How were the lives of male and female peasants different?

The Middle Ages in Europe was the timeframe from the 5th to the 15th centuries, also referred to as the Medieval period. During this era, there was a strict set of structural norms that dominated society. People were born into specific classes and typically stayed within that class for the duration of their lives. Tradesmen and peasants were the lowest-ranking classes, followed by the clergy, knights, nobles, and finally the king, who held the highest status. Clothing, food, marriage, homes, religion, and so on were all predetermined, and people did not typically “move up” to the next class, no matter how hard they worked.
Men and women were treated and perceived very differently at this time. The role of a male was to function as the head of the household, with his wife considered his property and thus treated by him however he wished. As part of this arrangement, men could divorce their wives, but women could not divorce their husbands.
Most peasants farmed the land owned by a lord, who rented it to them in exchange for the farm labor they provided. As per this agreement, peasant men were also required to fight if war broke out. As the head of the household, men were deemed the breadwinners and in charge of the farm duties. However, women were also often required to work in the fields, especially during the busy harvest season. In addition, peasant women had many other domestic responsibilities, including caring for children, preparing food, and tending livestock. It was also the role of women to fulfill fundamental home manufacturing duties, such as brewing, baking, and textile-making.
http://www.medievalgender.org.uk/masculinity-in-medieval-times/

https://westernreservepublicmedia.org/middleages/feud_peasants.htm

https://www.bl.uk/the-middle-ages/articles/women-in-medieval-society

Why does Grant become a teacher? What are some of the paradoxes of his position as a teacher?

A Lesson Before Dying takes place in Louisiana in 1948, where racism is prevalent and an innocent black boy, Jefferson, is sentenced to death. Our protagonist and narrator is Grant, a teacher in the community. Grant's aunt has asked him to visit Jefferson in jail to help him face death with bravery.
Grant's aunt is the one who helped him go to university to make a better life for himself. Grant ends up taking his anger out on his aunt:

Everything you sent me to school for, you’re stripping me of it . . . All the things you wanted me to escape by going to school. Years ago, Professor Antoine told me that if I stayed here, they were going to break me down to the nigger I was born to be. But he didn’t tell me that my aunt would help them do it.

Grant went to school so he could make something of himself. As a black man during this time period, that meant becoming a teacher:

I could never be a hero. I teach, but I don’t like teaching. I teach because it is the only thing that an educated black man can do in the South today. I don’t like it; I hate it. I don’t even like living here. I want to run away. I want to live for myself and for my woman and for nobody else. That is not a hero. A hero does for others.

Grant tells Jefferson he didn't become a teacher because of a passion for the profession. It just seemed like his best option.
Grant's position as a teacher is paradoxical because he is the one who ends up learning the lesson before dying. He learns from Jefferson, who is supposed to be his student. Grant starts off pessimistic, thinking that nothing will ever change. But the visits with Jefferson help him find hope and believe in change.

My eyes were closed before this moment, Jefferson. My eyes have been closed all my life. Yes, we all need you. Every last one of us.

Should Martin Luther have tried to keep the Church from splitting up? Why or why not?

This is a significant question, because the effects of the Protestant Reformation are significant, and have created ripples which have continued into the present. At the same time, be aware that the Reformation itself was deeply destabilizing, and resulted in a great deal of sectarian violence and religious warfare. In any case, this answer is really an opinion question, so I can't address it as a yes/no answer. That being said, I do have a few thoughts of my own, as they apply to this question.
First, be aware: Martin Luther's initial intention was not actually to divide the Church. Rather, his intention was to reform it. He genuinely believed that over time, incorrect doctrine had made its way into the Church, and he was trying to return it to (what he believed was) a theologically correct understanding. Furthermore, if we consider the stakes, especially in a period which was much more intensely religious than the western world is today, keeping silent would have been anathema from his perspective. One can disagree with his theology, but there's no reason to suggest he was insincere in his beliefs. With that in mind, is it realistic of us to expect him to recant these ideas, especially when they related to some of the central tenets of the Christianity and (perhaps most importantly) would have potentially impacted salvation?
In any case, I'd also suggest that these divisions within Christendom are better understood more in the manner of ripple effects, rather than anything resembling his initial intentions. With that in mind, after a certain point it is also worth asking just what kind of steps he could have taken to prevent the Church from breaking apart, and whether these suggestions are actually realistic. Keep in mind, there were Protestant theologians and preachers far more radical than Luther himself, and that, even were Luther to recant, we cannot expect they would have done the same. At a certain point, a movement outgrows than it's originator, and I believe this was the case with Luther. Even were Luther himself were to reverse course, to what degree would we expect other Protestant preachers, to say nothing of the various the princes and polities in whose lands Protestantism had become entrenched, would reverse course also? Your question asks whether he should have kept the Church together. I'd respond by asking if, after a certain point, such a goal would have been possible at all.

What is a summary of chapter 1 in Winnie-the-Pooh?

Chapter 1 of Winnie-The-Pooh is entitled, "In which we are introduced to Winnie-The-Pooh and some Bees, and the stories begin." In this chapter, Christopher Robin tells a story about Winnie-the-Pooh. Winnie-the-Pooh, while out walking one day, comes to "an open place in the middle of the forest." Here he sees an oak tree, and coming from the top of the oak tree he hears a buzzing noise. He reasons that the buzzing must mean bees and that bees must mean honey. So, hungry for honey, his favorite food, he climbs to the top of the tree, singing to himself as he climbs. Near the top of the tree, a branch snaps, and Winnie-the-Pooh falls all the way back down to the ground, landing in a gorse-bush. He "brushe(s) the prickles from his nose," and decides to visit Christopher Robin, who lives "behind a green door in another part of the Forest."
He asks Christopher Robin for a balloon, which happens to be a blue one, and then he rolls around in "a very muddy place." His plan is to disguise himself as a cloud, and float up to the top of the tree and help himself to the honey. However, when he gets to the top of the tree, the bees become suspicious. He asks Christopher Robin, who has remained on the ground, to "walk up and down with (his) umbrella, saying, 'Tut-tut, it looks like rain.'" Winnie-the-Pooh hopes that this will be enough to fool the bees.
Unfortunately, the plan doesn't work, and Winnie-the-Pooh decides that the bees are "the wrong sort of bees." He asks Christopher Robin to shoot the balloon, so that he can fall back down to the ground. Christopher Robin, ever the helpful friend, duly obliges. Winnie-the-Pooh falls to the ground. His arms are "so stiff from holding on to the string of the balloon," that they stay stuck "straight in the air for more than a week."

What is a good idea of an alternative ending of Romeo and Juliet for the play?

Perhaps another ending would show Juliet waking up from her death-like state just a minute or two sooner, so that Romeo could see her awaken before he has a chance to drink the poison that kills him in the original play. He is already amazed that Juliet is still so beautiful, even in apparent death; she has not acquired the pallor associated with the dead, and he speculates that Death keeps her to be his own lover. Maybe Romeo just spends another few moments considering how it is possible that she retains her beauty, giving her time to wake up and prevent him from taking his life. With Paris dead, the lovers can make their escape, with the help of Friar Lawrence, and begin life together in Mantua or some other place.

A possible alternative ending would be a happy one. It would go something like this: the misunderstandings that, in the original tragedy lead to Romeo and Juliet's deaths, would be cleared up in the nick of time. Realizing how close their beloved offspring had come to an untimely, tragic demise, the Montagues and the Capulets see the error of their ways, and realizing just how much Romeo and Juliet love each other, the warring families agree at long last to put aside their differences and give their blessing to the star-cross'd lovers.
Of course, this would mean that the play's Prologue, which tells us in advance of the title characters' tragic demise, would also have to be rewritten. Or perhaps it would be necessary to get rid of it altogether. At any rate, a happy ending would be entirely appropriate, and it would send home the audience with a song in their hearts.

Why does the speech sound inspirational to the jury in "The Devil and Daniel Webster"?

In Stephen Vincent Benet's "The Devil and Daniel Webster," the title character is a lawyer hired by a simple farmer who had sold his soul in exchange for good luck. Webster convinces the devil, called Mr. Scratch, to grant Jabez Stone a trial by jury before taking Stone's soul; he argues this on the grounds that Scratch violated Constitutional law in creating the contract with Stone in the first place.
During this trial, Webster gives a speech before the jury of men who were condemned to hell. Afterward, the jury's foreman announces the verdict in favor of Stone. He says that, even though Webster's argument provided virtually no evidence, "the damned may salute the eloquence" of the arguer. This means that, because Webster has delivered such a touching oration about the nature of mankind and its failings, the jury felt compelled to reward such beauty and poignancy, even if they thought Stone should have to pay the price of his soul.
The speech likely sounds inspirational to the jurors because they themselves are complex men like Stone who did both good and bad in life and likely feel that they didn't deserve eternal torment either. He makes them feel as though they have the power to grant a second chance that they themselves never got.

What does Julio give to Romiette in Romiette and Julio?

Having recently moved to his new house, he's in the process of unpacking all his belongings. Julio's in a nostalgic mood as he delves into one of the boxes and finds numerous reminders of his childhood, various things he no longer needs but which he's determined to keep anyway due to their enormous sentimental value.
As well as his rock collection and an old, taped-up baseball card of Hank Aaron, Julio comes across a small stuffed lion he won at the state fair the previous year. It's not immediately apparent why Julio's kept the little toy, but he's kind of glad that he has. As he looks at the lion with its big, silly grin, Julio is sure that Romiette will just love it.

Why is the overthrow of King James II known as "The Glorious Revolution"?

The revolution was glorious in the sense that it was carried out with virtually no bloodshed and relatively few shots fired in anger. The uprising against King James II had been well-planned, and thanks to his unpopularity, it wasn't too difficult to find many nobles and other important political figures to participate in his overthrow. James, though a foolish man in many respects, was wise enough to realize the game was up and therefore pointless to make a last stand against the vast forces ranged against him. (At least for now; James would attempt an unsuccessful comeback a year later at the Battle of the Boyne).
It's well-said that history is written by the victors. And the victors of this particular constitutional and political conflict capped their triumph by christening it "The Glorious Revolution." For those who participated in James's overthrow, that may well have been true. But for countless others in the British Isles, most notably Irish Catholics, the revolution was nothing short of a disaster, leading to increased persecution and repression.

What is the setting of the novella?

