How does each family member react to Gregor after his transformation? How do their reactions differ from one another? What do they have in common?

Mr. Samsa, Gregor's father, is completely repulsed by Gregor's transformation. He, in spirit, has already disowned Gregor. The apple-throwing incident, in which an apple Mr. Samsa throws becomes lodged in Gregor's back, is the culmination of his hatred towards what Gregor has become.
Grete, Gregor's sister, is initially almost martyr-like in her devotion and duty towards Gregor, but being young and full of life, she quickly tires of looking after him, and starts to feel resentful toward him.
Mrs. Samsa, Gregor's mother, never falters in her love for him, yet she cannot bear the sight of him after his transformation. She faints whenever she sees his insect form.
What is similar in Gregor's family's reactions is the sense of relief they experience once they finally get rid of him.

Analyze how the Solidarity (Solidarnosc) movement in Poland led to the collapse of communism in Poland. Point out what events led to the growth of the Solidarity movement and then identify and analyze the events that followed Gorbachev's policy of political pluralism in Poland. Then evaluate the relative success of democracy and capitalism in Poland after the end of the Cold War.

Solidarity played the key role in the end of communism in Poland. The organization was founded in 1980, but its origins can be traced to the mid 1970s.
Dissent was not allowed in Communist Poland, but there was widespread public dissatisfaction. The public was not happy with its standard of living, and Solidarity tapped into that discontentment and—capably led by Lech Walesa—quickly emerged as a potent challenge to communist rule. By 1980, rising food prices led to labor strikes and protests. As Solidarity gained strength, many feared the Soviet Union would intervene, as it had done years earlier in Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968).
Wojciech Witold Jaruzelski came to power in in Poland in 1981. At first, he tried to negotiate with Solidarity, but his efforts were fruitless. Then, in December 1981, he established martial law and outlawed Solidarity.
Solidarity did not disappear, however. It was aided by the Catholic Church, and it reemerged in the late 1980s. Because the USSR was led by Mikhail Gorbachev, a reformer, Soviet intervention was out of the question. Walesa remained the most charismatic leader in the country. Jaruzelski failed to revive the country's moribund economy, so he reluctantly agreed to allow to allow Solidarity to compete in national elections. By December 1990, Walesa was president of Poland. Jaruzelski was later charged with crimes related to the martial law crackdown, but he was too ill to be put on trial.

The Solidarity movement originated in 1980 and was largely inspired by the 1979 visit of Pope John Paul II to the country. It achieved official status following strikes in Gdańsk, when the government legalized its existence as part of the Gdańsk Agreement.
Its early success was, in no small part, due to American largess; the CIA covertly transferred $2 million per year to Solidarity, while the AFL-CIO made an overt donation of $300,000 annually to the movement. The U.S.-chartered National Endowment for Democracy also supported Solidarity through cash infusions.
In June 1989 elections, Solidarity won a substantial majority of the vote, resulting in the end of communism in Poland.
At various points during the rise of Solidarity, the Soviet Union considered military intervention in support of the Warsaw government. Largely due to Gorbachev's policy of openness and reform, this did not occur.
Since the downfall of communism in Poland, some have criticized the ensuing rise of nationalism and what, in some instances, has been characterized as xenophobia. Current attempts to retire jurists in the Polish courts have been attributed by the ruling Law and Justice Party as an attempt to purge communist-era judges, though critics have refuted this analysis and believe Poland is heading towards becoming an "illiberal democracy."
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Solidarity

https://www.dw.com/en/poland-blazed-the-trail-for-the-fall-of-communism/a-4809509

The events that led to the growth of the solidarity movement are pope John Paul II's visit to Poland in 1979, the formation of Solidarnosc in 1981, and the underground movements after it was banned. Talk about these events in greater detail to get the full points of an analysis.
When it comes to identifying and analyzing the events that followed Gorbachev's policy of political pluralism, just elaborate more on the definition of political pluralism and the strikes that follow.
Write about the actions of the Polish leaders at the end of the cold war and talk about how economic policies improved wages and working conditions to show the positive effects of capitalism. You should be very clear and detailed with the responses .
https://www.nonviolent-conflict.org/polands-solidarity-movement-1980-1989/

How does Katniss Everdeen change in The Hunger Games? Please provide original (before) and change (after) quote and explain them.

There are two ways in which Katniss Everdeen changes as she reaches maturity in The Hunger Games. First of all, she undergoes the kinds of personal and emotional changes that other characters of her age might in a typical coming-of-age story. These may include asserting independence, a first love, or rebelling against authority. The second way has to do specifically with the particular circumstances that Katniss has to navigate. Because she is both fighting for her life and being manipulated for a larger purpose, she must learn not only to follow her gut instincts, remaining true to her tendency to be loyal and honest, but also to deal with the fact that she is being challenged by deceptive people around every corner.
Another aspect to consider is the way that her story mirrors that of the heroic journey, as set forth by Joseph Campbell. When Katniss volunteers as tribute for her younger sister, this can be seen as paralleling the call to adventure. She does this out of a desire to protect her sister and ensure her safety, but there is also a sense that Katniss seeks out this adventure, because she has been preparing for it by sharpening her skills at archery and survival.
But even though the adventure is a real-life physical one, there is also a great deal of artificiality surrounding it. Part of Katniss's growth and change encompasses learning this difficult truth and doing her best to expose it without endangering her own life or the lives of others. Katniss acts out of loyalty and a sense of fairness, and these qualities are on display for the world to see. This makes her a bit of a folk hero, someone fighting for the rights of the poor and the suffering. Katniss understands the significance of her role but finds it painful to cope with the realization that she is part of the system that rewards some people and punishes others simply by virtue of birth or geography. She sees inside the lives of those who live in the Capitol and is repulsed by the luxury and entitlement she sees there.

What must it be like, I wonder, to live in a world where food appears at the press of a button? How would I spend the hours I now commit to combing the woods for sustenance if it were so easy to come by?

Katniss sees her role as one of exposing the corruption and hypocrisy of the system, but she knows she must tread carefully, because even as her role as a hero makes her very valuable to those who control the Hunger Games, they could easily find a way to turn the public opinion against her. These very adult situations and her realizations about her place within them account for the many dramatic changes in Katniss's life in a short period of time.

A common theme in literature is not to judge a book by its cover. Analyze how Twelfth Night uses this theme. Give two examples to support the analysis.

In William Shakespeare's Twelfth Night, the issue of taking someone at face value, or "judging a book by its cover," is a pivotal one. The characters assume disguises and false names, pursuing their own needs and desires under the guise of serving someone else. This leads to an ironic and humorous love triangle, which causes the characters much grief before its resolution. Of course, there is only resolution when the characters' true identities are revealed.
The first disguise of the play, and the most important one, is that of Viola. She is a young woman who has been shipwrecked and disguises herself as a man named Cesario so that she can serve in Duke Orsino's court and find information about her missing brother, Sebastian. While disguised as Cesario, the Duke asks Viola to help him win the heart of Countess Olivia. When Olivia meets "Cesario," she sets her sights on him rather than accepting the Duke's suit. All the while, Viola falls in love with the Duke, though she is disguised as a man and cannot express her love for him.
Viola's disguise itself is a test of the characters' willingness to judge a book by its cover and often leads to ironic conversations between the characters, such as in act 3, scene 1:

Olivia: Stay; I prithee, tell me what thou think'st of me.
Viola: That you do think you are not what you are.
Olivia: If I think so, I think the same of you.
Viola: Then think you right: I am not what I am.
Olivia: I would you were as I would have you be!

Countess Olivia believes she is flirting with Cesario in this conversation, while Viola is trying to subtly hint that Olivia's flirtations are aimed at the wrong person. Olivia also reveals her stubbornness here, as she is happy to believe that Cesario is who she wants him to be and unwilling to change her perspective, no matter what Viola says.

According to The Line Becomes a River, why do migrants no longer cross the border near cities?

The Line Becomes a River by Francisco Cantu explores life at the border of the United States and Mexico. With border security and immigration being highly charged issues in the modern political era, this book shows what it's like to be both a border patrol agent and a migrant trying to find a better life in the United States.
Many people illegally cross the border on a daily basis, but the trend has shifted. In the past, people would cross near cities so they could quickly enter a city and find shelter. Now, however, with heightened border security, cities are heavily policed and monitored, making it more difficult to cross the border near those locations. In between cities, where populations are sparse, there are greater swathes of fencing that is not monitored, and there are areas with weaknesses in the border, such as holes in the fence or tunnels underneath. This makes it easier to cross the border and affords the migrants ample time to pass through and get to shelter before they are seen by a border patrol agent.

