus slaughtering all the suitors.

What is the “automatic difference” that Robert Stam describes between text and film? In other words, why is it impossible to have a “faithful” adaptation?

In Beyond Fidelity: The Dialogics of Adaptation, the American film theorist Robert Stam questions the very possibility of a faithful adaptation of literature through the medium of film. Some adaptations are undoubtedly more faithful than others, but complete fidelity is impossible, owing to what Stam calls the "automatic difference" between the respective media.
A film is not a book; its creation involves a number of different elements, such as sound and lighting, which find no parallels with the written word. That being the case, the traditional notion of fidelity as it relates to cinematic adaptations of literary works must be challenged. That's not to say that the question of fidelity is completely irrelevant; some films are more adept at capturing the essence of a book than others or are more true to the most important components and fundamentals of a novel. But complete fidelity is a chimera, for the reasons we've already discussed.

A customer bought a computer online on Wednesday. On Thursday, the company delivered a broken computer. The customer immediately emailed them explaining they need a working computer before Sunday. When they didn't get a response, they phoned. The company only wanted to submit complaint tickets, but this was a time-sensitive matter, and even after the customer explained, the company wouldn't put them through to a manager or provide them with an email address or phone number where they could get help. The customer proceeded with contacting the company on live chat, followed up with numerous phone calls, and contacted the company on Facebook, but still received no help. The customer was eventually promised that they would be contacted by the company, but that didn't happen. The customer wants to receive a refund. If they submit consumer complaints, they may eventually get their money back, but the process will take months. Is there anything the customer can do because the company failed to deliver a new computer in time?

Yes, they are a few different options that the consumer has. They have done all that they can do with the company at this point. They should contact the Better Business Bureau and file a complaint about the business. The Better Business Bureau will investigate the complaint and contact the company. In some cases they can help get your money back too.
Also, the customer should contact their bank or credit card company depending on if they paid with a debit card or credit card. The bank and/or credit card company can open a dispute up right away. Which could get them their money back faster.
The customer should make sure to have all the information about the computer and the company when contacting these companies.

This is a complicated question. The short answer is yes, there are things the customer can do. It seems like the customer has gone above and beyond the call trying to contact the company, so they're going to have to try other channels. Even while they're doing this, they can submit the claim forms the computer company is asking for and jump through all the hoops. The company might reimburse the customer in the end.
First, if the customer bought from a vendor off Amazon.com or a similar site, they should check out the terms and conditions of purchasing and shipping. The site might be able to help the customer get a refund or replacement through the vendor. Plus, the customer can rate the seller low and leave a comment online.
Next, the customer could contact the company that shipped the computer—if it was an outside contractor, such as UPS or FedEx. The customer could try explaining what happened, on the off chance the computer was broken during delivery. They could ask if it was insured. If they're lucky, the shipping company might have a phone number or email for the computer manufacturer that they haven't tried.
Then the customer could file a complaint with their state's Better Business Bureau, who can warn others to be wary of this company.
If the customer is still not satisfied, and determined to be compensated, they could consult with an attorney. An initial consultation is usually free, and the attorney can advise whether it's worth the customer's money and time to pursue litigation.
Finally, the customer can share their experience on social media. Sometimes this evokes a quick response from companies that do not want their reputation smeared.

How do mountain zebras get their food?

Mountain zebras are native to Angola, Namibia, and West Africa and live in arid, stony, and, of course, mountainous areas. They are herbivores, meaning that they don't eat meat. Instead, they eat grass, bark, leaves from trees, and roots. They can smell water beneath the ground and will often dig for access to the water.
A mountain zebra's teeth continue to grow throughout its life, which is an evolutionary by-product of the fact that they spend so much time chewing on hard, dry food. They use their front teeth to cut the grasses, bark, leaves, or roots, and their back teeth to then grind, or chew, the food.
The mountain zebra is now an endangered species, in part because of a growing livestock industry in their native habitats, which means that they face ever increasing competition for scarce resources.

What are some examples of Melancholia in the writings of Paul Auster?

Paul Auster’s stories are fraught with melancholia in that they are filled with unrelenting loss and remorselessness. The term melancholia means that a there is a denial of, and a refusal to deal with loss, instead the feelings are repressed and internalized.
In The Book of Illusions, a man endures the death of his entire family, his wife and two children in an airplane crash. It looks at the aftermath as he experiences the associated grief. It details how watching a television show ultimately allows, Paul Zimmer, the main character to grieve. The book, “Oracle Night,” details how a man loses his place in world while in Travels in the Scriptorium, the main character loses his sense of history and memory. In all three books there is a perverse sense of loss leading to melancholia.
Auster’s post 9/11 novel, “Man in the Dark,” chronicle’s the experiences that August Brill endures when is sleeplessly struggles with the death of his wife, and the murder of his granddaughter’s boyfriend in a country at war with Iraq after the Twin Towers are destroyed.

Do you agree with the growing sentiment among many Americans that “less government is the best government”? What is the proper role for government with respect to social welfare? If the government is not responsible for "social security,” then who or what (if anything) should be responsible for providing the most basic necessities (food, jobs, shelter, education, healthcare) in order to secure Americans on a social level?

Firstly, this is not a new sentiment. Old arguments, instead, have a way of becoming new again. The argument regarding "less government" has been around since the birth of the United States and was one of the planks in the Democratic-Republicans' platform from the 1770s to the early-1800s.
There is no objective answer to this question, but you can use objective information—both current events and history—to help you form your own response.
Though there are multiple political parties in the US, Democrats and Republicans dominate national, state, and local politics. Therefore, it would be most useful to look at what these parties think about the role of government in determining social welfare. Generally, current Democrats think that it is important to protect safety-net social programs, such as Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare, because the absence of such programs will make lower-income, elderly, and handicapped citizens more vulnerable to dire poverty and homelessness. They insist that tax revenue must fund such programs.
Republicans, on the other hand, believe that there should be less dependency on such programs. There are some conservatives who want to make spending cuts, while there are others who would like to get rid of the programs altogether. They believe that healthcare and retirement are matters of personal investment and choice, and such matters are better left to the private sector. As for those in need, they believe that communities, particularly charities, could look out for those who cannot care for themselves. The belief among some Republicans is that local communities know best what their neighbors need—not the government. The belief among Democrats is that, while charity is certainly valued, it does not guarantee assistance to all who are in need. The federal government, they insist, must provide for the greater good. This includes providing EBT cards so that welfare recipients can shop for food and ensuring that every child has access to an education.

How has Elie changed in a short time, especially within chapter three?

Eliezer, like the other prisoners, experiences the shock of being thrust into the savagery of Auschwitz, and the principal change within him is the questioning of his religious faith. He hears men reciting Kaddish, the prayer for the dead, but asks himself,

I don't know whether, during the history of the Jewish people, men have ever before recited Kaddish for themselves.

The opening line of the prayer is "May his name be celebrated and sanctified." Eliezer, having just seen babies thrown into the crematorium, questions why men should so honor God, in light of the atrocities he is now witnessing.
The fact that the opening chapter of Night focuses on Eliezer's religious education shows how important Judaism was in the young boy's life. Even before the arrival at Auschwitz, his sense of God begins to be shaken, but he is simultaneously prescient enough to see the events as a kind of reenactment of Jewish history, of the centuries of persecution. As the Jews are being exiled from Sighet, the scene appears

like a page torn from a book, a historical novel, dealing with the captivity in Babylon or the Spanish Inquisition.

It is surreal that this is occurring in the twentieth century. As Eliezer's thinking is transformed from naive faith to a questioning of God's very existence, however, what remains unchanged is the continuity of the Jewish experience as it has been through the centuries.

Chapter 3 includes the story of Elie and his father coming to Auschwitz. It is a horrific scene, and Elie is transformed by what he sees, in particular the sight of a truck load of the bodies of dead children being dumped into a fire.
While Elie is outraged, he also loses his will to protect his father or to stand up to his captors in anyway. This shocks him. There is a moment when his father is struck in the face by a guard and falls to the ground, and Elie realizes that he has no reaction to this injustice: he can tolerate his father's assault because he has learned in his short time at the camp that his survival depends on not attracting notice to himself, even if that means not standing up for his loved ones.