The novella takes place in Salinas Valley, California.

"I feel so alone. I never did feel like this before; like I was all by myself and there was nobody to care what happened to me." Is this direct to indirect characterization?

Direct characterization is when a writer comments directly to the reader about character specifics, such as personality. In indirect characterization, the writer implies information about a character's personality and other aspects through dialog, thoughts, actions, and appearance.
The classic short story "The Cold Equations" by Tom Godwin tells of a pilot aboard an Emergency Dispatch Ship carrying essential medical supplies to a frontier planet. He discovers a stowaway onboard, a young teenage girl who only wants to visit her brother. However, the spacecraft has only enough fuel for the pilot and the supplies and cannot perform its mission unless the girl is jettisoned into space. Although the pilot communicates to his superiors and tries to come up with some sort of alternative action, there is none. The poor girl says this when she realizes that she has no choice but to soon die in the cold vacuum of space:

I feel so alone. I never did feel like this before, like I was all by myself and there was nobody to care what happened to me. Always, before, there was Mama and Daddy there and my friends around me. I had lots of friends, and they had a going-away party for me the night before I left.

This poignant passage is an example of indirect characterization. Through it, Godwin puts readers into the mind of the teen girl who is condemned to die and allows us to understand what she is going through during this ordeal.

As you know, Laertes and Fortinbras are two characters in Shakespeare’s play that serve as foils for Hamlet. How does each figure expose or highlight certain traits in Hamlet’s character, and how does each character’s behavior in the play relate to the themes of advice and duty, action versus inaction, and sanity versus madness?

Hamlet and Laertes share some significant commonalities. Both of their fathers are murdered. Both seek revenge for that murder, and both are dead by the end of the play. The most significant difference is the speed of reaction to their father's murders. Laertes is a man of action; he wastes no time after the death of Polonius in making his own plans clear. In fact, Laertes believes that if he fails to act with speed, he is casting a shadow against his mother's virtue:

That drop of blood that’s calm proclaims me bastard,Cries “Cuckold!” to my father, brands the “harlot”Even here between the chaste unsmirchèd browOf my true mother. (IV.v.130-134)

Laertes sees it as his duty to refrain from a calm response and therefore prove that his mother has been a devoted wife. He moves quickly in a sense of honor to his entire family. This contrasts with Hamlet's delayed response, of course, as he considers carefully the requests of the ghost. He approaches the murder of Claudius with caution, avoiding revenge at one point because be believes that Claudius's soul might benefit from the timing. Laertes therefore acts more from a sense of duty to immediately bring to justice the man responsible for his father's murder. I would argue that both men are sane; Hamlet feigns madness in order to accomplish his plans of determining the guilt of Claudius, but his manipulative word play and his treatment of his mother and Ophelia are arguably all part of the ultimate plan.
Fortinbras is a man of honor; he seeks to reclaim what his father lost to Hamlet's father. He stirs men to loyalty and action himself, and Hamlet marvels that Fortinbras is able to fight for "a little patch of ground / That hath in it no profit but the name" (IV.iv.19-20). Hamlet sees their contrasts in this way:

Witness this army of such mass and chargeLed by a delicate and tender prince,Whose spirit with divine ambition puffedMakes mouths at the invisible event,Exposing what is mortal and unsureTo all that fortune, death, and danger dare,Even for an eggshell. Rightly to be greatIs not to stir without great argument,But greatly to find quarrel in a strawWhen honor’s at the stake. How stand I then,That have a father killed, a mother stained,Excitements of my reason and my blood,And let all sleep (IV.iv.49-61)

Hamlet realizes that the ambition of Fortinbras propels his sense of honor, and Hamlet considers that his own father has been killed while he simply "stands" and allows the issue to "sleep." Fortinbras needs no one to advise him on his next steps; his sense of duty both to his country and to his father guide his path. Fortinbras's honor and duty (and clearly sanity) win him the eventual respect of Hamlet himself, who votes for Fortinbras to wear his own crown in his dying breaths. Fortinbras avoids the insanity surrounding Claudius's schemes and arrives just in time to claim victory.

This is an interesting question and allows one to map out some of the patterns in this complex play. Fortinbras, Hamlet, and Laertes seem to occupy three corners of the options for young men of court. Each loses his father, and each has reason to seek revenge. How they go about seeking revenge tells us about them not just as characters but also as intellectual or political options.
With Fortinbras, we seem to have an older version of the Germanic hero, occupied by questions of honor: his father was killed and his land was lost; he will fight to restore that land. In act 4, scene 4, Hamlet sees him crossing to battle for a piece of land of little worth:

Witness this army of such mass and chargeLed by a delicate and tender prince,Whose spirit with divine ambition puff'dMakes mouths at the invisible event,Exposing what is mortal and unsureTo all that fortune, death and danger dare,Even for an egg-shell. Rightly to be greatIs not to stir without great argument,But greatly to find quarrel in a strawWhen honour's at the stake.

Fortinbras's honor and his willingness to defend it, seemingly without thought or reflection, end in him gaining Denmark's crown. We can even look at this play as the comedy of Fortinbras—yet he is a man who lacks all the brilliant consciousness and self-awareness Hamlet demonstrates. He is a man of revenge, of action, and of blissful sanity. It is hard to imagine Fortinbras having any thought deep or complex enough to drive him mad.
Laertes is a more modern man. Like his father, he speaks in polished truisms taken from commonplace books. He seems to follow his father's advice to turn himself into a socially acceptable ornament, offending no one and standing for nothing. When his father and sister die, he feels bound by duty to seek redress, and he is willing to take the Machiavellian way to it. Before he left Paris for Denmark, he prepared himself for subtle revenge:

I bought an unction of a mountebank,So mortal that, but dip a knife in it,Where it draws blood no cataplasm so rare,Collected from all simples that have virtueUnder the moon, can save the thing from death

He has cause for grief and revenge, but something in his character makes his actions feel more performative than deeply felt. This is also why Hamlet jumps into Ophelia's grave, offended at Laertes' seemingly artificial forms of grief. Laertes may seem mad with grief at various moments, but he easily slides back into conventional behavior when he sees an opportunity to serve his purpose.
Hamlet, by contrast, resists the advice his mother and uncle offer early in the play, fails to follow his duty to office and family, delays acting on his grief and his duty as the son of a murdered father, and perhaps even gives in to his "antic disposition." Yet Hamlet is the character who, despite his many failures to perform his duty, to "take action in a sea of troubles," and even to channel his thoughts into a linear path, commands our awe and terror.

How were most governments in the American colonies organized?

The first American colony was Virginia. Virginia was granted a royal charter to found a colony, with rule of the colony being granted to an elected legislature and a governor appointed by the king. The legislators in the colony legislature could only be elected by property-holding males. The remaining colonies also received royal charters and established governments that were of a similar nature to that found in Virginia. Importantly, the legislatures did not have the same powers that state legislatures or Congress have today, because each colony was supposed to be under the direct rule of the king. The governors, as the kings' direct representatives, were meant to be the more powerful arm of government, though power of the legislatures to control the payment of the governor generally allowed for a powerful influence.
New England was slightly different, because the initial Plymouth colony was settled by individuals who initially sought Virginia but landed in Massachusetts. Since Massachusetts was outside of the established border of the Virginia colony, the Plymouth settlers created the Mayflower Compact and essentially established self-rule. When Massachusetts later became an established colony, it was provide a royal charter with a similar form of government to the other colonies, though the New England colonies retained more desire for self-rule and engaged in more direct action within towns and villages.

What characters are mostly involved with the theme of love versus infatuation in Romeo and Juliet?

The characters in Romeo and Juliet who are most involved with the theme of true love versus infatuation are Romeo, Rosaline, and Juliet. Although Romeo and Juliet have come to symbolize "true" love, the action of the play does not allow for that interpretation. It is apparent that both Romeo and Juliet are in the throes of strong infatuation. Romeo simply transfers his infatuation from Rosaline to Juliet.
As the play opens, Benvolio tries to get Romeo to attend the feast at the Capulets' home in order to get his mind off Rosaline, "whom thou so loves." He's convinced that once Romeo lays eyes on some of the other pretty women of Verona who will be at the party, he'll quickly forget about his "love" for Rosaline. Indeed, this is exactly what happens. Romeo sees Juliet and quickly makes his move. Before long, they've exchanged a little light banter and two kisses.
They stay up all night pining for each other and assuring each other of their love when they meet on Juliet's balcony. Juliet herself realizes that "it is too rash, too unadvised, too sudden" and calls their feelings "this bud of love." But as Romeo tries to leave, she more or less proposes to him, saying that if he wants to marry her, he should send word the next day, and she will meet him immediately for the wedding ceremony. After two meetings, they have committed to each other. Obviously, this is not enough time for true love to develop.
Paris's feelings for Juliet are even less developed. He seeks to marry her as part of an arranged marriage. Although Capulet first advises Paris to woo Juliet and win her heart, because of the way events transpire, this plan is dropped in favor of a wedding in a few days' time. Paris says nice things about and to Juliet, but he does not seem to be particularly infatuated with her. They have barely met each other. To him, the relationship is more like a business deal.
Therefore, Romeo and Juliet are the characters who display infatuation. True love is not really seen in the play, but the theme comes through as the shallow relationship of the two young people plunges ahead with disastrous consequences.

How did the Great Depression affect German society?

The Great Depression of 1929 held dire consequences for the financial, emotional and spiritual well being of German Society.
From 1924 to 1929, Germany's financial well-being was preserved by way of American loans and goodwill.
However, as America began suffering its' own financial devastion with massive unemployment and company shutdowns, this goodwill came to an abrupt end. In fact, America requested prompt repayment of these loans which plunged Germany into the same circumstances i.e massive unemployment and business closures. Additionally, severe austerity measures were meted out by The German Government whereby unemployment benefits were abruptly stopped.
By 1931, these dismal conditions prompted many bank failures and visible panic ensued. Some German citizens fortunate enough to hold savings, lost everything while bank runs became commonplace.
As dire as Germany's financial insolvency, the spiritual and emotional toll on its' citizenry created a visible moral bankruptcy. This moral decay manifested itself via a gradually increasing acceptance of Hitler and The Nazi Party. There was a definite migration away from mainsteam leadership to this radical regime.
Telling, are the comments from American journalists about Hitler I e 'he's a clown.._'some burst out laughing at his jerky hand movements..his shrill voice..and refused to take him seriously.' This is to emphasize the desperation of German Society during this period.
During times of financial hardship, charismatic leaders become popular even if they are buffoons without any leadership experience.
In conclusion, it is clear that The Great Depression had a profound financial, emotional, spiritual and historical impact on German Society.