When Kurtz cries out, "The horror! The horror!" before he dies in Heart of Darkness, is this an example of indeterminate meaning because it is ambiguous as to what Kurtz is referring to? Or what would be two examples of indeterminate meanings?

Joseph Conrad offers many statements with indeterminate meanings. The multiple layers of filtering through the various narrators add to this indeterminacy, as the story Marlow tells often depends not just on his memories of Kurtz’s statements but on others’ opinions of Kurtz and his enterprise. “The horror!” is an excellent example of the difficulty of interpretation. Among the infinite possible meanings of Kurtz’s dying statement, some are more probable than others. Crying out may not be the expression of conscious thought but a visceral reaction: Kurtz may be suffering tremendous physical pain as he nears death. If it does reflect his thoughts and feelings, he may be experiencing guilt as he reviews in his imagination all the atrocities he has commanded or committed himself. He may also be reflecting on the environment he has created, with skulls stuck on posts, as he briefly comes to his senses and sees it for the horror it really is.
Another sentence with multiple possible meanings is one that Marlow encounters appended to Kurtz’s report: “Exterminate all the brutes!” It seems likely that Kurtz was referring to the indigenous African people whom he had treated so harshly. Another possibility is that he is criticizing the colonial and company personnel who opposed him, or any individual or agency who has more power than he has. Or, rather than dehumanizing human beings, he may actually be referring to animals, possibly the elephants that provide the ivory.

What is the American Bill of Rights?

The Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. It guarantees personal liberties and rights, limits the power of the federal government, and reserves those powers not specifically mentioned in the Constitution for the state or the people. These ten amendments are listed below.
The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of religion, speech, press, and the right to peaceably protest and petition the government.
The Second Amendment is the right to bear arms.
The Third Amendment states that a soldier cannot be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner.
The Fourth Amendment grants protection of people and their possessions from unreasonable search or seizure, and it requires that warrants only be issued under probable cause.
The Fifth Amendment states that a person cannot be held for a capital of infamous crime unless indicted by a Grand Jury unless the case occurred in the military during a time of war or public danger. This Amendment also guarantees that a person cannot be required to be a witness against himself or deprived of life, liberty, or property. If private property is taken for public use, then the owner must receive fair compensation for that property.
The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a speedy and just trial by an impartial jury and the right to have counsel for defense for criminal cases.
The Seventh Amendment states that the right to trial by jury will be preserved in civil cases for those cases that exceed twenty dollars.
The Eighth Amendment states that excessive bail, fines, or cruel and unusual punishment cannot be inflicted.
The Ninth Amendment states that the rights written in the Constitution cannot deny or disparage other rights belonging to the people.
The Tenth Amendment states that the powers not specifically mentioned in the Constitution are reserved for the states or the people.

What problems did Ben Wolf have?

In Chris Crutcher's novel, Ben is a teenager with a fatal illness. Along with his terminal condition, his other main problem is that he does not trust the strength of his closest relationships. Because his mother has a history of mental illness, he believes it will be better to lie to everyone about his condition as a way to spare them pain.
Ben also pursues a romantic and sexual relationship with a girl he has a crush on. As they grow closer, he realizes that she has serious personal problems of her own. When he finally tells her the truth, she sends him away; she feels betrayed by his lies.
Another problem arises when he befriends a middle aged alcoholic man. Rudy's problems affect Ben when he realizes he cannot selfishly expect the man to be a shoulder to cry on. Rudy is also carrying a mental and ethical burden that ultimately ends his life.
Ben processes this news as a wake-up call and starts allowing his family and close circle to be full parts of his life. Even though his epiphany comes rather late, he can share some important moments with them.

What are Wes's grandparents' rules in The Other Wes Moore?

In chapter 1, as Wes sits in the front seat of the car, waiting to be taken to his grandparents' house, his mother reminds him of the rules that his grandparents expect him to abide by. The rules are, "No running indoors, no talking back, don't eat too much." Wes later learns, in chapter 2, that his grandparents' rules are in fact even stricter than those laid down by his mother.
His grandparents insist, for example, that the children should not be outside once the streetlights turn on, and that "all chores ha(ve) to be done" before the children begin their playing. Another rule is that if the children hear "any gunfire or . . . 'foolishness' outside," then they are to return immediately to the house. Wes's grandparents think that if these rules worked for their own children and helped their own children to "successfully navigate the world," then there's no reason why they shouldn't work for their grandchildren, too. Indeed, despite Wes's feeling that these rules are strict, they actually seem perfectly sensible.

What accounts for the movement of many African Americans from King's "beloved community" ideal to "black power" slogan popularized by Stokely Carmichael and H. Rap Brown? This is from chapter 19 of a textbook called The Struggle for Freedom.

The civil rights movement's slow pace frustrated many black people, who believed that desegregation was only the tip of the iceberg of problems that blacks needed to address. Martin Luther King's "beloved community" was a slogan intended to preach nonviolent resistance.
The Black Power movement was born in 1966, and it gained momentum under the charismatic leadership of Malcolm X. After Malcolm X's death, the Black Panther Party was established by Huey Newton and Bobby Seale in Oakland, CA. The group's original aim was specifically to end police brutality against blacks. This radical activist group (also promoted by Stokely Carmichael, who coined the "black power" rallying cry) was in many ways a reaction to the existing call for civil rights reform, which held that the speed of reforms ought to be sacrificed in the name of peaceful resistance. As a group, Black Power activists rejected integration and instead promoted separate, all-black institutions in the control of black people themselves. This group highlighted the injustices perpetrated by white people against black people for centuries, and it sought more reparations than simple desegregation; the proponents of black power wanted justice. This movement was especially popular with younger people, who grew impatient with the more peaceful strain of civil rights activism popularized by Martin Luther King.
Spike Lee's 2018 film, BlacKkKlansman (sic), is an excellent portrayal of the tumult that occurred in 1970s owing to racism, and it features a fictional portrayal of Stokely Carmichael.

What is the historical context of Born a Crime?

Trevor Noah was born in South Africa under Apartheid. This was a time of government-mandated racial segregation. As Trevor was a black woman who had a child with a while man, Trevor was literally "born a crime." He spent several years of his childhood living under Apartheid rule, as he was born in 1984. Apartheid ended in the early '90s.
This book is a series of stories revealing the struggles his mother and grandmother faced while raising him. It also details how many women defied their government by having mixed-race children--and how this impacted his childhood.
One especially interesting segment demonstrates how the name "Hitler" lacked the instant, extremely negative connotation it carries in America and Europe. This is not due to an acceptance of Hitler's deeds. Rather, it's because Africans have experienced more harsh rule at the hands of other despots.

Trevor Noah's Born a Crime takes place within the historical context of "apartheid," meaning "apartness" in Afrikaans. Apartheid governed social relations between South Africa's white minority (European) and non-white majority (African, Indian, etc.) from the early twentieth century until 1990s. Though rooted in histories, legacies, and laws of British and Dutch (Afrikaan) colonialism, apartheid was formally introduced in 1948 through the ideology of the National Party. Apartheid became law in 1953, when the majority white legislature passed the Reservation of National Amenities Act, which legally segregated public spaces. Furthermore, throughout the 1960s, more laws and acts were passed to implement racial segregation and classification, economic and political discrimination, and, in many cases, removal from tribal lands. Included in these laws were bans, similar to ones in the US, making interracial communication and marriages illegal. Trevor, being born of multiracial parents, was thus born a crime.