While Elie’s development is multifaceted, he changes on two major fronts in chapter three. One is his attitude toward God. In the beginning of the story, he is a devout Jew to whom praying is as natural as breathing. However, early on in chapter three, he witnesses the burning of babies in a crematorium. This alters his attitude toward God:

For the first time, I felt anger rising within me. Why should I sanctify His name? The Almighty, the eternal and terrible Master of the Universe, chose to be silent. What was there to thank Him for?

Elie begins to see God as fickle, leaving him and other innocent people to die in such horrible ways. In essence, he loses faith and begins to trust in himself for survival, rather than a being whose presence he cannot sense. His loss of hope is continually emphasized, as in the following passage:

The student of Talmud, the child I was, had been consumed by the flames. All that was left was a shape that resembled me.

The reader notices a second major change when his father is beaten before his very eyes. At the start, Elie worries continually about his father and desires to be near him no matter the cost. When he witnesses the beating, however, his attitude shifts noticeably. Elie himself takes note of the change in himself. After his father is hit, he reflects:

I stood petrified. What had happened to me? My father had just been struck, in front of me, and I had not even blinked. I had watched and kept silent. Only yesterday, I would have dug my nails into this criminal's flesh.

Elie realizes that he has become more concerned with his own well-being than his father’s. Where before he would have fought for his father, now he keeps to himself to avoid a similar beating. His instinct of self-preservation has taken hold.

How would you discuss the scene between the Russian officer and Dr. Shivago?

This question involves two separate episodes, so I will try to address both of them.
In Boris Pasternak's novel, the principal confrontation between Zhivago and Strelnikov (whose real name is Pavel Antipov) occurs near the end of the story. In the eastern region where Zhivago and Lara had been together, Strelnikov improbably meets with Zhivago and does not so much debate him as philosophize with him on both political and personal issues. In spite of their differences, a bonding of sorts occurs between them. It is an ironic episode between the two because, in some sense, they have represented opposite sides of the huge conflict of the Revolution. They have also both loved Lara. Zhivago is a poet, a dreamer. Strelnikov is an idealist of sorts as well, but his whole plan has been to serve the Bolshevik cause, apart from Lara, for as long as he is required in his political task, and then somehow to go back to her, become Pavel again, and restart the old life where they had left off. It hasn't worked out that way. After their meeting is over, Zhivago finds Pavel outside lying in the snow, dead, having shot himself.
In David Lean's film version of Doctor Zhivago it is much earlier in the story that Zhivago, on his train route east with his family, is detained and questioned by Strelnikov, who tells him harshly that "the personal life in Russia is dead." Strelnikov makes it clear that the end justifies the means in completing the task of the Revolution. Zhivago does not seem to question the supposed goals of the Bolsheviks in creating an equal society for all, but he stands up to Strelnikov in condemning their brutal methods. Strelnikov has suspected that Zhivago is a "White" (anti-communist) agent, but he nevertheless releases him and allows him to rejoin his family.
In both the novel and the film, Zhivago and Strelnikov/Pavel represent opposites: the one a poet-dreamer, the other a man of action—not without ideals, but using harshly practical methods. Yet both seem motivated by a desire to transcend the pre-Revolutionary Russian world and to accomplish something positive for humanity, each in his own way. That Pasternak has both of them in love with Lara is perhaps symbolic of this commonality.

What happened to Roger Williams and Anne Hutchinson?

Roger Williams was an extremely important person in colonial America. He was a co-founder of Rhode Island and founder of the city of Providence. Williams was a major proponent of religious freedom as well as separation of church and state, for which Providence was founded. Williams found opposition by the strict Puritan practices of Massachusetts and left for Rhode Island. He eventually traveled to England to help secure the charter for the colony of Rhode Island in 1647.
Anne Hutchinson followed a similar path to that of Roger Williams. Like Williams, she sought religious refuge in colonial Massachusetts. She also found conflict with the Puritans over the practice of religion, both in terms of religious ideology and simply by virtue of being a woman preacher. Hutchinson believed that pure faith was the path to God and that anyone who was faithful could go to heaven, while the Puritans followed far more strict practices. She was ultimately charged and banished from the colony. She and her family resettled in Rhode Island (at the suggestion of Roger Williams) and was eventually killed by Native American Siwanoy warriors.
https://www.history.com/topics/colonial-america/anne-hutchinson

https://www.history.com/topics/reformation/roger-williams

Compare and contrast Joe and Mrs. Joe Gargery in terms of appearance and behavior.

Joe Gargery and his wife, Georgiana, generally referred to as Mrs. Joe, are presented as very different in almost every way. Joe is a paragon of virtue. A hard-working blacksmith, he is devoted to his craft, his wife, and Pip. Dickens describes him as fair in coloring, with flaxen curls that surround a “smooth face” (chapter 2). While Joe knows that his wife is unkind, he feels that it is his responsibility to care for her, both through his affection—which he understands that she needs—and via supporting her and their household financially. Joe, who serves as a father figure to Pip, remains his steadfast friend even when the youth turns into a thoughtless snob, as he trusts that his true nature will resurface. After his first wife dies, Joe marries Biddy, who is much more like him in temperament.
Georgiana Maria Gargery, Pip’s sister, is twenty years older than him. Mrs. Joe's appearance offers a contrasts to Joe’s, as she is “not a good-looking woman.” Her hair is black, and her skin tends to be red. She is a volatile person who easily loses her temper. In general, she finds fault with her husband about everything. At one point, she physically assaults Pip. Her personality and behavior clash with Orlick, Joe’s assistant, who finally kills her with a hammer.

What is the main idea of the poem?

The main idea of the poem "Traveling Through the Dark" by William E. Stafford is subtle. In the poem, a driver finds a deer in the road that was recently hit by a car. He thinks about rolling the deer out of the way and into the canyon in order to prevent future drivers from swerving around the body, which "might make more dead." As he drags the deer to the edge, he notices that she had been pregnant with a fawn who is seemingly still alive:

her side was warm; her fawn lay there waiting,alive, still, never to be born.

The realization makes the speaker hesitate, and the poem goes silent and still for a stanza. The speaker notes the glow of his headlights, the "purr" of his engine, the red-tinged exhaust coming from his car, the wilderness still and "listen[ing]." He finally decides, after this extended moment of thought, to push the doe over the edge of the canyon.
The poem ultimately addresses questions of what we owe to other animals. In showing the simultaneous mercy and what some may see as insensitivity in the speaker's choice to roll the doe into the river—an action that both kills the unborn fawn (who would have died, in any case, without its mother) and saves future drivers and animals from harm—Stafford draws a thin line between the tenderness and cruelty that underline all our animal lives.
This is true for deer as well as humans, here, as Stafford emphasizes "our group" (made by the driver, the doe, and her unborn fawn) in the first-person plural. In this, the poem sits on the knife-edge between the past and the future: our actions and decisions in the present, our "swervings," have material and potentially fatal impacts for both human and nonhuman animals. We have life and death in common.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/42775/traveling-through-the-dark

How does Bigger feel towards Mary and Jan when he first meets Jan? Why do you think he feels the way he does?

It would be an understatement to say Bigger is made uncomfortable by Mary and Jan. The initial reason for this, on the surface, is that he is supposed to be driving Mary to the university, and she changes the plans on him, so that Bigger is forced to do something not on the up and up. But a deeper cause of his discomfort is the way Mary and Jan behave toward him. The attempted familiarity with which they act throws him off balance, and he doesn’t know what to make of it. He might have expected them to treat him in a stereotypical fashion, coldly ordering him about, which would have been even worse, of course, but would still have been the comportment of white people Bigger would have been familiar with. Instead, their attempt at kindness and intimacy, if that’s what it is, backfires.
Based on what he has seen in his life to this point, Bigger has little reason to believe Jan and Mary are sincere in their behavior to him. The whole situation is acutely embarrassing, especially because of their obviously condescending manner, despite their apparently good intentions. Jan and Mary begin to talk about “the Negroes” as if Bigger isn’t even there, asking each other “do you know any Negroes” and similar things as if discussing some kind of scientific study. It increases Bigger’s resentment and his wish that he were somewhere else, anywhere but in a car with clueless people.

Does anyone have a short analysis for Hilda Doolittle's (H.D.) poem "Leda"?