(Please visit this link for further reading and to provide citation)
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/03/early-warnings-how-american-journalists-reported-the-rise-of-hitler/254146

The U.S. stock market crash of October 1929 and the subsequent Great Depression had ripple effects throughout the Western world. The impact on Germany was profound. The German economy was progressing at a moderate but steady pace in the mid/late 1920s. With the start of the Great Depression, Germany experienced a sharp drop in national income and industrial production along with a spike in unemployment.
Germany relied heavily on foreign—particularly, American—capital. After the stock market crash, the United States began to pull back capital, including loans that were furnished by the Dawes Plan (1924) and related acts in order to help the Weimar Republic (1918-1933) with reparation payments to France and Great Britain. The withdrawal of capital precipitated a banking crisis in Germany and a lasting economic recession ensued. Furthermore, the economic malaise in major western countries led to a drop in the demand for German exports, which led directly to a drop in production and growing unemployment.
The economic hardships paved the way for the appeal of radical politics and the rise of the National Socialist (Nazi) Party. The political success of the Nazis, beginning with the Reichstag elections of 1930, led to a further withdrawal of capital. As the crisis deepened and emergency measures by the Weimar government failed, more radical solutions became more appealing.
Certain social groups were particularly susceptible to the Nazi Party's message. The youth, for example, were coming of age and trying to establish their careers and families at a time when prospects for doing so were exceedingly bleak. The Nazi message, which squarely placed the blame on the Weimar Republic for all of Germany's problems, appealed to social groups (farmers, professionals, public officials) that badly wanted the crisis to end but saw Marxist socialism as a cultural threat. Anti-Weimar sentiment was strong among these groups, and the Nazis appeared to be offering a viable solution.

Who are Cadmus's daughters in Metamorphoses?

The Metamorphoses mentions two of Cadmus's daughters: Semele and Autonoë. The other daughters of Cadmus are Agave and Ino.
In Ovid's story, Jupiter falls in love with Semele when he sees her swimming in the river. Jupiter subsequently seduces and impregnates her. Juno, Jupiter's wife, becomes jealous when she learns this fact. As a form of revenge, Juno disguiseds herself as an old maid. When Juno speaks to Semele—pretending to talk about gossip—she asks Semele if the one who impregnated her was truly Jupiter. She cautions that many men deceive virgins by pretending to be gods. In order to prove that Jupiter is indeed the father, Juno tricks Semele into summoning him.
Previously, Semele asked Jupiter for a wish, which he agreed to give. He told her she could have anything she wanted. Having been tricked by Juno putting doubts in her mind, she now wishes for Jupiter to appear before her. However, when Semele summons Jupiter, his powers of thunder and storm prove to be too savage for Semele's mortal body, and she dies. Jupiter tries to prevent her summoning him, but he is obliged to grant her wish. Jupiter and Semele had a child, Dionysus.
http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph3.htm

At Sir William Lucas's gathering, how does Darcy act around Elizabeth?

Mr. Darcy's behavior at Sir William Lucas's gathering is almost as haughty and proud as it is at the Meryton assembly. For example, when Sir William is attempting to make conversation, engaging Mr. Darcy on the subject of dancing, the older gentleman says that he considers it to be the mark of every polished society. Mr. Darcy rather rudely replies,

Certainly, Sir,—and it has the advantage also of being in vogue amongst the less polished societies of the world.—Every savage can dance.

Whether he is only being contrary or actually saying, in a thinly veiled way, that Sir William's party guests are unpolished savages is unclear. However, in either case, Mr. Darcy is certainly not being as polite as he could or should be. Not only this, but Mr. Darcy's other responses to Sir William are not particularly friendly or warm. They are barely civil at times.
When Sir William spots Elizabeth Bennet walking near to himself and Mr. Darcy, he entreats her to dance with the younger man. Mr. Darcy is "not unwilling to receive" her hand to dance, but Elizabeth declines. Next, "with grave propriety [he] requested to be allowed the honour of her hand, but in vain." After she walks away, Miss Bingley attempts to banter with him, and he admits that he admires Elizabeth's "fine eyes," a comment that sends Miss Bingley (who clearly wants Mr. Darcy for herself) into a tailspin. His behavior, at least toward Elizabeth, is more cordial and less insulting than it is at the Meryton assembly when he flat refuses to ask her to dance when Mr. Bingley suggests it.

I have to answer a question about Oberon. What do you do when people don't follow your orders? This is a question that we need to answer in Shakespearean language.

This is an interesting question. As background, Oberon, king of the fairies, has ordered his wife, Queen Titania, to give him the young Indian boy she has adopted. Titania refuses to do so, because the child is the son of a close mortal friend who died in childbirth, and the friend particularly left the child in Titania's care.
Oberon decides to play a trick on Titania because she won't comply with his demands. He has Puck put the juice of a flower in her eyes. This will cause her to fall in love with the first creature she sees. Oberon says he will not take the spell away from her until she agrees to give up the Indian boy (the "page"). In Shakespearean language, Oberon says:


She shall pursue it [the first creature she sees] with the soul of love.
And ere I take this charm from of her sight—
As I can take it with another herb—
I’ll make her render up her page to me.

In other words, when people don't follow his orders, Oberon causes them to fall in love in ridiculous ways.

Why did European colonists come to America?

European colonists came to America for a number of reasons. Many of them came because they wanted to get on in life. In Europe, societies tended to be quite hierarchical, and so it was difficult for people to rise in social status. America promised them the opportunity to start afresh, a chance to make their own way in the world unhampered by social prejudice.
Right from the start, America earned the reputation of being a land of opportunity, where everyone could become successful if only they were prepared to work hard. This proved an attractive proposition to many Europeans, who knew that no matter how hard they worked in their home countries, they would never be able to improve their lot. And so they turned their gaze towards America for hope and inspiration.
In those days, wealth was primarily conceived of in terms of land-ownership. But in small countries such as England, where land was in short supply, opportunities to own land were limited, to say the least. The New World, however, promised tens of thousands of acres of land on which potential settlers could build new lives for themselves and their families. That most of this land had been in the possession of Native-American tribes for centuries was not thought to be a problem. Nor was sufficient attention given to whether or not the land, even if it did become available, would be suitable for the settlers' needs. In any case, the land hunger among the settlers was so strong that such pressing concerns were either ignored or minimized, with often tragic consequences.

How is Maitre Hauchecorne responsible for his own doom in "The Piece of String"?

Although the old man is entirely innocent of any crime, the local townsfolk still insist that he's guilty, even after it's proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he couldn't have stolen the pocketbook. This would appear to suggest that Hauchecorne has something of an unsavory reputation in town.
Now of course, it may well be the case that such a reputation is singularly ill-deserved. After all, it's not unusual in small towns for people to be given a bad reputation simply because they don't quite fit in. But in the case of Hauchecorne, one senses that his reputation for deviousness is well-deserved. The way that he conducts himself as he walks down the street, his furtiveness in bending down to pick up the piece of string, and his loud boastfulness at what he thinks is his complete exoneration all convey the impression of a man who simply cannot be trusted—even if, on this occasion, he's completely innocent of any wrongdoing.

Why does Sammy quit his job so suddenly in "A&P"? Is his gesture genuinely heroic, or is it merely the misguided idealism of a rebellious adolescent? How is it prepared for earlier in the story? Why is it ironic?

Sammy quits his job as a cashier at the local A&P in order to impress the attractive girl he refers to as Queenie. Sammy takes a stand for romantic love and idealistically believes that Queenie will acknowledge his valiant defense. Sammy hopes that his "heroic" act will lead to a budding romance with Queenie. Unfortunately, Sammy publicly quits his job and discovers that Queenie and her friends have immediately left the premises without acknowledging his efforts.
One could argue that Sammy's gesture is merely the misguided idealism of a rebellious adolescent. Sammy resents his authoritative boss and takes pleasure in disobeying Lengel. He also naively believes that rescuing Queenie from the authoritative, oppressive Lengel will lead to a romance with the girl of his dreams. Updike utilizes numerous classical overtones to emphasize Sammy's misguided idealism; it is as if he's playing the role of hero in an Arthurian legend.
One could also argue that Sammy's action is not genuinely heroic, because he has ulterior motives. He is primarily concerned with winning Queenie's heart and does not take a stand simply to defend injustice. It is important to note that Sammy is not attracted to Queenie's friends and would more than likely remain silent if Queenie was not present. Despite Sammy's valiant attempt to gain Queenie's admiration, he walks to the parking lot and accepts the harsh reality of his bold choice. The irony of the story is that Sammy's bold stance backfires, as his romantic notions are crushed by the realistic world.

There are quite a few questions being asked here. I believe that the first question is the main question. The second question actually provides two possible answers to the first question. Either of those choices can be defended too. It's possible that Sammy genuinely thinks that his act will be so heroic in Queenie's eyes that she'll thank him as her knight in shining armor. It's also possible that Sammy believes in his ideals about how Lengel is unfairly treating the girls. Sammy doesn't care what the girls think; he just wants to make a stand against Lengel and what he stands for. I don't think either of those possibilities is the reason that Sammy quits his job so suddenly. I think his main motivation is trying to impress the girls in some way. He wants them to notice him as something more than just a cashier in the store. He doesn't care what the old ladies in the store think about him, because he hardly notices them in return; however, he definitely notices Queenie. Readers get huge amounts of detail about her bathing suit and where she pulled her money from.

Now her hands are empty, not a ring or a bracelet, bare as God made them, and I wonder where the money's coming from. Still with that prim look she lifts a folded dollar bill out of the hollow at the center of her nubbled pink top. . . .
I uncrease the bill, tenderly as you may imagine, it just having come from between the two smoothest scoops of vanilla I had ever known were there, and pass a half and a penny into her narrow pink palm, and nestle the herrings in a bag and twist its neck and hand it over, all the time thinking.

Sammy quits because he wants her to notice him, and quitting his job is just about the only rebellious "look at me" action he has to play. He might believe his action is heroic.