Some notable laws passed during apartheid included the following:
The Race Classification Act: a law instituting that every citizen suspected or believed not to be of European descent was classified according to race
The Group Areas Act: a law removing certain groups from their homes and forcing certain races to live segregated in certain areas
The Mixed Marriages Act: a law prohibiting interracial marriage
The Immorality Act: a law prohibiting interracial sexual relations
Part of the segregation of apartheid was enforced by judging and sorting people based on their skin tones and judging people by their tribes. Darker skinned Africans (like Trevor's mother) could be classified as black, while lighter skinned people (like Trevor) could be classified as colored. Each classification came with certain restraints and privileges. Furthermore, Africans in South Africa as well as throughout the continent descend from different tribes, such as Bantu, Zulu and Twsana. As Trevor notes in the book:
“Language brings with it an identity and a culture, or at least the perception of it. A shared language says "We're the same." A language barrier says "We're different." The architects of apartheid understood this. Part of the effort to divide black people was to make sure we were separated not just physically but by language as well. In the Bantu schools, children were only taught their home language. Zulu kids learned in Zulu. Tswana kids learned in Tswana. Because of this, we'd fall into the trap the government had set for us and fight among ourselves, believing that we were different.”
Born in 1984, six years before the official end of apartheid, Trevor Noah was literally born a crime as the son of a European father and an African mother under a system designed to keep them apart. Trevor summarizes the historical context of apartheid best when saying,
“The genius of apartheid was convincing people who were the overwhelming majority to turn on each other. Apart hate, is what is was. You separate people into groups and make them hate one another so you can run them all.”

The historical context to Trevor Noah's Born a Crime is the draconian laws of apartheid South Africa. It is thanks to these laws that his birth to interracial parents was considered to be a crime.
Two of the laws which segregated white and non-white people under apartheid are relevant here: the Immorality Act, which banned sexual relationships between members of different race groups, and the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act, which forbade white people from entering into marriages with people of color.
The stories in this book are anecdotes of Trevor's from growing up and living under the restrictive laws of apartheid. These laws dictated that he needed to stay as hidden as possible in order to conceal knowledge of his existence from the apartheid authorities.

Wo was the founder of fascism?

Benito Mussolini founded the Fasci Italiani di Combattimento in 1919. Fascism comes from the Latin word fasces which in ancient Rome was an ax bounded by a bundle of rods used to symbolize the power of state officials, and which was carried before them by their attendants whenever they went out in public. The intellectual currents that helped give birth to fascism had been flowing for some time in Europe prior to Mussolini's arrival on the political scene, but he was arguably the first man to build an actual political movement bearing the fascist name.
Before World War One, Mussolini had been a notorious socialist agitator. However, his experiences of fighting at the front with the Italian Army radically changed his whole political outlook. Now he believed in the need to restore Italy's greatness. To that end, he harked back to the example of ancient Rome for inspiration, seeking to establish an historical continuity between his movement and the legendary figures of the past.
Under Mussolini's leadership, the fascists' platform combined an aggressive, imperialist foreign policy with radical economic measures that had a distinctly socialistic air about them. Mussolini also ensured that the fascists quickly gained a reputation for violence, thuggery, and intimidation, which they employed ruthlessly against their political opponents.

What is the significance of the fire imagery used to describe Mildred and her friends in the Sieve and the Sand?

Montag, himself "on fire" after talking to Faber, comes home to find Millie and her friends watching the White Cartoon Clowns on the view screens. He turns off the television and definitely spoils the party. He looks at the women, and they remind him of the plaster statues of saints he used to see in church. He would try to feel some emotion about the dead statues and about religion, but it seemed alien to him. So too do these women. However, as he watches them, he thinks of lighting them up:

So it was now, in his own parlour, with these women twisting in their chairs under his gaze, lighting cigarettes, blowing smoke, touching their sun-fired hair and examining their blazing fingernails as if they had caught fire from his look. Their faces grew haunted with silence. They leaned forward at the sound of Montag's swallowing his final bite of food. They listened to his feverish breathing.

What Montag is doing here is projecting his own fiery emotions, his own desire to change his society and go deeper, onto them. It is his emotional upheaval and inner turmoil, almost a frenzy, that causes their hair and nails to look as though they're on fire. It is under his "gaze" that they are lit, as if they "had caught fire from his look." It is his breathing that is feverish or hot. They are like ghosts, "haunted" by the silence of having no view screens on, but he wishes to spread his fire—his passion—to them. They represent the meaningless, superficial, emotionally dead society he would like to transform. Montag has gone from wanting to burn books to wanting to light people up with the passion of his convictions.

From 1865 to the present, the conception of who is an American deserving of the full rights of citizenship has changed over time. Describe the expansion of who is or is not an American with consideration to historical context.

In 1865, the predominant view of who was truly American and deserving of full rights narrowly applied to white men. In the period of Reconstruction, following the Civil War, this conception drastically changed. The 14th Amendment stated that all people born in the United States were citizens. This was a distinct departure from the Dred Scott Decision in the 1850s, in which the ruling stated that blacks were not citizens. While the 14th Amendment extended citizenship and equal protection under the law to black Americans, they were still not treated as full, equal members of American society. Another Reconstruction amendment, the 15th Amendment, granted black men the right to vote. With these amendments, black Americans were legally full citizens with equal rights. In practice, however, these rights would be curtailed through loopholes restricting their ability to vote and through discriminatory segregation laws. The movement to achieve real equality reached its peak in the mid-twentieth century. In the 1960s, the Civil Rights Movement achieved significant gains with the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibited segregation, and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which put into place measures to ensure blacks were able to vote.
Another group whose citizenship and rights changed in the post–Civil War period was Native Americans. They were legally considered to be a special case of a nation within a nation. As such, they were not automatically considered citizens, even though they were born within the borders of the United States. Tribes were often forcibly removed from their land as white demand for those lands increased. In the late nineteenth century, an assimilationist movement gained popularity. The idea behind this was to “kill the Indian, but save the man.” Reformers believed that an alternative to killing Native Americans was to assimilate them into white culture. Schools were set up to assimilate Native American children. Assimilation also became a prerequisite for citizenship through the Dawes Act, passed in 1887. This practice remained in place until the 1920s when the Indian Citizenship Act extended citizenship to all Native Americans born in the country.
Women, even white women, were another group who did not enjoy full rights in 1865. While white women were considered citizens, they did not have the right to vote, and they also faced many other restrictions. For example, in many places, married women were not allowed to work or own property. Women were granted the right to vote with the 19th Amendment in 1920. Similarly to black Americans, however, this did not mark the end of women’s fight for full equality. Throughout the twentieth century, the women’s rights movement continued to push for full equality through measures such as the Equal Pay Act.
Finally, there is the case of immigrants. In its early history, America had an open immigration policy. As immigration numbers increased and anti-immigrant sentiment also increased, greater restrictions were placed on who would be allowed to immigrate to the US and how these immigrants could become citizens. In the 1880s, the Chinese Exclusion Act prohibited most Chinese people from coming to the county. In the 1920s, quotas were placed on how many people from each country could immigrate to the US. These restrictions largely remained in place until the 1960s.
https://cis.org/Historical-Overview-Immigration-Policy

The mid-1800s saw an increase in European immigration to the United States, particularly those from Ireland, Scotland, Germany, and Poland. Despite facing discrimination from Americans, they were eventually recognized as citizens of the United States. On the other hand, African Americans who have lived in the United States for many generations—many as far back as the colonial period—were still considered second-class citizens and had very limited rights. This was the case in after the conclusion of the Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation.
It wasn't until the mid- to late-twentieth-century that African Americans were protected from voting rights violations and were integrated in the South. Later in the twentieth-century, Asian and Latin American immigrants moved to the United States en masse, mostly due to political or economic instability in their respective countries.
Unlike African Americans and Jews before them—who were considered Americans, but were discriminated against—the experiences of Asian and Hispanic immigrants were more blatantly alienating. For instance, even today many Americans of Asian-descent complain of white and black Americans asking them where they are from—meaning, what country they are from—despite being born and raised in America.
Today, there are many Asian and Latino political movements and organizations that raise awareness on the minority experience, especially on being considered non-American despite their American nationality.

Why does Franklin list temperance as the first of his thirteen virtues?

Benjamin Franklin chooses temperance as the first of his thirteen virtues of life because it is this virtue that allows one to develop the self-discipline necessary to attain the other twelve. The cultivation of temperance leads to the development of a cool, clear head, which as Franklin points out is necessary to maintain constant vigilance against bad habits and temptations to overindulge in food or drink.
Franklin believes that if you can conquer your primal urges to eat and drink then you'll have the confidence to make the necessary improvements in other areas of your life, to which the other twelve of his virtues relate. Temperance is undoubtedly the hardest of Franklin's virtues to follow, not least because it requires the sustained application of will-power. All the more reason, then, to deal with it first. That way, adhering to the remaining twelve virtues will be so much easier.

What is desire for Boethius?