The title of the poem is an allusion to the classical Greek myth in which Zeus, taking the form of a swan, seduces a married woman named Leda.
H.D.’s use of imagery and diction create a sensual mood in her description of this myth.
The swan is described as exotic, with “red wings,” a “darker beak,” a “purple” underside, and “coral feet.” The shades of red all indicate an association with lust, while the purple is associated with royalty. Since Zeus is a god in Greek mythology, this association connects the poem with its inspiration. In addition, this imagery suggests that the swan is beautiful and attractive to Leda.
In the “dying heat of sun and mist,” the “white lily” connects with the red swan. The white lily is a metaphor for Leda herself. Flowers often serve as metaphors for a woman’s sexuality, and in this poem, this is the case. In the last stanza, the lily (Leda) “outspreads and rests / beneath soft fluttering” of the swan. The diction in this stanza creates a sensual, relaxed mood to describe the actual seduction of Leda.
Therefore, in this version of the classical myth, the swan’s alluring sexuality is what attracts Leda to it.

How is resignation a theme of "Remember"?

The definition of "resignation" is to have an accepting, unresisting attitude of acquiescence or submission (Random House Dictionary). If the theme of resignation is present in this sonnet, then the first-person poetic speaker will indicate acceptance of her upcoming death and acceptance of the reality of human frailty in upholding intentions. Does she do this?
In the octave, lines 1 and 4, she requests that she be remembered when "Nor I half turn to go yet turning stay." Since we know that the "silent land" is the land of death, we can understand this elusively constructed line to mean: [paraphrase] When I can no longer resist death; when I can not again recover when at death's threshold and turn away from death's face to stay in the land of the living....
The tone here--as displayed by the vocabulary and the sound choices--has no rancor, no bitterness, only quiet and soothing recognition of what is coming: she is accepting of and unresisting toward the approach of death. She is resigned to death.
The analytical details illuminating this quiet, soothing tone are these:
Vocabulary: She chooses simply "remember me," not you must remember, I want to be remembered, say you will remember etc that imply demand or desperation or fear.
Word Sounds: She selects, in the tradition of Edmund Spenser, combination of consonants and vowels that enhance the tone she establishes with her vocabulary: the sounds of the vowels and consonants are open, as in /mem/ /gone/ /land/ /hold/; elongating, as in /m/ /w/ /n/ /lf/ /ay/; soothing, as in /more/ /far/ /n/ /m/; and quiet and quieting, as in /s/ /l/ /lf/ /f/ /-member/.
In the sestet, lines 9 and 10, she forestalls quilt and grief over likelihood that her beloved will, for short moments of time, be distracted from remembering her, although he mourns and grieves his loss of her. She does not speak in a judgmental tone but in a gently consoling tone: "Yet if you should forget..." She requests that he not grieve when the inevitable happens; when human frailty allows distraction and forgetting. She goes further and offers him a consoling solution to the dilemma in the paradox of remembering while forgetting: she attests her words of poetry will remember her. She is resigned to--more than resigned to, she is compassionate of--human frailty in fulfilling intention.

Yet if you should forget me for a while 9 And afterwards remember, do not grieve: 10 For if the darkness and corruption leave 11 A vestige of the thoughts that once I had, 12Better by far you should forget and smile 13 Than that you should remember and be sad. 14

Why did the hens confess to Napoleon in 1984?

Everything seems to be going wrong with the Animalist revolution, and the absent Snowball has been made the scapegoat for all the problems that beset the farm. But Napoleon has got in into his head that Snowball must've had accomplices in his dastardly plot to destroy the revolution. So he accuses a number of pigs of being in secret contact with Snowball and demands that they confess their crimes. The charges are utterly ridiculous, of course, but the pigs confess anyway—largely out of fear but also because they think that Napoleon will leave them alone if they say what he wants them to say.
However, they are profoundly mistaken, and Napoleon literally sets the dogs on them, tearing their throats out. Napoleon then demands that other animals, such as the three hens who led the recent rebellion against the forced appropriation of their eggs, also confess their alleged crimes. The hens are scared stiff that they will suffer a similar fate to the pigs, so to save themselves, they make up the ridiculous story that Snowball came to them in a dream and inspired them to lead a rebellion. Unfortunately, their desperate plan to save their necks doesn't work, and all the animals who confess, including the three hens, are brutally put to death.

Explain the proslavery and abolitionist arguments of the Antebellum period.

Proslavery arguments in the South were economic, religious, historical, and social. Southern whites argued that their economy would collapse without slave labor. This was the "necessary evil" argument. They reasoned that nobody would harvest the cotton, sugar, and tobacco if slavery were abolished. The crops would rot and the United States as a whole would suffer. The agrarian economy of the South benefitted the entire country, not just Southern plantation owners, and helped to make the United States a powerful country. Since the Southern economy could only run effectively with low-cost slave labor, some argued, slavery was here to stay.
Proslavery proponents also turned to the Bible's seeming endorsement of slavery in such verses as "slaves, obey your masters." If the Bible approved of it, this argument went, it must be an acceptable institution. Further, the historical argument contended that slavery had built great civilizations in the past, such as ancient Greece and Rome, and therefore was a natural and a beneficial institution. One advocate of this position was William Harper, who wrote a book explaining these ideas called Memoir on Slavery. Finally, especially in the later part of the Antebellum period, slaveowners started to argue aggressively that slavery was not just a necessary evil but a positive social good. It civilized the inferior Africans. Slaves were well treated on happy plantations and received security. According to this argument, they had better lives than factory workers in the Northern states.
Abolitionists argued that slavery was a social and moral evil that harmed not only the slaves but their owners and society as a whole. Slaves were brutalized and lived in fear and forced ignorance, while whites became corrupted by too much power and also lived in fear. Their fear was of the slaves rising up and murdering them, which abolitionists argued was the only logical outcome of such an unjust system. White children were corrupted into cruelty by having helpless slaves at their beck and call.
Abolitionists argued that slavery was anti-Christian, because God had made humans in his image and that image was one of dignity and freedom. They argued that the New Testament said that people should live in love and that slavery was an inherently unloving institution based on controlling other people against their will.
Abolitionists also argued that slavery violated the very principle of "all men are created equal" that was foundational to the United States. The United States betrayed what it stood for in allowing slavery.
The abolitionists also contended that the South had viable economic alternatives to slavery. For example, the Quaker Ellicott brothers came to Maryland, a slave state, and gave land and help to farmers who agreed to grow wheat, which did not require slave labor.
Primarily, abolitionists relied on arguments that showed the real, living evils of slavery. Abolitionists like Frederick Douglass, a former slave, told the slaves' story from the slaves' point of view, showing the cruelty, abuse, and sadism built into the system. In Uncle Tom's Cabin, Harriet Beecher Stowe depicted the lives of slaves, based on her own observations while visiting relatives in slave-owning states, to show that the life of a slave was uncertain and that the slaves were at the mercy of a cruel system. Whatever plantation owners claimed about the "happy plantation" benefitting the slaves, the abolitionists could show that this idea was quite simply a myth. The abolitionists challenged the white slave owners to sell their own children into slavery if it was such a good and beneficial system for the slaves. Tellingly, the slave owners did not take the abolitionists up on this offer.

How does Richard Wright treat the idea of racism in his short story "A Man Who Was Almost a Man"?

Richard Wright’s “The Man Who Was Almost a Man” doesn’t explicitly deal with race, but as with all of Wright’s work, it is important to view Dave’s story through the lens of a racial experience.
Dave feels impotent in his life. At seventeen, he is still treated like a child everywhere he goes: by Mr. Hawkins, his parents, his coworkers, even Joe. His fellow field hands tease him at work, which prompts him to pursue buying a gun so that people will take him seriously as a man.
His treatment, which he perceives as inferior, stems in part from his identity as a young black man. Throughout history, particularly in the South, young black men are the most stereotyped and discriminated group. Mr. Hawkins, as the presumably white land owner for whom Dave works, represents the systems of oppression that black people face. Dave’s hostility toward Mr. Hawkins, as evidenced by his desire to fire the gun toward Hawkins’ house before boarding the train, represents his desire to rebel against this system.
Feeling like he is treated with no respect, Dave seeks power through gun ownership or violence. This is indicative of the internal and external struggles young black men face in a society that does not treat them with basic human dignity.
While Wright never discusses the racism that Dave faces from authority figures like Mr. Hawkins, its implicit impact resounds. Forced to work a low-wage, strenuous job for money to which his access is restricted, Dave is pushed over the edge when Hawkins informs him he must pay $50 for the accidental death of Jenny, the mule. When Dave decides to escape, this shows that what he really desires is freedom from the restrictive circumstances of his life—which are caused, in part, by a racist society.