The girls, and who'd blame them, are in a hurry to get out, so I say "I quit" to Lengel quick enough for them to hear, hoping they'll stop and watch me, their unsuspected hero.

Unfortunately, a truly heroic act isn't self-serving, and Sammy is definitely hoping his actions impress Queenie.

Why did Jackson defeat John Quincy Adams so dramatically in the 1828 election? Discuss how Jackson benefited from, and contributed to, the vibrant political culture of the 1830s

Andrew Jackson's win over John Quincy Adams in 1828 was a vindication of his loss in 1824. Adams's earlier selection over Jackson was achieved through the "corrupt bargain," in which he was chosen by the House of Representatives. Jackson relentlessly attacked corruption in the Adams administration, which touted its commitment to restore purity in the White House.


In his landslide 1828 win, with 56% of the popular vote, Jackson became the first president elected from west of the Appalachian Mountains. In office, one key issue was his veto of the Bank of the United States charter. His popularity kept climbing, leading to his 1832 re-election.


Beginning in 1830, the federal Indian Removal Act began the relocation process that deprived millions of Native Americans of their land, opening it to white people. The related Trail of Tears, from 1835 to 1838, forced indigenous people to endure a grueling and often fatal march away from their home territories. This is one of Jackson's most barbaric and inhumane legacies.


Jackson is also credited with strengthening the federal government through supporting the Nullification Proclamation. This forbade states from nullifying federal laws, a significant step in the budding conflict that would erupt with the Civil War.


A major crisis that began in Jackson's administration (but was not resolved by Jackson) was Texas declaring independence in 1836, a situation that Jackon's successor, Martin Van Buren, had to handle.
https://millercenter.org/president/jackson/campaigns-and-elections

During what time period was "King Grisly-Beard" written? Was it really based off of a German folktale?

"King Grisly-Beard" is an old German folk-tale, one of many collected by the Brothers Grimm. They travelled widely over the length and breadth of the various German kingdoms and states, gathering together dozens of old folk tales and legends for publication. Many of the stories were transmitted orally, and so were never written down until Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm arrived on the scene. Oral transmission of folktales was a necessity in an era when the vast majority of people couldn't read.
The precise time periods in which these stories were written are generally unknown. Although the fact that many of the Brothers Grimm's tales are set in medieval times does give us a possible hint as to when they were first composed. As regards "King Grisly-Beard," the setting appears somewhat vague. The story is set in "a land far away in the East," which could be just about anywhere. Having said that, as with many of the Grimms' fairytales there are references—to castles, kings, maypoles, etc—that appear to ground the tale in the medieval period.
The early 19th-century, when the Brothers Grimm first published their tales, was the heyday of the literary and artistic movement known as Romanticism. One notable feature of Romanticism was its veneration of the Middle Ages, which was look at nostalgically as a time of greater cultural and religious unity in Europe, and which provided numerous artists, poets, and novelists with much inspiration.

What does grey mean in "The Lady With A Dog" (i.e grey fence and hotel room)?

In "The Lady with the Pet Dog," Anton Chekhov tells the story of an adulterous affair that turns into true love. Dmitry and Anna meet and begin the affair at Yalta, a seaside resort, in full summer, where they often are outside in glorious nature. After they return to their respective homes and realize there is more to their relationship, they begin to meet clandestinely. Both realize that they are suffering because they have not faced the truth about their marriages and, more broadly, their lives.
Gray is associated with the artificial, soulless, desolate landscapes of their inauthentic existences. Anna, for example, lives in a house with a gray fence. They meet in dim, dull hotels as they try to push past the mediocrity of routine existence and live with emotional honesty.

What is the white privilege and how does our society support "whiteness" as the norm? Provide some examples from society to illustrate your responses. How can we, as a society, confront white privilege even when individuals may not know that they are benefiting from white privilege?

Although the concept of white privilege has been part of the sociological toolkit for at least 30 years, it continues to exert a strong effect on U.S. society. If whiteness is considered the norm or "unmarked" status in terms of race and all other racial identities are "marked" in contrast, then by extension difference is often portrayed as "abnormal." Suggestions of change to the status quo are then likely to be seen as benefitting only "minorities" or special interests rather than contributing to the general good.
The workings of white privilege extend back to the womb, as prenatal care differs markedly for pregnant women of different races, and carry through the course of one's life into elderly care. The reality of socio-economic distance between different racial groups, however, is just one element of white privilege. The ideologies of racial superiority, including an unwillingness to acknowledge or discuss the underlying importance of race in the historical and contemporary structure of U.S. society—often called "color blindness"—also serve to perpetuate the hegemony of whiteness.
In one of the most influential formulations of the white privilege concept, three decades ago Peggy McIntosh, a white sociologist, referred to it as an "invisible knapsack"—something that a person carries around at all times, full of weighty stuff, but is unaware of. She referred to this stuff as

unearned assets that I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was “meant” to remain oblivious.

Issues of personal safety, securing employment, and acquiring housing are among the areas in which that "cashing in" occurs. In recent years, attention has also increased to the incidence of racialized difference in apparently trivial aspects of daily life. An example is a manager at a Starbucks calling the police to arrest African Americans but not Caucasians who did not make a purchase. Without the publicizing of such cases, whites would likely not regard hanging out in a coffee shop as radicalized privilege.
Calling attention to isolated incidents and locating them within systemic patterns is one important step in increasing awareness and, in turn, taking steps to challenge the invisibility of which McIntosh wrote. Instituting employee training is another important component. Education at all levels, from an early age through higher education is equally crucial. It is important in public schools where the teacher is likely to be white even in a majority minority student body. As well, social media campaigns can help keep the issues from fading.
https://nationalseedproject.org/Key-SEED-Texts/white-privilege-unpacking-the-invisible-knapsack

https://www.socialworktoday.com/archive/exc_0618.shtml

How and why are the prostitutes "students of men"?

Malcolm X was an outstanding student during his junior high years. His exemplary grades were suitable enough to help him perpetuate his dreams to become a lawyer, however, his favorite teacher crushed him unmercifully by telling him there was no place for a ______ in that profession. Dejected and denied, he promptly left his schooling, moved to Harlem, and entered his first career path as a pimp and drug dealer.

Malcolm X relied on the women he employed to provide intimate details of their experiences with the clients they serviced. The women gave him information that no other employee can offer in such great detail. He, in his own way, was a pioneer of Information Age-esque data mining. The prostitutes would tell him how the men were invariably broken by "domineering, complaining, demanding wives who had just about psychologically castrated their husbands" and associated them with the good fortune he had made off of their husbands' misery.

Malcolm's referring to his days working as a pimp and a street hustler. He notices that the prostitutes who work for him are keenly observant of men's behavior due to their regular contact with them. They effectively study the men that they sleep with, learning quickly that they are too easy to push around. In the women's experience, the men who come to them do so because they feel as if they've been ridiculed and humiliated by their wives, despite giving them everything they could ask for. The prostitutes have internalized the retrograde, sexist attitudes toward women that Malcolm expresses candidly throughout the Autobiography. They think, as he does, that men need to be more forceful and controlling towards their wives; that men are supposed to be strong while women remain weak and subservient.

How has the Protestant reformation influenced how we in America today view freedom, government, and rights?

One thing you should be aware of, when speaking about the Protestant Reformation, is the degree to which it was deeply destabilizing throughout Europe. Religious Wars, sectarian violence, religious suppression—these are all key themes concerning the Reformation's impact on Early Modern Europe.
If you look at the history of English colonization, consider that a significant number of colonies were founded by religious minorities: for example, consider the Puritan presence in New England. Then there is a place like Pennsylvania, founded by the Quakers, or Maryland, by Catholics. Even as far back as the colonial era, you can observe a significant amount of religious diversity in Colonial America.
Now we come back to the founding of the United States itself, influenced as it was by Enlightenment era criticisms, and by the history of religious tensions and religious suppression that was deeply threaded in European history. Religious liberty was one of the key guarantees of the First Amendment (and this was particularly important, precisely because of the history that could be observed back in Europe). Meanwhile, one has the lasting influence of Thomas Jefferson and his ideas concerning "the separation of Church and State." These values have served as cornerstones of American democracy all the way through to the present day.

How did the three figures look? What did they say to hail Macbeth and Banquo?

When Macbeth and Banquo meet the three witches in act 1, scene 3, they are horrified by their ugly appearance. Banquo wonders if they are supernatural creatures, because they don't appear to be “inhabitants o’ th’ earth.” We have learned earlier that they fly on broomsticks and keep animals as familiars. Banquo also notes that the women have beards, which unsettles him.
The witches catch the attention of the two men by hailing Macbeth not only as Thane of Glamis but also as Thane of Cawdor. Macbeth knows he is Thane of Glamis but is startled to be called Thane of Cawdor, as he does not yet know Duncan has bestowed that title on him. The witches continue to hold the men's attention by predicting that Macbeth will become king of Scotland and that Banquo's descendants will be kings of Scotland too.

Congress is commissioning you to prepare a study about the effects on readers of violent, disturbing literature—e.g., gothic literature such as Poe's "The Black Cat" or Hawthorne's "The Birth-Mark." You are told that among sociologists there are two schools of thought: one is that such literature acts to “purge” the violent tendencies of people, allowing them to vicariously “let off steam” in a safe environment; the other is that such literature only desensitizes people and therefore makes them more prone to violence. How would you evaluate this problem, and what recommendations would you make? What information would you need, and what resources would you have to consult? Who would you ask?

In order to verify claims—even those posited by scientists and other professionals—one must conduct fact-checking research. How would you evaluate this particular thesis? Firstly, you should find relevant scholarly articles, preferably published in peer-reviewed journals pertaining to the field (e.g., psychology, sociology, etc.). You must cross-examine the conclusion of the initial source material with the research conducted by other scholars. This is akin to seeking a second opinion from various physicians regarding a diagnosis and treatment recommendation.
The most important pieces of information you'll need are the quantitative data, qualitative data, and the researchers' methodologies in conducting their experiments. This way, you can examine any flaws or biases in their methodology which could substantially affect the conclusion of the research. To supplement your findings, it is recommended that you also take secondary sources into account, such as newspaper articles or books highlighting the issue (e.g., youth violence or the correlation between media and violent behavior).
Since the conclusion of the researchers is based on the works of particular writers, it is also important to read in-depth biographies and/or autobiographies of those particular authors. Were they prone to violence and anti-social behavior? Did their works reflect their actual lives and personalities? These are all essential questions to answer in order to verify the claims of literary or scientific scholars.