In The Consolation of Philosophy, Boethius makes a distinction between appropriate and inappropriate desire. Examples of the latter are related to the things of this world—money, fame, power, pleasure. In themselves, these things are worthless. They are mere shadows of true happiness and their pursuit often leads to misery. So as Boethius rots away in a prison cell awaiting his impeding execution, Lady Philosophy points out to him that he's unhappy, not because he's had all his worldly goods taken from him, but because of the importance that he wrongly attached to those things.
Nevertheless, Lady Philosophy agrees with Boethius that happiness is our proper end. But true happiness can only be achieved by becoming like the idea of man that exists in God's mind. This, then, should be our only appropriate desire: to strive with all our might to realize our God-given nature, to make manifest the human ideal that originated in the divine mind.

What is the main theme of the story The Endless Steppe?

The main themes of Esther Hautzig's novel, The Endless Steppe, are the triumph of the human spirit and the love of beauty in the face of unspeakable oppression. When the novel begins, Esther is living a safe, luxurious life in her family home. She is surrounded by beautiful things, including gardens, servants, and other comforts of an urban, cultured life.
When the Nazis send her family into exile in Siberia because of their Jewish identity, Esther must deal with the harsh conditions of extreme poverty, suffering, and oppression. In the midst of her family's exile, however, she not only learns how to survive but how to pursue her love of beauty in new ways—in particular, through literature. Esther memorizes the Alexander Pushkin's poem "Eugene Onegin." She continues to love life and to pursue excellence. Esther learns that it is important not just to live but to live well, even in the face of anguish and the temptation to despair.

Discuss Utopian ideas

This is an incredibly broad question, so I'll try to touch on a variety of points. Hopefully you will find at least some of them helpful!
First off, let's define "utopia." By definition, a utopia is an idea of a (nearly) perfect community or society. The term originates from Sir Thomas More's Utopia (16th century), but the concept has existed for much longer.
Some common examples of utopia in literary and religious tradition are the biblical Garden of Eden or Shangri-La, a mystical valley in 1933 novel Lost Horizon by James Hilton. Both of these terms are so commonplace that they are often substituted as names for any concept of an earthly paradise.
Throughout the centuries, many utopian communities have been proposed and attempted.
The first known proposal for a utopia is Plato's Republic (c. 380 BC). Plato's plan centered around rigid economic and social classes and the concept of "benign oligarchy" via philosopher-kings. Since then, a variety of communes, townships, and more have been discussed or (partially) actualized.
Current utopian ideas tend to fall into one or more of several categories.
Economic utopias focus to rid their societies of poverty, greed, and other hardships often caused by capitalism or commercialism. This concept became particularly popular during the 19th century, as economies and industry boomed.
Ecological utopias serve as an example of society working more harmoniously with nature. Typically, this involves undoing or moving away from modern practices (i.e. deforestation, mass use of nonrenewable resources, etc.) that destroy or harm the environment.
Religious utopias may be inter-religious or intra-religious. These hope to unite citizens under a united moral understanding, which may be under a single faith or through understanding of how their faiths unite.
Feminist utopias have often been proposed as a way to consider "reworking" gender roles, misogyny, and the relationship between biology and social status.
Overall, utopian ideas are useful tools for examining what humanity values most, what struggles face us, and how we might realistically (or hypothetically) improve our world.
http://brbl-archive.library.yale.edu/exhibitions/utopia/uc22.html

http://www.bl.uk/learning/timeline/item126618.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/04/imagine-theres-no-gender-the-long-history-of-feminist-utopian-literature/274993/

In what ways does Alyce demonstrate intelligence?

Although she's often called a "lackwit fool" by others, Alyce is actually rather an intelligent young lady. Alyce may be illiterate as with most people at that time, and she may be an abandoned orphan from a dirt-poor background, but she has a certain sharpness about her. This is a young lady with the medieval equivalent of street smarts. And without them, she'd find it hard to survive in such a tough world.
But Alyce's intelligence also helps others to survive. When Will's close to drowning, Alyce thinks fast and crawls onto the tree branch so that it dips in the water and Will can grab hold of it. Although the other boys insist on calling Alyce a nitwit, Will now knows better and calls Alyce by her name.
Alyce further shows her intelligence through her remarkable ability to learn by observing other people's behavior. For instance, closely watching Gilbert Gray-Head carve wood allows Alyce to pick up the trade herself, something that few other girls of her time were able to do. And of course, Alyce's intelligence and capacity to learn quickly allows her to become a skilled, caring midwife, which greatly improves her sense of worth and self-respect.

I need to write a 2,000-word critical analysis on the play Sorry, Wrong Number by Lucille Fletcher.

You may want to look at the article "Projections and Intersections: Paranoid Textuality in Sorry, Wrong Number" by David Crane (see the link below). Crane writes about what he refers to as "paranoid textuality" in the play; this phrase refers to a kind of paranoia that becomes an element in and of itself in the drama and that moves the action of the drama along. In paranoid texts, Crane notes, paranoia always becomes a reality.
Crane writes that the paranoia in this play is essential to the narrative; the telephone is the device through which this paranoia and its attendant anxiety are transmitted. The phone in this play becomes a portent of evil that is about to arrive. The play turns what is generally a comforting device that connects people to others into something that only transmits worry and eventually death. Rather than connect people, the phone strands them and subjects them to their worst nightmares.
This article is one place you can start your process of research and writing.
https://read.dukeupress.edu/camera-obscura/article-abstract/17/3%20(51)/71/58255/Projections-and-Intersections-Paranoid-Textuality?redirectedFrom=fulltext

What makes Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss agree to use Charlie for their experiments in Flowers for Algernon?

Flowers for Algernon is a young adult science-fiction novel written by American author Daniel Keyes. The novel is made up of a series of progress reports written by protagonist Charlie Gordon, age 32.
Charlie is mentally disabled but wants to improve himself, and so he enrolls in reading and writing classes at the Beekman College Center for Retarded Adults. Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss are researchers at the college who are working to find a way to increase human intelligence. They are looking for a human test subject, and Charlie is recommended to them by his teacher, Miss Alice Kinnian. Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss have already experimented on a mouse named Algernon who showed incredibly positive results. Dr. Nemur does not want to use Charlie for the experiment as he is concerned that Charlie’s IQ is too low. However, Dr. Strauss does want to use Charlie because of his motivation and his desire to learn.

Dr. Strauss said I had something that was very good. He said I had a good motor-vation. I never even knowed I had that. I felt good when he said not everbody with an eye-Q of 68 had that thing like I had it. I dont know what it is or where I got it but he said Algernon had it too.

What is Auden saying about Achilles’s shield, Achilles’s world (the culture, human nature, the time period he lived in), and Auden’s world? What is the poet’s overall reaction to the piece of art?

W. H. Auden's poem "The Shield of Achilles," first published in 1952, details a description of Achilles's shield, which he used during the Trojan War as shown in Homer's epic poem the Iliad. The poem itself concerns Thetis (Achilles's mother) looking over the shield that the shield-maker Hephaestus is creating. Thetis expects to see images of peace on the shield, but Hephaestus instead crafts images of warfare and destruction, causing much distress to Thetis.
The shield, in Auden's poem, represents the inevitable despair that warfare brings. It depicts scenes of barren wastelands, barbed wire encampments (perhaps a parallel to World War II, which had ended a couple of years prior to the poem's publishing), and soldiers marching to battle. We see in Auden's descriptions of these scenes the devastation that war has brought to the world, and the indifferent public who doesn't speak up about the violence and destruction being committed. Thetis laments these visions, but Hephaestus seemingly has no problem with them; this shows the dichotomy between love and war that the poem discusses throughout.
You could argue that the poem is a commentary on how human nature allows for the repetition of war and violence, even when such actions damage or destroy the world. Hephaestus is not committing the acts he depicts on the shield—but he doesn't protest them either, allowing them to continue both on Achilles's shield and in the world around him. Thetis sees the actions on the shield and is tormented by them, protesting in her cries that her son will receive this representation of violence. The final line of the poem, in which the narrator reminds us that Achilles is destined to die at Troy, cements the theme of the destruction of war and how nobody can stop it once it begins.
This doesn't necessarily apply to any specific timeframe—it could easily describe Auden's reaction to both Achilles's world and his own. The poem was published in 1952, a few years into the Cold War, and the poem may be a response to the rise of totalitarian governments in many parts of the world (most notably, Stalinism). Auden sees the same violence and devastation in his world that he saw in Achilles's and laments that history seems to repeat itself. Auden is the one who describes the deeper meaning in the symbols on the shield, so perhaps it is him—not Thetis—who laments the depiction of war rather than peace.