In Animal Farm by George Orwell, what rules does Major give the animals?

Old Major, the large boar on the Manor Farm, calls a meeting of all the animals. He has had a powerful dream, and he feels the need to expound to his fellow animals about the meaning of life. Moreover, he believes he is dying, so the speech he gives is his final word of advice to his farm-mates. He tells them that man is the enemy and that if man were eliminated, the animals would have freedom and prosperity. They expend all their energies only to make the farmer rich. Why should they not work for themselves? There would be no more hunger and no more misery if Man were expelled from the farm.
After this speech, which the animals listen to with rapt attention, Old Major sums up his points in a number of succinct recommendations, which could be called rules. They included the following:
Any creature that walks on two legs is a foe, but any creature that walks on all fours or flies is a comrade.
In fighting against man and after their victory, the animals must not behave like man, taking on his tyrannical ways.
Animals must not sleep in beds, live in houses, wear clothing, drink or smoke, use money, or buy and sell.
All animals are brothers.
No animal must kill another animal.
All animals share equal status.
Old Major dies three days after this speech, but his words spurs the animals to revolt against Farmer Jones.

What place does Mrs. Gibb long to visit?

I believe you're referring to the character of Mrs. Gibbs from Thornton Wilder's play Our Town, as there are no characters of that name in "Town and Country Lovers."
Mrs. Gibbs, the doctor's wife, is unique in that she's the only character in the play who expresses a desire to leave the confines of Grover's Corners. Everyone else seems perfectly content with life in this small New England town, which inculcates a parochial mindset in its inhabitants. But Mrs. Gibbs is different. During one of her regular chats with Mrs. Webb, she reveals her long-held desire to visit Paris.
One can see why the denizen of such a small town would want to visit a large city, especially one as exciting as Paris. For Mrs. Gibbs, as for so many others, the City of Light is the epitome of glamor, culture, and sophistication, all the things her humdrum existence sorely lacks. Sadly, Mrs. Gibbs will never get to fulfill her life's ambition. By the time we reach act 3, twelve years after she reveals her desire to visit Paris, we discover that she's died of pneumonia.

What do "sceptre and crown" and "scythe and spade" stand for, and what do they symbolize?

The poem "Death the Leveller" by James Shirley tells of the futility of the trappings of human pride in the face of death, because death comes to all. Shirley points out that genealogy, the country where someone is born, and victory and honors in battle will not save a person from death. He writes that heroes should not brag anymore about their "mighty deeds" and that only the "actions of the just smell sweet and blossom in the dust." In other words, only the actions of just people will be remembered and appreciated after death.
The phrases mentioned in the question symbolize the fact that death is impartial and it comes to all. A crown is what a king wears on his head, and a sceptre is a staff of authority that a king holds in his hand, so "sceptre and crown must tumble down" means that kings must die too, just like everybody else. Scythes and spades are implements that poor people use in agriculture, so "in the dust be equal made with the poor crooked scythe and spade" means that in death, kings are no different than poor people. Once they are dead, they are all the same, unless they were just people who performed actions worthy of remembrance.

How is foreshadowing used when alluding to the isle of Elba?

In the opening chapter we discover that Edmond Dantès made an unscheduled stop on the island of Elba during his most recent voyage. He went there to fulfill the dying wish of his captain to deliver a package to the Maréchal Bertrand, an exiled grand-general. Sharing Betrand's exile on Elba was none other than the deposed French Emperor, Napoleon Bonaparte, to whom Edmond managed to speak.
Edmond's brief stopover on Elba foreshadows his own exile on the small island of Monte-Cristo, where he finds the buried treasure left to him by the Abbé Faria, a former fellow prisoner on Château D’If. Like Napoleon, Edmond will soon leave his island exile behind and return to France in glory. However, unlike the famous Corsican general, his return will turn out to be much more successful in the long-run.

What does blue sunglasses mean?

In The Famished Road, an unnamed white man asks Azaro's mother how to get out of Africa. She tells him a piece of traditional African wisdom through a riddle: "the only way to get out of Africa is to get Africa out of you." In return, the man gives her the blue sunglasses. The man wanders throughout the continent, until he finally understands the meaning of the riddle: to get out of Africa, he must learn how to be African. When he meets Azaro's mother again, he is a black Yoruba man:

They were shocked to see a mad white man in Africa . . . Then one day my head cleared. Five hundred years had gone past. The only way to get out of Africa was to become an African . . . I got a plane and arrived in England . . . Then before I turned seventy I had a heart attack and died . . . Time passed. I was born. I became a businessman. And I came to the market today to buy some eels and I saw you.

This tale contributes to the novel's element of magical realism. For Azaro's mother these events occur over a period of several weeks, while centuries pass in the man's perspective. Moreover, it plays into the theme of change and transformation as a result of cultural interactions. Both Azaro's mother and the man trade what they have from their respective cultures; Azaro's mother feels relief from using the sunglasses as a means of shielding her eyes and her advice allows the man to return home. The sunglasses story ties into the author's conception of African within the novel as an ongoing discussion of racial, geographical, and cultural solidarity.
The blue sunglasses can also be interpreted as an ironic metaphor for perspective: only when the man gives up his sunglasses and sees the true meaning of the riddle, is he able to find his way home. Ben Okri's novel, and this story-within-story in particular can be interpreted as a political allegory on colonialism. The white man has figuratively consumed Africa, then becomes what he has consumed. The 500 years that the man refers to can be interpreted as the centuries of colonialism the continent has been subjected to. As Avaro's mother shares the story, it then becomes one of colonialism told in the perspective of native Africans.

In the book In the Shadow of Statues, Mitch Landrieu talks about the inferiorization of black people, the violence against them, and the defense to keep slavery. Write a paragraph about it.

Mitch Landrieu was the mayor of New Orleans from 2010 to 2018, and in that role, was active in attempts to remove Confederate memorial statues from public spaces in the city. His 2018 book, In the Shadow of Statues: A White Southerner Confronts History, is an account of that struggle, but more generally an examination of how central race was- and is- to Southern history and society. In short, Landrieu points out that the monuments, and the passion with which some Southerners defend them, is evidence that the South has really never gotten past the racial attitudes that undergirded slavery. They rose again with Jim Crow (the context in which the statues were erected in the first place,) they were behind the "Southern strategy" employed by conservative politicians in the second half of the twentieth century, and they are still with the South. Landrieu, in short, advocates for an open, honest reckoning with Southern history, one that cuts through the Lost Cause mythology that the statues represent. As he writes in his introduction:

The statues were not honoring history, or heroes. They were created as political weapons, part of an effort to hide the truth, which is that the Confederacy was on the wrong side of humanity. They helped distort history, putting forward a myth of Southern chivalry, the gallant "Lost Cause," to distract from the terror tactics that deprived African-Americans of fundamental rights...

Having come to terms with Southern history himself, Landrieu attempts to use this book to help fellow Southern readers do the same. The mayor argues that the violence and injustices done to African-Americans, historically and in the present day, are directly related to the ideas reflected by statues like the ones removed under his watch. Dismantling racism means accepting its reality in the South and beyond.
https://books.google.com/books?id=mzNODwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=in+the+shadow+of+statues&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwighM-C--reAhXEVt8KHSOEAM8Q6AEIKjAA

https://time.com/5203614/mitch-landrieu-in-the-shadow-of-statues/

Why did Martin Van Buren own only one slave?

Though he originally hailed from a slave-holding family, Martin Van Buren came to detest the institution of slavery, calling it "an evil of the first magnitude." Yet Van Buren was also a politician, and as a politician—and a very ambitious one, at that—he knew that there was no way he could argue for the abolition of the peculiar institution and still get elected as president. So he twisted and turned on the issue, devising a series of ever more ingenious compromises which avoided taking the necessary hard decisions.
On a personal level, it is believed that Van Buren owned just one slave, who acted in the capacity of a butler or valet. At that time, it was increasingly difficult to find white people willing to perform the demeaning tasks associated with being a manservant. The industrial economy was growing rapidly, creating more job opportunities for white workers, and so there was a marked shortage of (white) domestic labor. This would've made it harder for upper-class families like the Van Burens to avoid using slaves, even if they themselves found the institution of slavery morally reprehensible.

What finally causes Cecile to call Fern "Fern"?