Apply one term or element of identity to "A Serious Talk." Build your topic sentence around the term or element of identity you select, making sure to offer what you will prove about it. For example, you could write something about Burt's masculinity or symbolism in "A Serious Talk." Offer a developed paragraph on the story, identifying what term or element of identity you will discuss.You need to offer one post that contains two formal paragraphs. Make sure that you have a topic sentence, evidence in the form of at least three quotes from each of the stories, and analysis of that evidence.

If you want to stick with symbolism (given in the prompt as an example and therefore likely something your teacher is looking for), there are several examples you could use. You might structure a thesis something like this:

Raymond Carver uses symbolism in "A Serious Talk" to convey the devastation in the relationship between Vera and Burt.

Here are some examples you could use to build your paragraphs:

The ashtray: This represents the life the couple had. They had bought it together in happier times, and when he sees a mixture of cigarettes in their ashtray, Burt is disturbed. After all, he cannot accept that Vera has moved on without him, and this is a visual reminder that she is mixing a new life with pieces of her old one with him (and their children). Since he cannot reconcile the image of Vera's moving forward, he decides to wipe it clean: "He rinsed it out and dried it. He put it back on the table. And then he ground out his cigarette in it." Burt is trying to symbolically reclaim his own place in Vera's life. When he leaves, he takes the ashtray with him, symbolizing his efforts to hold on to what remains of their life together.


The disarray of the backyard: Burt looks out a window and sees "a bicycle without a front wheel standing upside down. He saw weeds growing along the redwood fence." This is symbolic of his current relationship with Vera. It is in disarray (like the weeds covering his fence, choking out something created to mark their own space together) and has no further function (like the bicycle which can no longer be ridden and cannot even stand in its intended position).


The pumpkin pie in the driveway: The story both begins and ends with this image: "It was still there, the aluminum pan upside down, a halo of pumpkin filling on the pavement." Typically pumpkin pies are symbolic of warm family bonds and happy moments spent together. The fact that his is both upside down and in the driveway is symbolic of the cold, broken relationship that exists between Burt and his family.

How would you interpret the ending of "Why don't you dance"? "She kept talking. She told everyone. There was more to it and she was trying to get it talked out. After a time, she quit trying."

The young man and young woman were glad to get a bargain on the furniture from the older man who put it out on his lawn. Their attitudes toward the experience were different, however. The young woman seemed to find humor and adventure in the experience, while her companion seemed self-conscious and uncertain. They were obviously at or near the beginning of living together and short on money: they are not just buying a used bed but trying to get it cheaper. The older man seems to be at the other extreme, discarding the material apparatus of his conjugal life.
Consistent with her attitude of the experience being a lark, the young woman enjoys telling people about it. She wants to overlook the implicit pathos of the man's situation but it intrudes in her mind: "There was more to it. . . . "
The last line seems to link her with the older man's missing partner and her own possible future path, when she too might stop trying.

Does Pip go to see Joe, Biddy, and his sister while he is in town? Why or why not?

In chapter 35 of Great Expectations, Pip returns home for his sister's funeral. After the ceremony, he has an awkward exchange with Biddy when he tells her that he will come back to the forge often to take care of Joe now that his sister's passed away. Biddy's silence tells him that she doesn't believe a word of this. And with good reason, too, because Pip's a changed man.
Since moving to London he's become a crashing snob. He's no longer the humble apprentice blacksmith living in a cramped cottage on the bleak Romney Marshes; he's a young gentleman of substance. Pip's feelings of superiority are heightened further by the embarrassing, unwelcome visit of Joe to London, during which time he acts like a country bumpkin, thus reminding Pip of his lower class origins.
Pip is overcome with remorse at his high-handed treatment of Joe, and he resolves to come pay him a visit. But crucially, he makes all kinds of excuses as to why he can't stay at the forge, and must lodge at "The Blue Boar" instead. Pip may feel guilty about his snobbishness, but that doesn't stop him from continuing to be a snob.

Why are morels easier to find after forest fires?

Morels, a kind of mushroom, are generally hard to find, but they tend to appear the year after a forest fire in conifers in the western United States. According to a blog post in Scientific American (see the link below), no one really knows why these types of morels, referred to colloquially as "burn morels," are more plentiful after forest fires. According to the blog post below, there are several theories about why morels grow after a forest fire. The fire might result in the loss of needle duff that prevents the growth of morels, or the fire might result in a change in soil pH or chemistry that is beneficial for the growth of morels. Fires might result in less competition from other organisms or in the availability of more minerals in the soil, from burned trees. The loss of food might also cause the burn morels to flower. Native Americans knew that forest fires brought about a crop of morels and may have deliberately set fires to encourage the morels' growth.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/artful-amoeba/in-the-year-following-fire-a-mushroom-bonanza/?redirect=1&error=cookies_not_supported&code=95c587f2-564f-4a28-8d26-e01189c6c2e5

Many people enter into therapy hoping to change some aspect of their lives, but what actually leads to the change? While I am specifically asking you to think about what it is about the therapeutic relationship (or what happens in therapy) that brings about change, you can also think more globally about what causes people to change.

Change happens in therapy when the client is ready and motivated to change. Many people state that they want change in their lives, but they are not really ready to change or to alter the way that they approach their lives or their relationships. Many people also want other people to change without changing themselves.
The therapeutic relationship is important because it can foster a safety and trust that allows the client to examine his or her life and behavior in order to find the motivation to change.
However, the motivation for change has to come from within the client—when the client is ready for it. Often, change is possible when clients realize that their old ways of being and thinking are not working for them anymore, and they are ready to face the (often destabilizing) process of internal change.

Why is Coleridge's use of language important?

“The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” is noted for its musicality and vivid imagery in creating the poem’s fantastic, dreamlike atmosphere. Numerous poetic techniques—alliteration, repetition, distinct patterns of rhythm and rhyme, and various types of figurative language—are found throughout the work. Simile, metaphor, and personification are consistently employed in creating the many memorable images in the poem. Moreover, figurative language and sound devices are often concentrated in particular stanzas to enhance the poetic effect.
This stanza in Part II illustrates the effectiveness of Coleridge’s concentrated poetic language:
About, about, in reel and rout
The death fires danced at night;
The water, like a witch’s oils
Burned green, and blue and white.
The rhythm in the stanza is perfect, with lines of iambic tetrameter alternating with lines of iambic trimeter, each syllable in each line fitting the meter of the line. The end rhyme, “night” and “white,” rhymes perfectly to the ear. The stanza begins with the repetition of “about,” and the musical effect is enhanced through the alliteration that follows. Each of the four lines features words that alliterate: “reel” and “rout,” “death” and “danced,” “water” and “witch’s,” and “burned” and “blue.”
The image in the stanza—St. Elmo’s fire illuminating the ocean—is created through personification, metaphor, and simile. The natural phenomenon is a “death fire.” It dances in a “reel and rout,” suggesting its frightening intensity. The water surrounding the ship burns like the oil a witch would use to cast a spell. The effect of the figurative language is heightened through the negative connotations of “death,” “witch,” and “burned,” words that suggest darkness, evil, or destruction.
The stanza, like “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” in its entirety, illustrates Coleridge’s artistry as a poet and the power of poetic language to captivate and enthrall.

Why is Misha such a good friend to the orphans?

The first and most obvious answer to this question is that Misha is an orphan himself. Also, it is thanks to other people on the outskirts of society, such as Misha's friend Uri, that Misha gains an identity and a sense of community.
Misha's nature appears to be a gentle one, and he is kind to all those who are kind to him, resorting to criminal activities only as a means of survival for himself and those that he cares about.
I would argue that Misha was a good friend to anybody who showed him kindness and acceptance. For example, consider the way Misha treats Janina and her family, ensuring that they have food and following them into the ghetto in spite of the fact that he was not Jewish and therefore was not required to.

I believe that one of the best supporting pieces of evidence as to why Misha is such a good friend to orphans is that Misha was himself an orphan. When the novel begins, Misha does not even have a real name. He believes that his name is "Stopthief" because that is what he hears people calling out to him right after he steals something from them. Uri befriends Misha, and for the first time in his life, Misha has something that resembles a loving and supporting family. Uri will eventually give Misha the name "Misha," and Uri also provides him with a hypothetical background. Misha is thankful for people like Uri and Janina, and he is kind to orphans as a result. He has a heart for orphans because he knows what it is to be one, and being kind to them is his way of paying it forward.

Describe the boy's horse ride.

If you're referring to Aram and Mourad's ride on the white horse, one way to describe the horse ride is that it is an exhilarating experience.
In fact, the boys enjoy the ride so much that Mourad sings during the ride. From the text, we learn that Mourad sings at the top of his lungs; Aram tells us that his cousin "roared" his happiness in song. Although Aram doesn't sing, he admits that the feel of the horse running is "wonderful."
After letting the horse run for as long as it wishes, Mourad takes the reins alone. He guides the horse across a field, crosses an irrigation ditch, and then returns to where Aram is waiting. When Aram gets on the horse for his solitary ride, however, he freezes in fear. After an irate prompting from Mourad, Aram kicks into the animal's muscles.
The horse takes off but doesn't perform as before. Instead of running toward the irrigation ditch (as it did with Mourad), the horse turns into a neighboring vineyard and begins jumping over vines. The text tells us that the horse jumps over seven vines before Aram falls off.
So, the horse ride was exhilarating for both boys. However, the boys also learned that it takes particular skill to guide a horse toward an intended destination.

What does Lady Macbeth say when Macbeth doesn’t want to kill Duncan

Lady Macbeth is very much the prime mover behind the wicked plot to kill Duncan. Macbeth's reluctant to go along with his wife's plans because he still feels a residue of loyalty to his king, the man who's showered him with honors and praise for his tireless service. By the time we've reached Act I Scene vii Macbeth is openly expressing his doubts about the murder plot:

We will proceed no further in this business.
He hath honored me of late, and I have bought
Golden opinions from all sorts of people,
Which would be worn now in their newest gloss,
Not cast aside so soon.

Lady Macbeth responds by impugning her husband's manhood and presenting him with a stark choice: either he can take the crown or live the rest of his life as a coward, always wondering what might have been. Macbeth replies by claiming that committing this foul deed will make him less than a man. On the contrary, says Lady Macbeth, it will actually make him more of a man:


What beast was ’t, then,
That made you break this enterprise to me?
When you durst do it, then you were a man;
And to be more than what you were, you would
Be so much more the man.