How are Mariam in A thousand Splendid Suns amd Mary Carson in The Thorn Birds similar and different from each other?

Miriam and Mary have similar experiences during the novels, such as rejection and jealousy. They both feel a similar pain when the objects of their affections choose younger, beautiful women. Though they experience the same kind of pain, their reactions to it are markedly different.
Miriam from A Thousand Splendid Suns has a promising marriage until she has the first of several miscarriages. Her husband takes a second wife, making Miriam unhappy and jealous. However, she warms to her rival, Laila, when the younger woman stands up for her. Miriam becomes close to Laila and treats her and her children like family.
Miriam’s initial approach to her betrayal mirrors her mother’s advice:

A man's heart is a wretched, wretched thing. It isn't like a mother's womb. It won't bleed. It won't stretch to make room for you.

Mary Carson is the wealthy aunt of the protagonist, Meggie Clearly, in the novel The Thornbirds. Meggie moves from New Zealand to Australia because Mary offers her father a job. Mary is very interested in Ralph de Bricassart, a disgraced priest living in the area, and attempts to seduce him. He, in turn, is only interested in her for her money, hoping she can buy his way back into favor in the Catholic Church. He does not respond to Mary’s overtures. Instead, he focuses on Meggie, which makes Mary jealous.
Miriam and Meggie are similar because they are both rejected by men they care for. They also have to cope with the objects of their affections choosing younger and more attractive women. They differ in how they handle jealousy. Miriam is angry, but after her change of heart, she loves Laila and goes to great lengths to defend her instead of trying to destroy her husband’s relationship with Laila. She becomes kind, gracious, and self-sacrificing. She meets a tragic end in a peaceful state of mind:

And yet she was leaving the world as a woman who had loved and been loved back. She was leaving it as a friend, a companion, a guardian. A mother. A person of consequence at last.

Meggie reacts very differently to her rival, her niece Meggie. Her jealousy makes her angry and vindictive, and she takes active measures to keep Meggie apart from Ralph, the object of both of their affections. She tells Ralph:

I'll pin you to the wall on your own weakness, I'll make you sell yourself like any painted whore.

She forces Ralph to choose between Meggie and the money. She succeeds in separating the two because Ralph is weak enough to choose the money and his career instead of Meggie.
Mary uses her fortune to tempt Ralph away from Meggie and to ultimately separate the two lovers. She uses Ralph’s weaknesses to doom the couple. She is neither loving nor self-sacrificing.

How do you view the arguments presented supporting the relationship between secularism and extremism? What has led to your persuasion or dissuasion? Illustrate your case by presenting exemplars, patterns, and cases in point.

I’m not sure if, from the wording of your question, you’re alluding to the views of a specific writer or statesman about this issue. Ever since the Enlightenment there have been reactions against “secularism” by those who have claimed that without a religious basis, society will descend into chaos. Edmund Burke, in his Reflections on the Revolution in France, wrote what is probably the most seminal treatise advancing this argument. Though in 1790, when he wrote it, the French Revolution had not really turned violent yet, Burke predicted that the abandonment of traditional government and of religious institutions would lead to extremism and would pose an apocalyptic danger to all of Europe.
Those who disagreed with Burke, such as Thomas Paine, were implicitly or openly against both organized religion and monarchical governments. If by “extremism” we include any sort of violence on a mass level, then it’s surely true that the European powers did not need secularism to encourage this. Warfare was the constant state of affairs in Europe when the entire continent was united under Christianity, and became worse after the Protestant Reformation split Europe in two along religious, not secular, lines.
Nevertheless one could assert that after the Enlightenment, when religious belief was weakened, Europe became even more violent. In the twentieth century leaders such as Stalin and Hitler murdered millions of people in cold blood, in a time when both Communists and Fascists certainly were “secular” and held religion in contempt. So as with almost everything there are two sides to this issue and no definitive way of resolving it.

Whose thoughts and feelings about Donny's problems are best known to the reader?

In Anne Tyler’s story, the thoughts and feelings presented are primarily those of Daisy Coble, Donny’s mother. By emphasizing the adult concerns, Tyler indicates the gulf between mother and son in interpreting his experiences, including her sense of inadequacy as a parent. These are far from the domineering control of which her child is convinced. At the story’s end, Daisy and her husband Matt are living without Donny, who has run away. It concludes with a mental image that Daisy has of a bleak scene of shadows and dry bones.
Tyler does not employ Daisy as a first-person narrator but rather an omniscient third-person narrator. In some ways this restricts the emotional punch that first person can pack, but in other ways it allows the author more flexibility as she can create an impression of reliable objectivity, which seeing things only through one person’s eyes would not allow her to do.

What characterizes the music of autumn?

The classic poem "To Autumn" by John Keats celebrates the season of autumn with sensual elegance. Each of the three stanzas has a specific emphasis. The first stanza extols the beauty of autumn mainly through visual imagery. In the second stanza, Keats personifies autumn as a beautiful goddess. It is in the third stanza where Keats delineates the various sounds that characterize the music of autumn.
Keats begins by declaring that, like spring, autumn has its own music. He first writes of a chorus of gnats among the trees along the river bank. Lambs bleat from the hillsides, and crickets sing from the hedges. The red-breast, a type of bird, whistles from the garden-croft, which is a field adjoining a house or farm. Swallows flying in the air twitter, which means that they make a type of chirping sound.

What can The Frogs tell us about everyday life in ancient Athens? Can this play be performed successfully in modern times?

Aristophanes's The Frogs was written and performed in a time of civic crisis when Athens was at war with members of the Peloponnesian League, former allies. Although the play is a comedy, Aristophanes takes advantage of his opportunity to entertain the assembled citizens of Athens (male citizens of age who had undergone military training) to offer subtle and not-so-subtle political advice to help his embattled city. These didactic messages reveal quite a bit about everyday life in contemporary Athens.
In the journey scene to Hades, for example, in the warning off of the profane, we hear a litany of grave offenses in life that would disqualify the souls of the dead from participating in the holy rites available to the just and pure of heart. This device allows Aristophanes to condemn what he considered to be the worst offenses of his time.
These offenses include the violation of social norms, such as being disagreeable instead of living peaceably and showing kindness to one's fellows. Those who neglect holy rites meant to protect the city in preference for profane and vulgar comedies are singled out. Aristophanes condemns men who stir up factional strife from the base motive of trying to profit at the expense of the public good. He mentions officials who accept bribes even though their corruption jeopardizes the stability of the state as being in the ranks of the profane. He condemns those who betray forts and ships to the enemy. Rounding out his list of offenses are merchants who procure or sell naval stores and supplies to the enemy. These offenses surely reflect many of the tensions of life during wartime in Aristophanes's Athens.

Why does romeo feel that he hasn't seen or experienced love until the night he saw Juliet?

Romeo is completely smitten by Juliet the very first time he lays eyes on her. Romeo's young, naive, and inexperienced in love, and so he's experiencing emotions he's never had before. He once claimed to be in love with Juliet's cousin Rosaline, but that was just a youthful infatuation; this, however, is the real thing. Then, Romeo's eyes had lied to him, because they had never seen true beauty:

Did my heart love till now? Forswear it, sight!
For I ne'er saw true beauty till this night. (Act I Scene v).

But now, the scales have fallen from Romeo's lying eyes and, in the beautiful figure of Juliet, he suddenly beholds a vision of loveliness the likes of which he has never seen before. Now he knows the true meaning of beauty, beauty that's too good for this world, beauty that transcends the merely mortal to ascend to an entirely different plane of being:

Beauty too rich for use, for earth too dear. (Act I Scene v).

Why does Hyde grow stronger when Jekyll stops using the drug?

In Robert Louis Stephenson's The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Hyde not only grows stronger over time: he becomes larger, stands more upright, and finally does not need the drug at all to appear. In fact, Jekyll needed a serum to prevent Hyde from appearing. Over time, Jekyll would need stronger and stronger doses of serum. Finally, they no longer worked. At that point, Jekyll takes his own life to prevent becoming Hyde permanently.
Stephenson was from a devout Presbyterian background. The message of the book is that evil, once you set it free within yourself and indulge it, will inevitably take over, rule your life, and damn your soul. There is also the interpretation, however, that to believe oneself to be without sin is itself a sin: pride. This is what Jekyll does by concealing his inner sinfulness even before taking the potion to transform himself into Hyde.