Cecile makes a point of never calling her youngest daughter, Fern, by her name. She wanted to call her Afua, but she was overruled by her husband and Big Ma. From that day on, she's insisted on referring to Fern as "little girl" out of spite, as a way of showing her evident displeasure at the name that she's been given. Fern, however, insists on being called by her proper name, and she gets very annoyed when Cecile calls her "little girl." That's not her real name; it isn't who she really is.
Cecile only calls Fern by her name when she gives the children their early morning wake-up call. This will be the girls' last day with their mother before they return to Brooklyn. Cecile's calling Fern by her proper name foreshadows the final, heart-warming scene at the airport, when Cecile will warmly embrace her children, including the "little girl" Fern.

"Development policy needs to be about poor people, not just about poor countries." Please explain this statement to me in more depth so I can understand it.

The statement "Development policy needs to be about poor people, not just poor countries," carries a lot of baggage. Let's discuss what it means first and then discuss that baggage later.
Development policy is a package of assistance that's given to poor countries by richer countries, or by international financial institutions such as banks or the International Monetary Fund, or by agencies such as the World Bank or the United Nations Development Program. That assistance could come as cash or loans, tax breaks, or favorable terms in treaties. It could also come as help with large infrastructure projects such as building dams, creating fiber optic communications networks, building hospitals and schools, or funding public health initiatives.
When we say that development policy ought to be about people instead of countries, we mean that we should focus on what people in a country need, instead of simply prescribing remedies for a whole country. A country isn't anything without its people, so sending development aid which looks good on paper but doesn't really help anyone doesn't make sense. It's much better to send aid that can be targeted to specific people with specific problems.
That quote about people means focusing on policy outcomes, not the policies themselves. It's easy to say, for example, that a country that's having trouble repaying a loan should cut government payrolls in order to free up money to service its debt. If you focused your development policy on people instead, you might actually expand government payrolls to help raise incomes and increase consumption, thereby increasing government revenue. Actual policy is a lot more complicated than that, but you get the idea.
The baggage that accompanies the original quote goes something like this. Development which is brought to poor people from outside is fundamentally flawed because it denies them agency. Poor countries don't need saviors. They need money, but just giving them money, whether you call it people-centric development policy or not, won't help them in the long term. True development has to come from inside the country, even inside the people, because without the will to help themselves, any outside aid is lost on them. The catch-phrase which encapsulates this point of view is "trade not aid." If you really want to help poor countries, you would buy their exports, give them access to your markets, give them scholarships for their students to attend your universities, and share the patents of your medicines with them. Your original quote recognizes only two forms of something unhelpful. There's no room in it for the people, because "we" are doing something to "them" when we "give" them development policy.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.739.1444&rep=rep1&type=pdf

http://www.globalization101.org/trade-not-aid/

https://www.devex.com/news/q-a-how-rwanda-focused-pepfar-funds-on-people-centric-not-disease-centric-care-92918

What image closes “Remembrance”? How does this image create irony?

Emily Bronte's poem "Remembrance" features a speaker who reflects on a lost loved one, who has apparently been dead for fifteen years. The speaker laments the loss and discusses how she learned to live without the beloved. At the same time, she admits has felt no joy since the beloved's death. The speaker writes,

No later light has lightened up my heaven,
No second morn has ever shone for me;
All my life's bliss from thy dear life was given,
All my life's bliss is in the grave with thee. (Lines 17-20)

The speaker is openly stating that she will never feel "bliss" again; her chance to experience this feeling died with the beloved ("is in the grave with thee"). The metaphorical "later light" and "second morn" represent another beloved who might supplant the dead beloved in the speaker's heart. This stanza clearly repeats the idea that no new love has come, and no new opportunity for joy will ever present itself to this speaker.
The final three stanzas see the speaker wavering between emotions. In the sixth stanza, she says she learned to live without the speaker, though that life is "fed without the aid of joy" (24). In the seventh stanza, the speaker admits that she wanted to die, to "hasten / Down to that tomb already more than mine" (27-28). She once saw no point to living without her beloved. In this stanza, though, the speaker emphasizes how difficult it was to "wean" herself from the temptation to die along with the beloved.
In the eighth and last stanza, the speaker closes the poem by writing,



And, even yet, I dare not let it languish,
Dare not indulge in memory's rapturous pain;
Once drinking deep of that divinest anguish,
How could I seek the empty world again? (29-32)



Despite all of her best efforts, the speaker still must be vigilant, as she "Dare not indulge in memory's rapturous pain." This oxymoronic line suggests that a "remembrance" of the beloved is both pleasurable and painful: the love they shared clearly brings up strong emotions, but it can never be separated from the fact that the beloved is now dead and beyond her grasp. It is ironic that she can not even think of her beloved with pleasure or joy and that she even sees the remembrance of the beloved as somehow "rapturous." It is obviously dangerous for the speaker to "languish" in the memories of the beloved. She asks how she could ever "seek the empty world again" if she were to fully immerse herself in "that divinest anguish." The irony in the poem's final image is seen in the oxymoronic phrases "rapturous pain" and "divinest anguish." There is both the temptation and the danger in remembering.

Give examples of how Alec is honest with himself on what kind of person he is (bad) and examples of how Angel is dishonest with what kind of person he is (likes to think he's better than society but really is just like anybody else).

After Alec "seduces," in other words, rapes and impregnates Tess, she accuses him of taking advantage of her. He agrees, saying:

‘I did wrong—I admit it.’ He dropped into some little bitterness as he continued: ‘Only you needn’t be so everlastingly flinging it in my face. I am ready to pay to the uttermost farthing. You know you need not work in the fields or the dairies again.

Tess decides, after they are married, to confess to Angel what happened with Alec, interestingly using exactly the same term ("uttermost farthing") as Alec. She thinks to herself:

She would pay to the uttermost farthing; she would tell, there and then.

But first Angel confesses to her that he once spent two days in "dissipation" (having sex) with a stranger. However, when Tess confesses to what happened with Alec, Angel shows he is unable to rise above the conventional thinking of his society, which will condemn the woman for doing just what the man did. Tess says to Angel, realizing he is shocked:

Forgive me as you are forgiven! I forgive YOU, Angel.

But Angel shows himself to be a hypocrite who judges Tess by a harsher standard than she has judged him, even though she was completely innocent when Alec raped her. Angel says to her:

O Tess, forgiveness does not apply to the case! You were one person; now you are another.

Angel, in his inability to forgive others as he has been forgiven, shows he is not as pure and moral as he would like to believe. He is dishonest with himself in a way that Alec is not. If he were honest with himself, he would admit he is no purer than Tess.

What are some concepts of preaching?

One of the most interesting concepts concerning preaching can be seen in the work of the Swiss theologian Karl Barth. As both a Calvinist minister and a distinguished theologian, Barth attached great importance to preaching as the transmission of the Word of God. In his voluminous output as a theologian and in his own sermons, Barth attempted to do justice to the dual aspect of preaching. This dual aspect was embedded in the contradiction between the "perfect" Word of God delivered through "imperfect" human speech.
In preaching to a congregation, a minister must both ascend to God and descend towards his auditors. That is to say that a minister and must ensure that the Word of God speaks through him, but in a language that is readily understandable by himself and his congregation.
Through the act of preaching, the minister utters the divine Word (as he has understands it) from his extensive reading of Scripture. As a man of God, he has a duty to proclaim the Word. Given that he—like everyone else—is a sinner, however, his proclamation of the Word will necessarily be partial and imperfect. Therefore, in the act of preaching, the man of God has a difficult task to perform; he must try to articulate the perfect Word of God using imperfect human language.
That being the case, the sermon should serve as a call to action, a means of encouraging the faithful to go out into the world and proclaim the Word themselves. It is not enough that they hear and understand the Word of God—for, as we have seen, it can only be transmitted through imperfect human language via an imperfect human preacher. They must emulate the example of their preacher: take the Word of God and proclaim it to the world.

In The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant's categorical imperative says: “I ought never to act except in such a way that I could also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (4:402). In this context, how does Kant show that making false promises is immoral?