We can see here that Lady Macbeth's trying to overcome her husband's moral qualms about the murder by playing on his sense of manly honor. She's effectively making him feel like a wimp for not going through with it.

How does Shakespeare create a magical atmosphere in the first scene of act 2 in A Midsummer Night's Dream?

Shakespeare creates a magical atmosphere in this scene by immersing us in the forest world of the fairies. The scene opens with a fairy's speech, which clearly sets this place apart from the human environment we know so well. Fairies, unlike humans, can fly about swiftly in this whimsical sphere. As the fairy states,

I do wander everywhere
 Swifter than the moon’s sphere.

We're also invited into the quarrel between Oberon and Titania that is upsetting the weather in the human world and also causing discord in the fairy world. We learn, as we hear of the quarrel over the Indian boy, that this is a world of tiny creatures that can fit into acorn cups:


all their elves for fear
Creep into acorn cups and hide them there.


Despite the quarrel upsetting this kingdom, the scene is filled with enticing, whimsical imagery that make it clear we are in a magical world usually hidden from humans.

How is Mr. Spencer significant?

In the opening chapters of The Catcher in the Rye, Holden Caulfield describes the school and several of the students, but the real author, J. D. Salinger, must have felt it would seem incomplete if his narrator did not give some description of the teachers as well. This probably explains why Holden goes to say goodbye to Mr. Spencer. The elderly teacher actually is, in one respect, a representative of the entire faculty at Pencey. Mr. Spencer is speaking for all of Holden's teachers when he explains in an apologetic manner why he had to give the boy an "F" as his final grade. The other teachers probably felt the same way as Mr. Spencer. They could not help feeling that they might have done something—and should have done something—to "motivate" this bright and talented but totally indifferent young student. They know it will look bad for Holden when he goes home to face his parents, who were paying a lot of money to send their son to one of the most prestigious prep schools in the country, one that supposedly has been "molding young boys into splendid, clear-thinking young men" since 1888 and runs magazine ads showing one of these splendid, clear-thinking young men leaping over a fence on horseback. It looks bad for Holden, but it also looks bad for the teachers, the headmaster, and the school. The parents might ask, "Why didn't you mold Holden into a splendid, clear-thinking young man instead of sending him home with a report card full of F's?"
Mr. Spencer is not reprimanding Holden for his misbehavior so much as he is apologizing and trying to justify his own perceived failure. Holden is kind of a super-dropout. He has flunked out of two prestigious prep schools before, and now he is flunking out of the third. Three times is a charm. He probably will not ever be going back to another prep school. The teachers could not have motivated this problem student, but nevertheless they feel somewhat embarrassed because they sense that some of the blame will attach to them. That is why Mr. Spencer, speaking in a sense for all the teachers, asks:
"Do you blame me for flunking you, boy?"
It seems ironic that Holden ends up consoling his old teacher:
Well, you could see he really felt pretty lousy about flunking me. So I shot the bull for a while. I told him I was a real moron, and all that stuff. I told him how I would've done exactly the same thing if I'd been in his place, and how most people don't appreciate how tough it is being a teacher. That kind of stuff. The old bull.
Holden and Mr. Spencer seem to change places, which is underscored by Holden saying, "I would've done exactly the same thing if I'd been in his place."

What does Napoleon's action of urinating over Snowball's windmill plans say about his character?

In chapter 5, Napoleon and Snowball begin to form their own separate factions and oppose each other's vision for the future of Animal Farm. While Napoleon believes that the farm should focus on agriculture and food production, Snowball focuses his efforts on creating blueprints for an electricity-generating windmill. Using Mr. Jones's old books on mechanics and electricity, Snowball develops elaborate blueprints for the windmill and gains the animals' support. Napoleon refuses to support Snowball's plans for the windmill and even urinates on the blueprints without uttering a word. Napoleon's actions indicate that he is an insensitive, ruthless man, who believes that his ideas are superior to others. His actions also reveal that he is inconsiderate and willing to engage in foul play in order to get his way.

In "Barn Burning", is there a way to read the story in which the reader can view Ab as an empathetic or a sympathetic character?

I believe that this question is asking whether or not a reader can empathize and/or sympathize with Abner Snopes. I do not think the question is asking whether or not Abner himself is an empathetic or sympathetic person. If the second option is the question, then I think the answer has to be "no." Abner is a selfish and malicious character that doesn't focus on anything other than getting what he considers what is or should be his.
Despite Abner's unlikable qualities, I do think it is possible for readers to empathize and/or sympathize with Abner Snopes. Part of those feelings are dependent on the individual reader. If a reader is "down and out" and struggling to make ends meet, then I think that reader could find a lot of common ground with Abner.
While Abner may not have been the most honorable man fighting during the Civil War, he was still wounded. That wound has crippled Abner a little bit, and it makes sense that he harbors anger and resentment toward the people and circumstances that caused the wound in the first place. It's also likely that the wound causes him discomfort and pain all these years later. That pain could possibly contribute to Abner's overall miserable attitude. Anecdotally, I've been guilty of that myself after my knee surgeries. Pain a month after everything was supposedly fixed just made me irritable. That personal experience helps me to empathize with Abner.
Another possibility for Abner's anger at the world could be his socioeconomic status. As a tenant farmer, he is forced to use another person's land and grow their crops. Abner gets to keep a bit of the crop and hopefully sell it, but his work is going to make someone else rich. When Abner defaces de Spain's rug, Abner might be standing up to de Spain and showing what he thinks about de Spain getting rich off of Abner's hard work. That's a bit admirable and in some way makes him a likable guy. Unfortunately, Abner never considers how the consequences of his actions will affect his family.

How is the youngest child introduced in the story "The Boy Who Drew Cats"?

In “The Boy Who Drew Cats,” Lafcadio Hearn introduces the youngest child as “a little boy.” He is one of a large number of children in his family, which also includes an older brother and some little girls. While the older boy helps his father, the young boy seems unsuited to hard work. The narrator not only calls him “very clever” but also says he is the cleverest one of all the siblings. He is small for his age, as well as weak, and others comment that he is unlikely to grow into a large man. These attributes make his parents decide that farming would not be the best occupation for him. Instead, they conclude that he should study for the priesthood, and they take him to the temple in hopes that the priests will accept him as an acolyte.
http://www.surlalunefairytales.com/books/japan/hearn/boydrewcats.html

How does Valentin finally arrest Flambeau in "The Blue Cross"?

The small priest met by Valentin on the train actually leaves clues for the police to follow once he realizes that the tall man he's met is pretending to be a priest so as to rob him of the silver and sapphire cross he carries. First, the little priest thinks the man he's with (who is really Flambeau) is actually a thief, so he switches the salt and sugar to see if the man says anything. He does not, indicating that he does not want to draw any attention to himself, and so the priest waits for him to leave, and then he throws his soup at the wall, knowing that people would talk about it and it would attract attention. Later, when Valentin discovers the salt/sugar switch, he begins to follow the little trail of oddities the priest leaves behind.
Next, Valentin finds a fruit vendor who talks about the two clerics who tumbled his apples out into the street, and Valentin discovers that two of the signs in the stall have been switched as well. Valentin then boards a bus, bringing two cops with him, just like the two clerics are reported to have done, and he gets off when he spots a broken window in a restaurant. A waiter there reports that two black-clothed clerics came in and ate and then one broke the window. The little priest had altered the bill, another test to see if the man pretending to be a priest would draw attention to the mistake; when he did not, the little priest broke a window to continue to trail.
After this, Valentin stops at the only open shop—a candy store—and makes a purchase; the woman who works there tells him that she's already sent off the parcel, so she cannot give it to him. When Valentin asks for details, she tells him about the little priest having left a parcel in her shop and how he asked her to send it along to Westminster if she found it. Valentin then heads up the same road the clerics took, eventually happening upon them. He listens to their conversation and feels, for a moment, that he may have made a terrible mistake—that is, until he hears the small priest say that he'd known the other tall man was a thief all along.
After the small priest describes what he'd been doing all day, he even identifies Valentin and the two police officers he has with him hiding in the bushes. Finally, the little priest says that he no longer has the cross with him—so he cannot be robbed—because it was in the little package he'd purposely returned to the candy shop. He'd switched the parcel for a decoy, which Flambeau took, believing it to be the real cross.

Who is the murderer in Blues for Mister Charlie?

James Baldwin's 1964 play, Blues for Mr. Charlie, found its basis in the 1955 murder of Emmett Till in Mississippi.
In the play's first act, middle-aged store owner Lyle Bittern, not incidentally Caucasian, is indicted for the murder of Richard Henry, a young African American and son of a pastor and civil rights leader. Parnell James, the editor of the local newspaper, assures Bittern that he will never be convicted. Their community is already charged with a racial tension that is only heightened by Bittern's arrest.
Through a series of flashbacks Baldwin sketches in the characters of both men, including Henry's ambivalence about the validity of violent self-defense and the apparent guilt of Bittern over the death of the husband of a woman who had been cheating with him.
The trial turns out to be a farce; witnesses lie without penalty, and there are no African-Americans on the jury, which renders a verdict of 'not guilty.' In a final flashback, Baldwin reveals that Lyle Bittern is, indeed, the murderer of Richard Henry.

How does Johnny Dorset demonstrate the power of the human imagination?

Like many young children, Johnny Dorset lives primarily in a world of his own creation. Play is his central occupation. During the period about which O. Henry writes, children in the United States often played at “cowboys and Indians.” Johnny has assumed the role of an indigenous leader whom he calls “Red Chief.” The fact that he has been kidnapped is apparently not sufficient to derail him from the centrality of play. Instead, he tries to draw the adults into his fantasy world. One main mistake that the adults make is to believe that they are in control of the situation. Johnny does not subscribe to this view. If he cannot make the adults play with him, they are of limited value.
The challenge that O. Henry poses in making this a humorous story is to convince the reader that the child is not truly in danger. Although the author makes “play” the central action, he also hints that Johnny does have an inclination of the seriousness of the situation. He takes a risk when he sneaks up on the sleeping adult man and approaches him with a knife. This bold action make it seem that the boy has been paying close attention to the adults' behavior and personalities: he does not believe that the adult will injure him. In this respect, O. Henry achieves a balance between imagination and observation, showing the child’s intelligence and skill that balance his imagination. His father’s reaction when confronted with the ransom demand indicates that he understands his son well enough not to fear for his safety.