When did Britain colonize America?

Britain tried to start a colony in the late sixteenth century, under Queen Elizabeth I, in Roanoke, North Carolina, but this attempt failed. It wasn't until the early seventeenth century that the British gained a permanent foothold in North America with the Jamestown (1607) and Plymouth Bay (1621) colonies.
European missionaries, explorers, and people seeking to make money had been coming to America for a century, but they did not intend to stay permanently. Catholic missionaries wanted to convert the Native Americans to Christianity, but eventually they intended to return home. Explorers wanted to chart and claim territory for their nation, then go back to their home countries. Hunters and other fortune-seekers sought to come back to Europe with furs and treasure but not to stay long in the "New World."
The trading outposts and temporary shelters built by men hoping to spend a few years in a hostile environment became too sporadic and uncertain for European countries that were insatiably hungry for a steady and abundant flow of raw materials and cash crops from their colonies. This drove a desire on the part of countries like England to establish permanent colonies in America, which meant they would control the land they rested on for the benefit of their homeland and which would ensure a steady and highly profitable flow of supplies into Europe.

What would be an essay, based on The Three Musketeers, on the idea that sometimes a friendship is born out of conflict?

The idea that friendship grows out of conflict can be seen in two primary ways in The Three Musketeers. First, and more generally, the musketeers themselves are brought together in a common cause. They form an elite squad of fighting men who support the crown and oppose Cardinal Richelieu. With their motto of “all for one, one for all,” they exemplify unity and loyalty of friendship that comes from supporting a cause and those who share their values.
Second, d’Artagnan’s entry into the musketeers stems from an initial conflict. The young man is so anxious to prove himself and to join their ranks that when they first meet, he sets himself against them. Convinced of his own worth and sensitive to any criticism, he challenges Athos, Porthos, and Aramis to duels. When the cardinals’ guards arrive, however, he quickly sets aside this contest, and they join forces to fight them off. This incident leads to his friendship with the other three.

Who is Ariel?

Ariel is a character in The Tempest by William Shakespeare. He is not human but rather a magical being, a type of air spirit. His gender is actually somewhat ambiguous. Although in Shakespeare's period, all roles were played by men, subsequently Ariel has often been played by female actors.
Ariel had lived on the island before Prospero arrived and was imprisoned in a tree for twelve years by the evil witch Sycorax, the mother of Caliban (a bestial or monstrous character). Prospero freed Ariel from the prison and promised that after a period of servitude, he would give Ariel freedom, a promise fulfilled at the end of the play.
Ariel has many magical powers, including the power to command winds and storms which he uses to cause the shipwreck that brings Alonso and Antonio to the island.
"Ariel's Song" is considered among the most beautiful poetry of the play and has been set to music by several composers. It is also the origin of the expression "sea-change", a term first found in English in the lines:

Full fathom five thy father lies;
... Nothing of him that doth fade,
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange.

What were Goneril's and Regan's replies to their father for the distribution of the kingdom?

In act one, scene one, the elderly King Lear announces that he wishes to hand over his responsibilities to his three daughters, Goneril, Regan, and Cordelia, so that he can "unburdened crawl toward death." He asks each of his daughters in turn to tell him how much they love him, and says that he will distribute his territory according to their protestations of love, the implication being that the one who loves him the most will receive the largest share of territory, whereas the one who loves him the least shall receive the smallest.
Goneril replies that she loves him "more than words can say," and "as much as life itself." Following Goneril, Regan replies that Goneril's protestation of love "comes too short," implying that her love is greater. She also says that she is "alone felicitate / In your dear highness' love." In other words, she is only ever happy, she says, because she is loved by her father.
Later in the play, Goneril and Regan effectively disown their father, casting him out into the night to fend for himself. Their protestations of love in act one, scene one, are evidently not at all genuine and are motivated only by a greed for power and territory.

I need help with writing an interpretative paper on disguise in Shakespeare's As You Like it and Hamlet of Denmark.

The two plays you will write about both use disguise but in very different ways. In As You Like It, disguise is mostly literal, as Rosalind dresses up as a young man, Ganymede. In Hamlet, disguise is primarily figurative, as Hamlet feigns madness.
The task in effectively comparing two such different approaches is to find commonalities between them. You could look at the reasons the two characters decide to fool the people around them. You might also address the outcomes of their deception. Another angle would be to interpret the language the two disguised characters use. How does "being" a man affect the way Rosalind speaks? What does Hamlet say when he is acting as though he is mentally ill?
As You Like It is a comedy, and Hamlet is a tragedy so the outcomes are quite different. Because Shakespeare is moving the action toward a different resolution in each play, the steps along the way are quite different as well. Rosalind enjoys teasing Orlando while she is disguised, but no great harm comes to either one--they fall in love, once she is back to dressing like a woman, and become a couple. In Hamlet, however, his goals in feigning madness include wreaking a terrible revenge on his uncle. While he does succeed, in that Claudius dies, he manages to kill a large number of other people along the way so the effects of disguise are very far from those that Rosalind caused.

What values exactly is Salman Rushdie trying to preserve for the people of India in Midnight's Children?

Salman Rushdie shows history as a burden that the people of India, especially those born at the time of independence, must bear. Among the positive aspects of the nation’s history is diversity, symbolized by the many spices needed for the pickles made in the pickle factory Saleem manages. Saleem also uses the symbolism of pickles to frame and organize his memoir. Rushdie also argues for religious tolerance, which the violence of Partition had seriously jeopardized. Saleem is Hindu and British by heritage but Muslim by upbringing. The combination within him of these three important strands of Indian history offers the hope for greater social unity. Although Rushdie argues for the importance of traditional values, which were disrupted by British imperial rule, he also cautions against the rigidity of the caste system. Saleem’s hybridity and Shiva’s low-caste origin are portrayed as positive elements of the country’s future trajectory, while in traditional society they would have been denied the chance of making positive contributions.

During the administrations of Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Madison, Europe was nearly constantly at war and it grew increasingly difficult for the new United States to stay out of it. Explain the situation, its problems, and the ways these early presidents sought to stay out of war, why they ultimately failed, and what the result was.