Throughout his voluminous writings on moral philosophy, Kant emphasizes the point that maxims of morality must be capable of being applied universally to everyone, in all times and all places. There must be no exception to the moral law; this is what gives it its compelling force, and to which we are duty-bound to assent.
Kant recognizes, of course, that there are situations where, for whatever reason, we cannot act according to the dictates of the moral law. But he argues that, in such cases, we are not acting morally, for the simple reason that we can't universalize our actions so that everyone would behave the same way in a similar situation.
Kant uses the example of lying to illustrate his point. Whenever we lie, we are effectively willing that lying should become a universal law. Kant wants us to think through the very serious consequences of this. For if lying does indeed become a universal law, then imagine what it would be like. Promises would mean absolutely nothing, as there would be no standard of truth against which they could be measured. Relationships of all kinds, be they personal or business relationships, would be virtually impossible to maintain. People would feel free not just to lie, but to cheat, steal, and obtain what they wanted through making false promises. The very fabric of society would become dangerously unraveled.
Although Kant thinks that lying is intrinsically wrong, that is to say wrong in itself, he also recognizes the damaging consequences that would arise in the event of lying attaining the status of a universal law.

What are some literary devices used in the book Brave New World and where are they found?

Huxley utilizes symbolism in his novel by depicting Henry Ford as a symbolic religious figure and deity who resembles Christ. In the World State, technology and manufacturing are supreme, and Henry Ford's mass production and assembly line played a significant role in the creation of the World State. Therefore, the manufactured citizens view Ford as their god, and the Model-T corresponds to what the cross means to Christianity.
Huxley also utilizes metaphors throughout his classic novel. One example of a metaphor takes place when Huxley compares the citizens of the World State to bottles after ingesting soma. Huxley writes,

Bottled, they crossed the street; bottled, they took the lift up to Henry’s room on the twenty-eighth floor. And yet, bottled as she was, and in spite of that second gramme of soma, Lenina did not forget to take all the contraceptive precautions prescribed by the regulations. (52)

This metaphor illustrates how citizens of the World State are enclosed and distant from each other. They lack the ability to develop meaningful relationships and are completely controlled by society.
Huxley also utilizes numerous similes throughout the story. Huxley writes that the Brentford Television Corporation’s factory was "like a small town." At the end of a daily shift, Huxley writes that the Gamma girls and the Semi-Morons swarmed around the entrances to the tram-cars "like ants."

What are examples of an allusion in To Kill a Mockingbird?

There are many many allusions in To Kill a Mockingbird. In chapter 2, we have an allusion to Bullfinch's Mythology, a famous collection of Ancient Greek myths. Scout is explaining to her teacher, Miss Caroline, how it is that she's already able to read. She tells Miss Caroline that Jem thinks that Scout is a Bullfinch not a Finch, and that she was switched at birth. Jem's only kidding, of course, but in his little joke he's alluding to the popular book.
There are also several cultural references throughout the novel. While these are not the same as allusions, these references are important to situate the novel in its historical context. In chapter 2, Jem refers to the Dewey Decimal System, which is used to organize books in libraries. Contrary to what Jem thinks, it has nothing to do with John Dewey, the American philosopher of progressive education.
There is another reference, in the same chapter, when Scout discusses her reading habits and how she never really learned to read; it was just something that came to her. She'd read pretty much anything that Atticus happened to be reading when she curled up on his lap, from Bills to Be Enacted into Laws to the diaries of Lorenzo Dow, a famous Methodist preacher who traveled the length and breadth of the United States.

How are Watson and Holmes presented as different male characters?

At the beginning of The Sign of Four, it is clear that Sherlock Holmes intimidates John Watson. Although Watson is a doctor and a war veteran and quite accomplished in his own right, Holmes's confidence and intelligence make Watson reluctant to confront him about his drug abuse. Watson endures Holmes's egotism; he is fascinated by Holmes's powers of deduction and the adventures his work provides for both of them.
Holmes is not especially skilled in interacting with other people. He tends to be tactless, uninterested in others, and insensitive to others' feelings. He does not mean to give offense but frequently accomplishes just that. Watson, on the other hand, is attuned to the feelings of others and provides a buffer when Holmes is interacting with clients and suspects.
It is no surprise, then, that Watson should strike up a romance with Miss Morstan and end up engaged to her. When Watson announces the engagement to Holmes, he groans and tells Watson he cannot congratulate him because

love is an emotional thing, and whatever is emotional is opposed to that true cold reason which I place above all things. I should never marry myself, lest I bias my judgment.

Instead of taking offense, Watson is able to laugh and accept his friend and colleague's lack of social skill.

How is Paul like Neal and how are they unlike?

In Norman MacLean's semi-autobiographical book, Norman describes himself and his brother Paul and uses fly fishing to help show the reader certain character traits. Norman and Paul are both disciplined and both love nature. This is shown through their fly fishing, which is an activity they both love and which is done in a methodical and orderly way that their father teaches them. The brothers differ in key ways, as well. Norman is studious and more reserved; Paul is more rebellious and wild. Norman is willing to leave Montana and venture out into the world; Paul is less willing to do so. They are close and love their family. They love to spend time together and with their father, fishing. However, Paul doesn't apply the discipline he has while fishing to his own life outside of the water. His wild ways lead to his downfall. He has a propensity to gamble, drink, and push boundaries, which ultimately leads to his death at a young age.

What role does the storm play in the development of the plot?

In the opening scene of the play, the royal court of Milan is violently tossed during a strong, unexpected tempest, which threatens to sink the ship and kill all of the passengers aboard. Shakespeare's audience believed that the weather and nature, in general, was a reflection of human relationships and emotions. Therefore, the tempest at the beginning of the play corresponds to Prospero and his daughter's unjust exile, when Antonio usurped his position to become the Duke of Milan. The violent tempest also serves as the catalyst of the play, which results in the royal court being shipwrecked on Prospero's magical island, where he masterminds a plan to retake his title from Antonio while allowing Ferdinand to fall in love with his daughter Miranda. The audience discovers that the tempest was not a natural occurrence and that Prospero gave Ariel direction to purposely create the tempest. Fortunately, Ariel's tempest serves its purpose and the royal court is shipwrecked on Prospero's magical island, where he gets revenge for being exiled and is eventually restored to his rightful position as Duke of Milan.

The violent sea storm—the tempest of the title—is the catalyst for what happens in the play. It's the storm that brings the royal party to Prospero's island, where all the action takes place. And it was Prospero who whipped-up the storm in the first place using his magical powers. Moreover, the storm is important as it sets the scene for what's about to follow. The storm's violent tempestuousness is a reflection of the seething anger and resentment that Prospero still feels over this overthrow and subsequent exile. By creating the storm, Prospero is showing the royal party on board ship that his supernatural powers are much stronger than the merely earthly power they enjoy back in Italy. This is his way of showing them that he's the one who's now in charge; he's the one who controls their destinies.

Near the beginning of chapter 3, George and Slim agree on the negative consequences for men who "go around on the ranches alone." What are those consequences, and how might this explain why George travels around with Lennie? Support your answer with evidence from the text.

John Steinbeck carries the theme of loneliness and companionship through the entire novel. The unpredictable nature of ranch-hand work, exacerbated by the Great Depression, meant that most of the workers were moving around a lot. Finding an amenable situation was serendipitous, and fitting in with the other hands, with whom one shared a bunkhouse, required respect for privacy. The itinerant lifestyle could generate conflicts, and some men invited conflict. They got mean and wanted to fight. George prefers harmony.
In the passage quoted, George tells Slim that going around the ranches alone “ain’t no good.” The guys who do so

don’t have no fun. After a long time they get mean. They get wantin’ to fight all the time.

George is the kind of person who likes to get along with and help others. His need to be one of the guys had previously led him to join in teasing Lennie, until he realized that hurting another man was not entertainment, telling Slim that it “wasn’t so damn much fun after a while.” He has become a steadfast advocate of Lennie’s welfare and of his good qualities, defending him against other men’s frequent insults.
In their one-on-one conversation, Slim gently prods George to figure out his relationship with Lennie. While it remains unstated, it is understood that the other ranch hands, commenting that it seems “funny” that the two men travel together, are trying to verify that they are not gay. George seems used to this, as he responds, “It ain’t so funny.” In addition, the juxtaposition of one clearly more intelligent man to an intellectually challenged one is notable.
Slim is presented as a sympathetic character, with “Godlike eyes,” who speaks with a friendly tone that “invited confidence without demanding it.” George tells him that he and Lennie “kinda look after each other,” telling Slim that Lennie is a “Hell of a good worker. Hell of a nice fella, but he ain’t bright.”
Noting how few men “string along” together, Slim philosophizes, “Maybe ever’body in the whole damn world is scared of each other.” He further notes that the hands usually just work a month or so and then move along, simply occupying their separate bunks and then going off alone.
George’s opinion is that “It’s a lot nicer to go around with a guy you know.” Lennie takes the place of relatives because George has “no people” of his own. After the time they have spent together, he and Lennie have gotten used to each other; he is used to going around with Lennie—“and you can’t get rid of him.” He disagrees with Slim’s opinion that he is much smarter than Lennie:

I ain’t so bright neither, or I wouldn’t be buckin’ barley.... If I was even a little bit smart, I’d have my own little place.