The key to answering your question, I think, is to note the intensity of Johnny Dorsett's imagination. For Dorsett, these games extend far beyond typical childhood pretending. When he is pretending to be Red Chief, he speaks about scalping his captives, and later, one of the two kidnappers wakes up to find the child standing over him, knife in hand, attempting to actually scalp him. Johnny Dorsett shows, to say the least, remarkable dedication to his pretend life, well beyond a reasonable limit.
In addition, I'd add that Johnny Dorsett is actually in a very precarious position: he's been kidnapped, and is being held for ransom by two criminals, and yet he treats the entire encounter as a game (and proceeds to terrorize these two criminals in the process). That's not what I'd consider a normal reaction—there's a kind of fearlessness here, to the point that he doesn't seem to even recognize the danger of his situation because he's so caught up in the games he wants to play.

O. Henry's "The Ransom of Red Chief" is an early example of what Hollywood calls a "busted caper" story. In such a story, some crooks plan to commit a crime that should yield a lot of money; but, usually because of poor planning, they run into serious problems and the job, or "caper," ends in disaster. A good fairly recent example of a busted caper movie is the very excellent Fargo, in which a man named Jerry Lundegaard, played to perfection by William H. Macy, hires a couple of hoods to kidnap his own wife. His idea is to get a million dollars from her wealthy father to pay the ransom money but to keep most of the money himself. Both his wife and her father end up dead and Jerry will go to prison for life. In "The Ransom of Red Chief" the biggest mistake made by the two crooks is in planning to kidnap a little boy without knowing anything about little boys. The main thing the crooks do not understand about children in general is that fantasies can be very real for some. Johnny Dorset is not just pretending to be a wild Indian named Red Chief. He really is a wild Indian named Red Chief. It is the intensity of the boy's imagination that moves the story forward and creates disaster. The crooks think that they can just pretend along with Johnny, but they are progressively disillusioned.

Are the poems of George Herbert on Affliction controversial?

They are not controversial. In fact, it was rather typical, in Herbert's time, for authors to write about spiritual journeys that included moments of backsliding into sin, doubting one's faith, and so on. Therefore, for the speaker of Herbert's poems to admit to having such difficulty in sticking to the spiritual life that used to bring him such joy and happiness is neither a unique nor a surprising position. In "Affliction (I)," the speaker enjoys a satisfying, if somewhat superficial, spiritual life full of blessings and "pleasures" which was "no place for grief or fear." Life is good—"There was no month but May"—but as the speaker ages and begins to experience his own physical decline, as well as the decline and deaths of his friends, his breath is "tune[d] . . . to groans." Suddenly, the speaker feels as though he has no anchor, that he is carried off by each figurative "wind" in his life. He feels a sense of betrayal, as though God has abandoned him. In the end, however, the speaker continues to return and hope that God will not continue to forget him; he vows to remain "meek" and "stout" in God's service. Ultimately, then, the poem is still quite pious, as the speaker accepts God's place in his life, whatever that place is.
Further, in "Affliction (II)," the speaker acknowledges that the death Christ suffered on the cross is more than all of the pain the speaker faces in his life. He feels that he must lay all his happiness and his sadness at God's feet, giving thanks for both. In "Affliction (III)," the speaker acknowledges that God's breath "gave [him] both life and shape" and that the grief he feels is "guide[d] and govern[ed]" by God, that it will be used to help him. In "Affliction (IV)," the speaker once again laments the painful circumstances of his life; however, he expresses his belief that "those powers, which work for grief" will, he says to God,

Enter thy pay,And day by dayLabour thy praise, and my relief;With care and courage building me,Till I reach heav'n, and much more, thee.

In other words, then, the speaker carries on this expectation that God will afflict him with suffering for some purpose—perhaps to prepare his soul for heaven.
Ultimately, then, we see that the speaker retains his faith despite what happens during his life, despite what afflictions he must bear. He finds a way to credit God for his happiness, and he assumes that God will use the sadness and pain that he feels for some greater purpose. He accepts God's workings in his life and tries to remain grateful, even when it is difficult. Thus, these poems are saved from controversy, as they remain firmly faithful to God.

Where was Rusty-James when the story opened?

At the beginning of Rumble Fish, Rusty-James is spending time on the beach, having recently gotten out of the reformatory. On the beach, Rusty-James runs into his old friend Steve.
The novel utilizes a frame-narrative, with the bulk of the story actually taking in the place in the past. Rusty-James recalls the events when talking to his friend Steve; however, Rusty-James seems to be disgruntled as he remembers these events. In fact, it becomes clear at the end of the novel that Rusty-James fully intends to forget these events in order to live as much at peace as possible.
As Rusty-James and Steve continue their reminiscences on the events leading up to Rusty-James placement in the reformatory, it is revealed that Rusty-James's brother, Motorcycle Boy, was fatally shot by the police several years ago. In response, Rusty-James had thrown a fit and was arrested by the police.
The novel also ends at the beach, with Rusty-James and Steve discussing future plans to get together. Rusty-James tells the reader that he has no intention of seeing Steve again, for he aims to completely forget about the events that led up to his brother's death.

Do you think there is life, intelligent or otherwise, that exists on an exoplanet somewhere in our galaxy or perhaps another galaxy? Why or why not?

It is certainly possible that life, intelligent or otherwise, exists elsewhere in the universe. Researchers typically begin their search for life in the universe by looking for solar systems that are similar to ours. In our solar system, planet earth revolves around the sun, a massive body of combusting gas, due to the gravitational attraction between the Earth and the sun. Researchers postulate that there is something very special about the mass of our sun and the resulting gravitational force that holds our planet in an elliptical orbit. By looking for stars that we estimate are similar to ours, we are able to search for planets within those solar systems that are similar to ours; in fact, we have already found several solar systems similar to ours that have what appear to be habitable planets. In the grand scope of our infinite Universe, it is certainly possible that life can develop, just as the way we have.

This is an excellent question that is illustrated by a theory called Fermi's Paradox. Here the law of large numbers is pitted against a lack of evidence of extraterrestrial life. Or to put it more simply: if the universe is vast in space beyond comprehension, with more planets and stars in it than there are granules of sand on the beach, then it stands to reason that there are other planets similar to ours however unique we may think earth is. The paradox is that despite the law of large numbers dictating the extreme probability of much more extraterrestrial life, we have no evidence for it.
This could be for many reasons it is possible that the vast distances of the universe serve as barriers to the advancement and resulting travel of life. Perhaps there are many alien civilizations similar to ours in some ways but we are all to far away to reach one another. After all humanity occupies a pretty small amount of space and time in the universe. We are far away and have not had the means for attempting or recording extraterrestrial contact for very long in the grand scheme of things.
There is also the possibility that alien civilizations are aware of us and have decided to not contact us intentionally for a number of good reasons.

I do think life probably exists on another planet. There are hundreds of billions of planets in the universe, and it seems against all the odds of probability that the Earth is the only one of them to contain life.
I also tend to believe in the idea of life on other planets because NASA does and is spending money to try to locate life beyond earth. NASA's Kepler 2 (K2) mission is designed for that purpose. Through it, NASA is searching the cosmos for signs of life and a civilization on a planet other than our own. If the country's best scientists think this is a worthwhile project, I am not going to disagree.
If we accept that life evolves scientifically from the right mix of chemicals, it is hard to imagine ours is the only planet to get the mix exactly right. After all, the planets all come from the same matter created in the Big Bang. On the other hand, if we reject the scientific hypothesis of a Big Bang and believe God created life and called it good, it stands to reason he would spread his gift beyond our lone planet.

I am exploring the Theme of Sacrifice in John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men. I need help developing a strong thesis with three solid arguments. Each argument must have 2 examples from the novel with quotes to support it. Essentially I need a thesis statement with a minimum of 6 quotations (two per argument) from the novelette that support the thesis statement and/or are relevant to the theme.

Sacrifice is a primary theme that runs through the entire novel, so there are many possible examples on which to draw. Identifying the strongest examples is an important first step to developing a thesis that is supported by the text. Two distinct approaches would be to concentrate on George and Lennie, as they are the main characters, and identify three arguments that support their sacrifices, or to select supporting characters and identify one argument that relates to each character. This answer draws on the latter approach.
John Steinbeck presents a fictional situation that approximates the difficulties that many people faced during the Great Depression. In order to earn a living, people often accepted very difficult circumstances which required them to make sacrifices of various kinds. In the novel, some of the things people sacrifice are money, companionship, and excitement; the minor characters for whom Steinbeck develops these ideas are Candy, Crooks, and Curley’s wife respectively. Candy wants security, which he cannot achieve on his own; he is willing to sacrifice his life savings to achieve it as part of George and Lennie’s ranch. Crooks, because he is African American, must live in segregated housing. In order to have a job, he sacrifices companionship in his lonely life in a separate room. Curley’s wife wants attention and excitement; she ends up sacrificing her life because she misjudges Lennie.

When forming a thesis statement about a given topic in a work of literature, one must try to state an argument that demonstrates original thought on that topic. A thesis should essentially be argumentative, brief, clear, and direction-providing to the reader. In the text Of Mice and Men, the topic of sacrifice, albeit the darker side of sacrifice, is certainly shown most clearly through George and Lennie's relationship; considering what patterns emerge from their conversations is a good place to start. For instance, when looking at the character of George, it is obvious that he is protective of Lennie and has sacrificed opportunities to do what he thinks will benefit Lennie, even amidst the dark backdrop of the Depression. So, when constructing the thesis for an essay on sacrifice, it might be formatted something like:

Through George's sacrifices of (example 1), (example 2), and (example 3), it is clear that sacrifice, although usually praised as a heroic quality, is ultimately shown in Of Mice and Men to be (original thought/ argument).

As far as quotations go, it is definitely worth examining George and Lennie's conversations, particularly at the beginning of the novella to get a sense of their bond. For example, Slim notes this at the beginning of chapter three: "I hardly never seen two guys travel together. You know how the hands are...Never seem to give a damn about nobody." Another section for quotes that might be helpful is the very end when George sacrifices Lennie's life to spare him a more painful death at the hands of Curley.