The office of the Presidency was created by the U.S. Constitution, but many of the powers of the office were still undefined by the document. The early U.S. presidents were in the unique position of determining the scope of their powers and establishing new norms, particularly in the case of foreign conflict.
George Washington, the first U.S. President, made extensive efforts to focus on domestic issues before becoming involved in foreign disputes. However, the French Revolution, was expanding into the rest of Europe, opening the door to an international crisis. After France declared war on Britain in 1793, the British became concerned about the United States' allegiances. America's longtime alliance with France might encourage the United States to break their neutrality in favor of France.
So, in 1794, the British Royal Navy seized American ships in the West Indies. It seemed like war was inevitable and many U.S. politicians, including Thomas Jefferson, thought it was the only way forward. Washington, however, felt neutrality was essential to the longevity of the early American nation. In November 1794 Washington sent John Jay, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, to Britain with the Jay Treaty. Its primary tenets were that Britain would compensate the United States for its interference in West Indies and provide favored nation status to American traders in exchange for Americans, offering Britain some trade advantages in the United States and paying off some Revolutionary War debts.
Ultimately, the treaty was approved by Congress on August 14, 1795, after significant debate. It was the first time the new American government had needed to arbitrate an international treaty, and it proved that the new American political system worked: big international relations decisions could be made through a process of debate and arbitration. It also reinforced Washington's belief that the United States needed to maintain neutrality and peace in order to protect her fledgling democracy--a point Washington reiterated in his Farewell Address.
John Adams, the second U.S. President, had to face the fallout from the Jay Treaty, which had angered the French. They felt betrayed by the Americans, who had previously sided with them against the British. In March 1797, John Adams sent three of his best diplomats—Charles Pinckney, John Marshall, and Elbridge Gerry—to France to meet with the foreign minister Charles de Talleyrand. The minister refused to meet with them unless they'd pay a sizable bribe andprovide a loan. The Americans refused.
When Adams received word of the French demands, he took immediate action. He took the memos from his diplomats and replaced the names of the French actors with the letters X, Y, and Z, leading the action to be called the XYZ Affair. Adams then sent the memos to Congress, which subsequently pushed through a series of defensive measures, including expanding the Department of War and creating a new executive department for the Navy. In July 1798, Congress even authorized the attack of French vessels in the Atlantic in a "quasi-war," stockpiling warships, weapons, and money in case of war--which, still, was avoided.
Thomas Jefferson, the third U.S. President, inherited this system of American neutrality (and its newly built arsenal and Department of War) which would become harder to preserve as things escalated in Europe. British soldiers began to desert in record numbers, often hiding on American ships and enlisting as merchant marines. The problem of deserting British sailors became so extreme that British "press gangs" were dispatched to board American ships and take anyone off who appeared to be British. Unfortunately, these gangs often removed Americans alongside the British soldiers. The conflict came to a head in 1807, when the British ship H.M.S Leopard opened fire on the American ship U.S.S. Chesapeake after the Chesapeake refused to allow British press gangs aboard. Three American sailors were killed, and the ship was raided.
Jefferson was in a tight spot: he feared any move he made would lead to war. His solution, then, was to ban trade with Europe altogether. This was called the Embargo Act, and it passed through Congress in late 1807. Unfortunately, the Act only served half (or less) of its purpose. It prevented war between Britain and the United States, but it backfired economically for the Americans. After a long debate on how to proceed, Congress decided to substitute the Embargo Act with a Non-Intercourse Act in March 1809, which removed every nation but France and Britain from the embargo. Three days before leaving office, the now highly unpopular President Jefferson signed it into law. Peace was preserved, but at a high economic cost.
James Madison was the fourth U.S. President. In 1810, Madison attempted to rectify the economic disaster caused by the Embargo and Non-Intercourse Acts by passing a bill known as Macon's Bill Number 2. Under this legislation, trade remained free between Britain, France, and the United States, but if either Britain or France violated the United States' neutrality, the United States would immediately ban the nation from trade.
This Bill failed to end ongoing British impressment and French attacks on American ships. Even so, Madison remained firm in his desire to prevent war. His new Congress, however, was less interested in doing so. In 1811, Congress met and elected Henry Clay, an outspoken and colorful Kentuckian, to be Speaker of the House. Clay led a group of Congressmen from the Northwest and Southwest territories known as "War Hawks." They feared the British were allying themselves with the American Indians, and believed the only way forward was to defeat the British and the American Indians on American soil. They wanted a war.
Despite his reticence, Madison officially declared war on June 18, 1812. As it turned out, Madison was right to be skeptical. The Americans were completely unprepared for war. The U.S. Army was incredibly small at this time, with less than 12,000 men enlisted when the war broke out. State militias, which weren't under federal government control, frequently refused to carry out military orders since they disagreed with the war on principle. The war was also expensive and difficult to finance.
Ultimately, the War of 1812 left Britain and the United States exactly as they had been before: both living on the American continent, with the United States' neutrality intact. The war had nearly bankrupted the United States, and had also divided the Northeastern states, who were anti-war, from the inland states, who had pushed for it.
Americans were realizing that George Washington's policy of neutrality seemed to have been the right move. The War of 1812 had failed to change anything except the nation's finances, so Madison and his Congress quickly reverted to a focus on peace. For a while, it worked: this was known as the Era of Good Feelings. James Monroe, the fifth President, would inherit a seemingly stable nation. Unfortunately, as the United States' short history had already demonstrated, war was always on the horizon--and the President was not always able to prevent it.

Montaigne's Essays illuminate the difficulty of achieving total self-knowledge, and/or self-mastery. How did Montaigne attempt to overcome this difficulty?

Montaigne explained in this work that total self-knowledge or mastery was nigh impossible. He reckoned that humans, being inside our own heads, can only see a portion of our experience and therefore only understand a small bit of it. If we could totally understand ourselves, we would be tantamount to God.
He did believe, however, that one could improve their self-mastery and begin to grasp more and more of oneself and one's environment. In fact, he set himself along this path personally in an attempt to try and enlighten himself totally. He laid out practical steps as to how he would achieve that, and he certainly became more self-aware, though it is debated how masterful he truly became in the end.
His steps achieve true knowledge of himself were the following: first, he decided that he must accept that he cannot know the true purpose and reason behind many things. The second step toward his idea of enlightenment is to focus on humanity's internal freedom.
This is integral to fully understanding and controlling oneself because it includes an understanding of what one cannot control—the exterior influences. Finally, he casts off inauthentic attitudes and mindsets and focuses purely on what is true and valuable.

In his Essays, Montaigne inquires about limits of human knowledge and self-knowledge. He says time and again that God is not fully knowable nor are we to suppose that we can reach complete self-knowledge. In particular, the thinker compares attempts at apprehending our own being to those at grasping water:

for the more you clutch your hand to squeeze and hold what is in its own nature flowing, so much more you lose of what you would grasp and hold. (book 2, chapter 12)

And though the philosopher’s approach can be termed skeptical fideism (a quest for knowledge and self-knowledge driven by faith but balanced by doubt), he does not reject reason altogether. Rather, he encourages us to test it and see what it is worth. At the same time, Montaigne defines man but negatively when the latter is viewed in the light of God’s perfections:

Thus is it that to God alone glory and honour appertain; and there is nothing so remote from reason as that we should go in quest of it for ourselves; for, being indigent and necessitous within, our essence being imperfect, and having continual need of amelioration, ‘tis to that we ought to employ all our endeavour. We are all hollow and empty (book 4, chapter 16)

Montaigne believes that the only way to locate and manifest one’s own self is self-reflection through introspection. Montaigne’s thought moves in three stages. First, he comes to the conclusion that we cannot really know true reasons of many things, including our own selves. Life is a totality of appearances, or “masks.” Second, Montaigne isolates man’s inner freedom as the sole truly human endowment from everything that affects it from without.
However, it is impossible to overcome this unauthentic reality completely. Yes, man is “hollow and empty”, but there is no other reality for the sake of which all appearances have been negated. The third stage in Montaigne’s reasoning is to integrate the negation of the unauthentic reality with an acceptance of each person’s relatedness to other beings:

there is nevertheless a certain respect, a general duty of humanity, not only to beasts that have life and sense, but even to trees, and plants. We owe justice to men, and graciousness and benignity to other creatures that are capable of it. (book 2, chapter 11)

As his thought progresses, Montaigne shows a more favorable attitude toward human nature. We need to consider its wants but, at the same time, we also need to balance this with reason. To trust your own nature is to find a way toward your true self, and this will contribute to its “amelioration.” Man’s goal is not to find an abstract truth but rather to agree to live through everything that his existence involves.

Michel de Montaigne wrote essays on a wide variety of subjects, yet he insisted that their subject was himself. More than that, he advocated that everyone seek self-knowledge, especially as humans are so prone to criticize others. This self-knowledge would help to temper, not to exacerbate, pride in one's own accomplishments.
Several essays elaborate on specific aspects. "On Vanity" and "On Moderation" explore these themes. Montaigne does not deny that he is vain; it is a basic human quality to be partly overcome by surrounding oneself with superior beings, both one's living contemporaries and the great thinkers of classical times. Aiming for self-mastery by restraint from overindulgence is recommended and, while laudable, a virtue that the speaker hesitates to claim for himself--that would be vanity.
In his longer essays that engage substantively with other philosophers, Montaigne argues for self-knowledge through faith rather than through reason. His dialogue with skepticism and modern proponents of rationalism, in which he refutes reason as superior to Christian faith, are laid out extensively in the "Apology for Raimond Sebond." Yet as he obviously is thoroughly schooled in their ways of thinking, he also reveals the strong attraction that skepticism exerts on him, and he comes across as revealing his own doubt as much as advocating for faith.

In The Tempest, why is Prospero angry that Miranda volunteered to help Ferdinand with the logs?

When Miranda offers to carry the logs for Ferdinand, Prospero exclaims, out of Miranda's hearing, "Poor worm, thou art infected!" He means by this that Miranda is "infected" with love, and the expression "Poor worm" is uttered much more as an expression of sympathy than anger. Prospero is actually pleased that Miranda seems genuinely in love with Ferdinand, and Ferdinand with her. Indeed, Prospero wishes that "Heaven rain grace / On that which breeds between 'em!" In other words, he wishes for their love to be blessed and to blossom.
Miranda might assume, when she offers to carry the logs for Ferdinand, that her father would be angry with her. This is because, earlier in the play, Prospero tells Miranda that Ferdinand is "a traitor," and warns her to stay away from him. He does this, however, only to test that Miranda's love for Ferdinand is pure. Or, in Prospero's own words, he has to make the love between them "uneasy . . . lest too light winning / Make the prize light." In other words, he wants them to earn their love, rather than win it cheaply. He thinks that if they earn their love now, it will be more meaningful, and in this sense heavy and enduring, rather than light and too easy to cast off.