Slim gives his opinion that Lennie is “a nice fella” and that “a really smart guy” is not likely to be nice. At this point comes the passage quoted about the men who go around alone, with George noting that they get mean and want to fight. Slim agrees that they get mean and that “They get so they don’t want to talk to nobody.” As he and George have been talking for a while, he is clearly implying that he is not mean and prefers conversing to fighting.

What was Mrs. Windibank's motive in the Sherlock Holmes "A Case of Identity"?

Mrs. Windibank conspires with her husband to ensure that her daughter, Miss Sutherland, is seduced and abandoned just before her forthcoming wedding to Mr. Hosmer Angel. Of course, the caddish Mr. Angel turns out to be none other than Miss Sutherland's stepfather, Mr. Windibank, in disguise. Mrs. Windibank's motive is the same as her husband's—money. So long as Miss Sutherland's living at home with her mother and her stepfather, the Windibanks can count on a regular supply of money, as they are free to use the substantial sum bequeathed to Miss Sutherland by her uncle Ned in New Zealand. However, if she gets married and leaves home, then the Windibanks will lose out financially. So they concoct a wicked, elaborate plot to make sure they can continue to get their greedy, grasping hands on Miss Sutherland's money.

Where does Virginia Woolf's To the Lighthouse take place?

To The Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf is a novel that was published in 1927. The beginning of the novel takes place before World War I begins. The novel continues moving through time, and World War I takes place as well as ends during the story. The novel's characters live in Britain, but the narrative primarily takes place in Scotland. The story covers the trips that the Ramsay family takes to the Isle of Skye in Scotland. It also takes place at the lighthouse, which they visit on the Isle of Skye and which is the reason for their journey.
An interesting component of this story is the way that Woolf writes about experience. She writes the characters' thoughts with different perceptions and shows the different ways that they reflect on their own experiences with the Isle of Skye and the lighthouse.

In the book We Were Liars, what was Grandad's only failure?

The novel We Were Liars by E. Lockhart follows the families of the daughters of Harris Sinclair, a wealthy businessman who is a very controlling and is an overbearing father and grandfather. The novel discusses the inheritance he leaves for his family members, as well as how he takes care of them despite his controlling and domineering behavior towards them.
At one point, Granddad professes that his one failure is related to his lineage. His one great failure was never having a son and instead having three daughters. He wishes to have an heir and someone to carry on the family name, mainly due to his pride. He has no issue giving his inheritance through trust funds to his children and grandchildren, but he yearns for someone who would carry on his legacy and take over his work, as well as his wealth.

What is the worldview of Rainer Maria Rilke and how is expressed in his poetry?

It is fair to say that Rainer Maria Rilke was a prolific poet concerned with the mystical, religious, artistic, and existential.
A major work of Rilke's is Das Stunden-Buc, or The Book of Hours—a three-part poem cycle in which the speaker presents himself as a monk. The poet was a religious seeker who struggled to conceive of God and man's impetus to live, and in the poems, he communicated how he grappled with the limitations of language to describe God.
Rilke later developed the object poem, a type of verse dedicated to the attempt to put into words the experience of a work of visual art.
Some of Rilke's last works are contained in Sonnets to Orpheus, a cycle of fifty-five sonnets inspired by the mythical characters of Orpheus and Eurydice and thematically concerned with the phenomenon of transformation and divinity.

Lord Byron's poems "She walks in Beauty" and "Darkness" (vol. 2) are both in Tom Stoppard's Arcadia. Why do you think Stoppard chose to make Byron a central (though off-stage) character in his play, and what do these poems in particular contribute to his vision? (Look to the Romantic era in the Norton Anthology, vol. 2.)

Tom Stoppard's plays often focus on re-interpreting literary history and on using past literary characters or symbols in order to discover modern meanings. Of the two Byron poems cited, the first is the expression of what Byron was perhaps best known for during his lifetime: his amorous feelings and affairs. The second, "Darkness," is a grim dystopian depiction of the last days on earth after the sun and stars have been extinguished.
Stoppard's Arcadia juxtaposes the past (Byron's time, specifically the years 1809 to 1812) with the 1990s, when the play premiered. The personal conflicts of the characters are also juxtaposed with a meditation on scientific theories about heat reduction and the idea that the energy of the universe will eventually burn itself out. These dual aspects of the play can be seen, respectively, to be expressed in the two poems by Byron, while the figure of Byron is an unseen presence behind the action of the drama in both its past and present phases.
Stoppard's use of his poetry also emphasizes just how "modern" Byron really is. One often tends to think the Romantics had an idealized view of mankind and the world, and though this is true to an extent, much of their work was also dominated by a deep pessimism. Byron's work fits in especially well with a playwright such as Stoppard, whose dramas often focus on the absurdity and existential dilemmas of modern times.

What test must Gilgamesh pass to get the help of the man scorpion?

Gilgamesh has embarked upon a dangerous quest. Still grief-stricken over Enkidu's death he's desperate to find Utnapishtim, the sole survivor of the apocalyptic flood that deluged the earth. Gilgamesh wants to learn from Utnapishtim how he too might escape death.
But before any of this can happen, Gilgamesh has to go past the twin-headed mountain of Mashu, which is guarded by two fearsome giant scorpion monsters, one male, the other female. When Gilgamesh shows up, they are astonished to see a mere mortal show such boldness in approaching the gates of Mashu. Nonetheless, they are also impressed by Gilgamesh's great courage and sense of purpose and so agree to talk with him.
The Scorpion-man tells Gilgamesh that Utnapishtim lives on the other side of the mountain. In order to get there, Gilgamesh will have to walk through a long tunnel buried deep into the mountain. The tunnel is pitch-black, and the Scorpion-man doesn't believe that any mortal, not even one as brave as Gilgamesh, will be able to survive such darkness.
However, Gilgamesh is undeterred and begs the Scorpion-man and his wife to allow him to make the attempt, which they do. So Gilgamesh enters the tunnel, along which he has to walk in complete darkness for the next twenty-four hours.

What is the significance of symbolism in Antigone and how does each symbol relate to its themes?

One symbol is the way in which Creon chooses to punish Antigone. Creon sentences Antigone to be buried alive in a cave. This is significant because Antigone has been trying to give her brother his funeral rights for the entire play, but now she herself is put in the ground. Ironically, Creon will not allow the dead to be buried but punishes Antigone by burying her alive. This punishment is symbolic of the perversion of justice that has taken place. In his original decree, Creon said that any person who disobeyed his decree would be publicly stoned, but he changes the punishment for Antigone to a much more private death that mirrors what she has been trying to do for her brother. When Creon realizes his error and recognizes that he has been going against the will of the gods by leaving the dead unburied, he rushes to dig Antigone out of the cave. However, it is too late and she is already dead. Ironically, Creon has been wrongfully uncovering Polynices each time Antigone tries to bury him. He finally gives the order to bury Polynices and uncover Antigone at the end, but his change of heart comes too late.

Next, after reading "A Pair of Tickets," briefly answer the following questions about Setting: Where does the story take place? What does setting suggest about the characters' lives? Are there significant differences in the settings for different characters? What does this suggest bout each person? When does the story take place? Is the time of the year or time of day significant? Does a change in the setting during the story suggest some internal change in the protagonist?