Consider the following statement: “Negative experiences, as well as positive ones, strengthen us and can help us become the person we are meant to be.” Do you think this is a theme of the novel? Why or why not? Explain your answer using textual evidence.

One could certainly argue that negative experiences in life shape individuals into whom they become.
Janie Crawford is a woman whose romantic life has been tumultuous, to say the least. After the abusive and boring Jody’s death, Janie finds herself independent for the first time in over two decades. Free from the restrictive confines of marriage to a man who dictated her every move, Janie decided to do as she pleases without caring how the people of Eatonville will react.
After marrying the younger, poorer Tea Cake, Janie runs off to live a life of uncertain adventure. The biggest negative experience that shapes Janie’s life is, of course, her decision to shoot Tea Cake. Faced with the dilemma to either kill him or be killed, Janie has to shoot her husband.
Eatonville’s gossips suspect that Tea Cake stole Janie’s money and left her. Janie tells the true story to Phoebe throughout the text. In the end, Janie relates a powerful lesson she has learned through her experiences:

"It’s uh known fact, Pheoby, you got tuh go there to know there. Yo’ papa and yo’ mama and nobody else can’t tell yuh and show yuh. Two things everybody’s got tuh do fuh deyselves. They got tuh go tuh God, and they got tuh find out about livin’ fuh theyselves."

This shows that Janie discovered that she must take destiny into her own hands rather that waiting around for things to happen to her. Without the suffering she experienced after Tea Cake’s death, Janie might not have come to the same conclusion.

Why is A selfless in the book Every Day?

In Every Day, the character of A, in some regards, cannot even be considered a person throughout most of the novel. The entity referred to as A lacks a fixed self in every regard, such as gender, race, age, and other markers of identity. Nevertheless, the idea of having a self becomes appealing to A while they are inhabiting Justin’s body; the current person is a cis straight male, and that becomes an important aspect of the identity that A temporarily desires, motivated by Justin’s relationship with a cis straight girl, Rhiannon.
The dawning of individual consciousness in A stimulates a series of complications, however. From the point of realizing the power of this desire, A begins to want a fixed self. David Levithan thus builds a fundamental contradiction into the book: if A is selfless, then the entity that begins to develop a self is no longer A. The further realization that they are not alone in the ability to move between bodies adds to the contradiction: having just begun to figure out that they are unique, A now understands that there is a community to which they belong. A change of setting and the development of conscious interest in having a self are important further steps that A takes toward fulfillment.

How does one go about understanding the poem "Remember"?

It is tempting to interpret, as opposed to analyze, poetry text from the perspective of one's current historical, social, or cultural era and personal experience (interpretation can often reduce to extrapolations of meaning from one's own personal experience). While this might be useful with some texts, perhaps with Contagion by Robin Cook or Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close by Thomas Schell, it is counterproductive with other texts, especially so with works having universal themes.
It can also be counterproductive to finding understanding to analyze texts without due attention carefully paid to syntax and punctuation structures: a semicolon versus a colon can radically alter the meaning of written text; this is why writers use them with such selective care (although styles of punctuation alter periodically and must be understood within their historic time frame to avoid confusion).
Christina Rossetti has been generally acknowledged by readers and critics alike to write "poetry displaying a perfection of diction, tone, and form" (PoetryFoundation.org). It is also acknowledged that Christina wrote on recurring ideas of the "inconstancy of human love, the vanity of earthly pleasures, renunciation, individual unworthiness, and the perfection of divine love [as] recurring themes in her poetry" (PoetryFoundation.org).
Thus, in consideration of these two aspects of her work--structure and theme--in order to fully understand Rossetti's work a two-fold approach to analysis is needed. Bear in mind that "analysis" can be very different from and yield very different results to "interpretation." Interpretation of a literary work may arise from one's personal experience, one's culture, one's society, one's historical period, or one's emotional response (which may or may not be related to direct personal experience, for example the emotional response elicited when watching The Blind Side though most of us are not underprivileged high school football players). Examples of these kinds of interpretation might be reading Oliver Twist through your own experience of poverty; reading "Remember" by Christina Rossetti through your own cultural norms; reading The Red and the Black through your own social-religious structure; reading Pride and Prejudice through the eyes of a 19th century Marxist; or reading Evelina by Fanny Burney according to the emotional response elicited, which may or may not relate to personal experience.
In general, analysis of literature applies more structured application of logic than these interpretive approaches do, although there are literary criticism approaches that incorporate interpretive elements, such as Reader-Response Criticism and Marxist Criticism. What is the advantage of either analysis or interpretation over the other?
The advantage of analysis over interpretation is that analysis helps us understand, as much as possible, what the author was expressing. Some think this is the most advantageous way to know what literature illustrates (illustrates rather than suggests) about human nature, the pitfalls of living, the nature of life, the pain of death, and metaphysical hopes.
To illustrate this concept of advantage, if Crime and Punishment is about a student who becomes obsessed with the philosophical notion of the "superman" who is above the regulating norms of life, that has little bearing on the majority of people that ever were or ever will be since most of us are not thus obsessed. Yet if Crime and Punishment is about a student who has an altruistic heart motivated by pity and anguish who literally and figuratively throws himself into his neighbors' fires thereby depriving himself of what is required for the sustenance of life and sanity, that could very well be applicable to many overly-large-hearted students anywhere in the world. Analysis rather than interpretation will identify which of these themes is the driving force in the text.
In order to accurately understand the complex form and structure of "Remember," a two-pronged analysis approach is needed to identify theme and meaning. For meaning, the close reading and formal analysis of New Criticism is needed to understand diction, syntax and the distinctions in meaning made by punctuation. For theme, the application of the principles of Historical Criticism (also called Traditional Criticism), which keeps touch with the author by examining biography (also society and culture if applicable), is needed.
Christina Rossetti Biography and Theme Notes
(Historical Criticism)
For the purposes of understanding "Remember," the salient parts of Christina Rossetti's biography are health--hers, her brother's and her father's--and the recurrence of themes in her corpus of work. Here, the job of the literary analyst is to understand the implications of life events and the significance of the dominance of some themes and the absence of others.
HEALTH
Health seems to have been an issue with some in the Rossetti family. Gabriel, Christina's father--a librettist, poet and Latin scholar--suffered a collapse of health in 1843, when Christina was thirteen. Her brother, Dante Gabriel, the poet and Pre-Raphaelite painter, later became dangerously ill in 1872, an illness that had devastating psychological components. Christina herself became seriously ill for the first time in 1845 after two years of helping to care for her father; she was fifteen. Her brother, William, an art and literary critic and editor, writes in his memoirs that understanding Christina's work requires understanding how seriously poor health impact and plagued her life, not once but repeatedly:

"Rossetti had bouts of serious illness throughout her life; William insists in his memoir that one cannot understand his sister unless one recognizes that she 'was an almost constant and often a sadly-smitten invalid.' The morbidity that readers have so often noted in her poetry, William suggests, was attributable to Christina’s ill health and 'the ever-present prospect of early death....'" ("Christina Rossetti," PoetryFoundation.org)

As literary analysts, we are well advised to understand the nature of Christina's life, full of the suffering of ill health as it was. We are well advised to take into account the instances when her health forced--or even seemed as though it would force--her body and mind to turn toward the portal of death only to be allowed by recovery to turn again toward living. Her first collapse in 1845 led to heart symptoms and depression (biographers understand little about the this first event).
Between 1870 and 1872, Christina suffered the worst of the bouts of illness she experienced (ironically, 1872 being the same year Dante suffered the turning point of his decline). She was at last diagnosed with Graves disease, a condition of the thyroid gland, after much suffering and many approaches toward death. Since "Remember" was published in 1862, ten years earlier, this particular incidence has no bearing on understanding this poem, yet it does illustrate and corroborate William's assertion that understanding Christina requires understanding the effects of her ill health on her everyday life beginning from her fifteenth year in 1845.

[1870-1872] "Her hair fell out, her skin became discolored, her eyes began to protrude, and her voice changed. After some months her doctors diagnosed a rare thyroid condition, exophthalmic bronchocele, more commonly known as Graves’ disease. Although Rossetti recovered, the threat of a relapse always remained. Moreover [according to William], the 'crisis left her appearance permanently altered and her heart weakened.'” (PoetryFoundation.org)

THEMES
Rossetti's first collection of poetry Verses appeared in 1847, two years after her first major health collapse, and had distinctly recognizable themes, particularly an emphasis on mortality and corruptibility. This is understandable since for four years she had been personally, physically and psychologically preoccupied with illness, the potential for death, and loss (loss because of the financial ruin the family fell into with Gabriel's illness and inability to work, although William and sister Maria helped mother Frances try to fill the financial gap).
"Remember" appears in Rossetti's second collection Goblin Market and Other Poems, which came out in 1862, the same approximate time that she began a tentative romance with Charles Bagot Cayley, one of her father's former students. Two things are of note: (1) this second collection continued the themes of death and corruptibility and (2) part of the reason her romance with Charles was tentative is that for more than twenty years she had been plagued with horrible bouts of illness and depression attending it.
Christina might well have had occasion to think that a romance with Charles was doomed to end in the grief of parting through death. Charles did propose in 1866, and Rossetti refused him. William states that, being very reticent, she never discussed the matter but that she did give the reason as being on "'on grounds of religious faith.'" (PoetryFoundation.org)
This significant event, though occurring after the writing of "Remember" published in 1862 (the approximate year of the commencement of their romance), relates to understanding Christina's psychological framework, which relates to understanding the overall meaning of "Remember." Of all Rossetti's poetry, from the 1847 collection Verses to all that she published up until the end of her life, more than half is religiously devotional in nature, indeed, all in her later years is religiously devotional.
Indicators of Context
In this context--a tentative romance with marriage refused on religious grounds and a poetess of devotional works--how likely is it that Rossetti would write a poem about ambiguous love and the rejection of a lover who will probably not regret her loss very much?
In this biographical context and in the context of a corpus of work that is serious, not frivolous, and that has corruptibility and mortality as the thematic "keystone" (PoetryFoundation.org), it is highly unlikely. In fact, it seems highly doubtful that she would have had the inclination or experience to write a poem about an insincere, ambiguous love that is broken off in life to avoid breaking it off in death. Such a poem would be inconsistent with her biography, with the themes that recur in her corpus and with the devotional nature of her psychology and poetic expression.