Amy Tan's story, "A Pair of Tickets" describes both a physical and emotional journey experienced by Jing Mei Woo and Canning Woo, her father. Jing Mei's mother is recently deceased, and the pair have set out to visit various relatives before their final destination wherein Jing Mei will finally meet her half sisters.
The bulk of the story takes place as they travel to meet relatives, but there are many flashbacks and sub-stories that we encounter along the way. The setting of the story in present tense remains the same for the characters, but the flashbacks and sub-stories vary widely in date and place. Jing Mei recalls conversations with her mother in her youth in California, and stories are told of Jing Mei's mother in China when she was young and made the fateful decision to leave her daughters behind.
Jing Mei and her father have a pair of tickets on a train to meet relatives from afar, and ultimately to meet Jing Mei's half sisters, who Jing Mei's mother had to abandon when they were merely infants.
Jing Mei grew up in California, so her flashbacks to her mother take place there. As the story begins, Jing Mei knows little about her half sisters. Jing Mei had a strained relationship with her mother before her death and still does not know the full story as to how her half sisters were abandoned or why.
I believe that the initial train ride takes place during the day for a reason. It allows the author to show Jing Mei's father's responses to seeing his homeland after so many years away. He is visibly stirred by the places he remembers.
Day turns to night as they meet Jing Mei's extended family at the train station and then they move on to share stories at the hotel. Finally, late into the night, Jing Mei's father tells her the whole truth about how and why her mother abandoned her sisters on the side of the road so long ago. This use of night is symbolic of closure and Jing Mei is able to awaken the next morning in preparation for meeting her sisters for the first time as a newly awakened woman, with new knowledge of her mother's past to fortify her for the meeting to come.

Do you think this poem gives a true picture of our society today? Which details do or do not ring true?

You must remember that Auden was not describing, or satirizing, today's society, but the society of 1939 at the time of his writing the poem. Nevertheless, there are issues that were of concern to Auden then which remain pressing today—arguably far more so.
The first issue is the idea that people represent mere statistics to governments, with data processing being used as a means of keeping tabs on citizens. Auden is criticizing the tendency of governments to treat everybody according to how closely they adhere to societal norms; anyone who is not "happy" would surely have made this known to the government—except that the government equates happiness with being statistically normal and the same as everyone else.
Another issue is the idea that governments are always surveilling their citizens—this idea was just beginning when Auden wrote this poem, but is of far greater concern today.

Describe the differences between Northern and Southern economic and social life that were developing in America through the first half of the nineteenth century.

During the antebellum era (in the early to mid nineteenth century), the Northern economy was becoming increasingly industrialized. The North was linked to the Midwest (then called the Northwest) by railroad and canal, while the South remained largely agrarian and did not industrialize to the same extent. The South also had far fewer miles of railroad track, making it more isolated, geographically and culturally, from the rest of the country. The Northern economy was moving away from the need for agricultural workers and was turning to factories and the use of immigrant labor, while the South, in part because of the invention of Eli Whitney's cotton gin in the late 1700s, was still highly reliant on slavery.
The Second Great Awakening, which took place around 1800, led to increased fervor for abolitionism in the North and to other reform movements, such as temperance. This sentiment did not hold sway in the South, which remained culturally and economically committed to practicing slavery.

In Speak, what are Melinda’s deepest fears, and does she eventually overcome her fears?

Melinda Sordino was raped by Andy Evans at a summer party before her freshman year of high school and instinctively called the police, who broke up the party. Tragically, Melinda does not inform anyone that she was raped and is ostracized by her peers for calling the cops. As an isolated, shunned teenager, Melinda struggles to find a voice and heal from her traumatic experience. Melinda stops speaking and begins spending time alone in the school's broom closet. Melinda fears her attacker, Andy Evans, and goes to extreme lengths to avoid him at all costs. Melinda also fears publicly discussing her traumatic experience, so she attempts to suppress her negative emotions. As the year progresses, Melinda gradually begins to heal through her art and gardening. In the spring, Melinda finally tells Rachel that she was raped and ends up confronting her attacker in the broom closet. After Melinda stands up to Andy Evans and overcomes her fears, she gains notoriety and is ready to finally heal.

What are the consequences of deceit in Hamlet?

Deceit really drives the plot in Hamlet. The circumstance which generates all further conflict is that Claudius has secretly killed his own brother (and Hamlet's father), which Hamlet's father's ghost conveys to him in act 1. Because of this initial deceit, a tide of deceit follows:
Hamlet feigns madness in order to stall and consider his options for revenge.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, once school acquaintances of Hamlet, work with Claudius to deceive Hamlet regarding their loyalty. Their true motive is to assess his state of mind, not to lend support.
Polonius attempts to deceive Hamlet as he spies on a (heated) conversation Hamlet has with his mother. Unfortunately for him, Hamlet realizes that hidden ears are listening, assumes that it is Claudius, and is moved to act on his feelings of revenge—actually accidentally killing Polonius.
Ophelia is played as a pawn by most men in the story, asked to spy for them and to behave in ways that suit their purposes.
Shakespeare crafts the character of Hamlet by using cleverly deceptive puns and wordplay. In the very beginning scenes, Hamlet says of Claudius, "A little more than kin, and less than kind" (1.2.65). Claudius is now both his uncle and his father in law—but not necessarily a kind man or Hamlet's kind of man. When speaking about Claudius to his mother, Hamlet says, "You are the queen, your husband's brother's wife" (3.4.15). Hamlet presents a full logical circle here. Which husband? Which brother? The ability to craft Hamlet's character in this way to showcase the theme of deceit is a testament to Shakespeare's great talents.
Because of deceit, there is great loss of life by the end of the play. Claudius, Gertrude, Laertes, Polonius, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, and Hamlet himself all meet an untimely end because they choose deceit over truth. The final scenes serve as a reminder that the effects of deceit can be far-reaching, impacting even the innocent (represented by Ophelia).

There is indeed something “rotten in the state of Denmark,” as Marcellus observes to Horatio as the play begins, and one obvious failing in the Danish court is the apparent inability to act without guile. Deceit seems to be the characters’ default behavior; acts of deception riddle the plot, driving it relentlessly to a deadly conclusion. With the exception of Horatio, the only principal characters who don’t die at the end of the play are those who are already dead—Old Hamlet, Polonius, Ophelia, Rosencrantz, and Guildenstern. The dead in Hamlet are all victims of deceit, in one way or another, and with the exception of Old Hamlet, each of them is also guilty of deception.
The catalog of acts of deceit in the play is comprehensive, beginning with the murder of Old Hamlet. In killing the king, concealing the heinous crime, and feigning love for Hamlet, Claudius initiates subsequent events that lead to further deception. Hamlet pretends to be mad in order to verify the truth of his father’s death. Ophelia meets with Hamlet, allowing Claudius and Polonius to eavesdrop on their conversation. Gertrude conspires with Polonius, meeting with Hamlet while Polonius hides in Gertrude's chamber to listen and observe. Claudius schemes to secure Hamlet’s death at the hands of the English king, but through Hamlet’s clever deception, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern die instead after reaching England. It is a final act of deception—Claudius and Laertes’s plotting to draw Hamlet into a duel and kill him with Laertes’s poisoned sword—that results in the ultimate catastrophe that plays out in the drama’s final scene.
Would death and disaster throughout the Danish court have been avoided if Hamlet had chosen at the outset to proceed without guile in addressing his father’s death? Shakespeare seems to suggest that no such option existed for Hamlet, given his nature and the intrigue inherent in the exercise of political power. Moreover, killing a king—even a vile usurper like Claudius—cannot be accomplished without grave ramifications. Regardless of Hamlet’s actions in dealing with Claudius, the consequences would have been severe. The number of characters who die in Hamlet is remarkable, even for a Shakespearean tragedy, and they die as a consequence of deceit.

Explain the religious argument in An Essay on Man. What are some examples?

Pope's argument concerning religion in An Essay on Man is basically that people are not in a position to know enough about the universe to enable them to question God's plan and, still less, the actual existence of God. He uses the example of Isaac Newton—the Einstein or Stephen Hawking of his time—as one who, in spite of having explained the mechanistic laws of the universe, was still unable to answer the spiritual questions:

Could he, whose rules the rapid comet bind,Describe or fix one movement of his mind?

Man, in Pope's view, will never have the ability to explain why the universe came into being and what God's plan for him is.
A corollary of this idea is the much-caricatured view that this is "the best of all possible worlds," for which Pope's source is partly the philosophy of Leibniz. Man has no business judging God by the problems and imperfections that exist in the world because he has no way of knowing why God created the universe and man. Without imperfections, there would be no struggle and no problems to solve; these problems give "meaning" to life. To Pope, in these lines in which Newton is again referenced, man is to God and the angels as the animal kingdom is to man, the implication being that since animals don't understand man's purposes, neither should man presume to know God's intentions for us:

Superior beings, when of late they sawA mortal man unfold all Nature's law,Admired such wisdom in an earthly shape,And showed a Newton, as we show an ape.

Though Pope was nominally a Christian, the message is more that of deism, an ecumenical belief in a deity and in the equalty of faiths throughout the world.