Prospero is testing Ferdinand to make sure he is worthy of Miranda and truly in love with her. He wants to make sure Ferdinand is willing to do lowly and backbreaking labor to win her heart. To Prospero, to prove Ferdinand cares about Miranda, he needs to do all the work, even though Miranda offers to help him move the logs so that he can rest.
Prospero is more than a bit of a control freak—for example, Miranda is worried that she has disobeyed his direct command when she reveals to Ferdinand that she loves him.
Ferdinand does express that he would do all sorts of manual labor if it meant earning the prize of Miranda. His heart is sincere. However, Prospero wants to make things as difficult as possible for him to test his love for his daughter. That means Miranda shouldn't offer to help him.

What is the background of the poem "The Solitary Reaper"?

To answer this question, it's important to first define what you mean by "background." In literature, you may be referring to the historical context or author's style when addressing the background of a poem.
William Wordsworth's famous lyrical ballad was first published in 1807. Some literary scholars have suggested that the poem was written after Wordsworth visited the Scottish highlands in 1803 with fellow poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge and his sister Dorothy. Dorothy Wordsworth's journals place Wordsworth at Balquhidder before writing his first draft of the poem. Thus, one could discuss how the romanticized, picturesque beauty of the countryside inspired Wordsworth to write "The Solitary Reaper."
Besides this interpretation, one could consult Wordsworth's biography to understand how his life informed his poetic style. From an early age, Wordsworth's appreciation for nature led him to associate it with a beauty unspoiled by civilization.
Because the titular reaper in the poem sings in a language the speaker doesn't comprehend, he is forced to focus instead on the raw emotion the song conveys and the simple aesthetic impact it possesses. The simplicity of the reaper's beautiful song can therefore be seen to reflect the perfect serenity Wordsworth finds in nature.

What are some facts about the Pennsylvania Colony?

The Pennsylvania Colony was one of the original thirteen colonies. The land was granted to William Penn by King Charles II in 1681 in order to clear a debt the king had with William's father, Admiral Sir William Penn, who was an admiral and politician. The family and many settlers came to the area the following year in order to set up a place where Quakers could freely practice their religion.
Quakers, like Puritans, were known to be hard workers. Quaker women also enjoyed more freedoms than other colonial women at the time, and their approach to others was more inclusive. They made strides to maintain solid relationships with the Native Americans and shaped their colony to make the most of the fertile soil on which they settled.
http://www.quakersintheworld.org/quakers-in-action/282/Quakers-in-colonial-Pennsylvania

https://www.britannica.com/biography/William-Penn-British-admiral

https://www.ushistory.org/us/4b.asp

Jimmy successfully opens the safe at the Elmore Bank and rescues Agatha. Then he surrenders to Ben price. Why do you think he does so? Give reasons.

It can be argued that Jimmy surrenders because he believes that his identity has already been exposed, and therefore, it would be pointless to run away.
At the beginning of the story, Jimmy is released from prison.
Immediately, he returns to his life of crime. A week after his release, a safe is broken into in Richmond, Indiana, and eight hundred dollars is stolen. Two weeks later, fifteen hundred dollars is taken from a safe in Logansport. Then, five thousand dollars is taken from a safe in Jefferson City. The author hints that Jimmy is responsible for all of these thefts.
Later in the story, Jimmy falls in love with a woman named Annabel Adams. Because of his newfound happiness, Jimmy decides to leave his criminal past behind. He makes plans to give the tools of his trade away to an acquaintance. However, on this fateful day, two children are locked in a bank vault. So, Jimmy is faced with a terrible choice: save the children and expose himself to Ben Price (the investigator), or leave his future nieces (by marriage) to die.
In the end, Jimmy decides to save the girls. He also decides to give himself up to Ben Price after the rescue. You will recall that prior to the incident, Jimmy had already decided to reject the criminal lifestyle. The author hints that Jimmy's goal is to live an honest life, the kind befitting a family man. So, he surrenders to Ben Price because he believes that it is the right thing to do.
Another reason Jimmy surrenders is because he believes that running away would be pointless. His identity has already been revealed to Ben Price. Furthermore, Jimmy may be tired of his old life, one of constantly being on the alert against law enforcement. So, there are quite a few reasons Jimmy may have decided to surrender to Ben Price.

What are the adaptations of a bald eagle?

The bald eagle is both the national bird and the national animal of the United States. It has a number of adaptations, some of which are listed below:
A bald eagle has much better eyesight than many other species. They can see a small fish from high up in the sky. This is made possible by a super-sensitive retina. A bald eagle's retina is five times more light-sensitive than that of a human, providing it much better eyesight.
Another vision-related adaptation is the presence of a bony ridge above their eyes that helps in minimizing the glare from the Sun.
They have very sharp talons that allow them to capture and kill prey. The sharp talons are capable of penetrating the prey's flesh.
They have large curved beaks that allow them to tear the prey's flesh and eat it. The beaks are made of keratin, the same material that forms our toenails and fingernails.
They have an extremely large wingspan (as long as 8 feet), which allows them to drift easily in the air without spending too much energy. The wings also provide a lifting power of about 4 pounds.

Why is Helena Charles not the moral compass of the play?

The short answer to this question is that Helena has an affair with her best friend's husband. Unfortunately, this is another manifestation of the air of cynicism that pervades the play. It's therefore somewhat unfair to single out Helena as lacking moral authority, since it's doubtful that anyone in Look Back in Anger could fulfill that role.
Osborne shows women to be manipulated by Jimmy. In spite of his abusiveness, Alison stays with him. The underlying theme may be that people have needs that are actually detrimental to their interests. This would include Jimmy himself, because he seems self-destructive, preferring to maintain a dysfunctional dynamic in his home life. His obnoxiousness, one would think, is such that he not only makes those who are with him miserable but does the same to himself. Helena at least makes an effort to help Alison, and the fact that she also becomes mesmerized by the supposed allure of Jimmy is probably meant to show the irrationality at the root of much human behavior. It is also not difficult to see, by our standards today and perhaps those of Osborne's own time, a male chauvinist agenda underlying the action of the play. In any event, we can at best evaluate Look Back in Anger as an at least partly honest description of an all too real dynamic that exists in many marriages and extra-marital situations.

What is a line by line analysis of the poem "The Mountain" by Louise Glück?

This poem by Louise Gluck details a teacher/artist's struggle to describe an artist's life to her students. The tone of the poem suggests that she herself struggles with desire to make art, to make a difference, to add her own burden to the mountain.
My students look to me expectantly.
This teacher knows the influence of her advice on her students. She is worried about answering correctly. 'Expectantly' implies a sort of a naivety in her pupils.
I explain to them that a life of art is a life/ of endless labor. Their expressions/ hardly change; they need to know a little more about endless labor.
The line breaks are important here. Not only is art is hard, it is your whole life. For this reason, the narrator breaks the line after life, so the reader takes a pause before finishing the sentence with "of endless labor". Because her students have yet to experience this hardship, they require the narrator to explain herself further.
So I tell them the story of Sisyphus, /how he was doomed to push/a rock up a mountain, knowing nothing/would come of this effort/ but that he would repeat it/indefinitely.
This is an interesting take on the myth of Sisyphus. It implies that Sisyphus willingly undergoes this endeavor, rather than it merely being a punishment. She likens his efforts to the sacrifices of an artist.
I tell them/there is joy in this, in the artist's life,/that one eludes/ judgement, and as I speak/ I am secretly pushing a rock myself,/ slyly pushing it up the steep/ face of a mountain
The narrator reveals what we perhaps knew all along- that she herself is a struggling artist. She encounters much judgement, possibly from herself. There is a disconnect as she gives this advice. She doesn't agree with it herself. She perhaps sometimes does not feel the joy involved in carrying this burden.
Why do I lie/ to these children? They aren't listening,/they aren't deceived, their fingers/tapping at the wooden desks--
The students are becoming restless. The narrator believes it is because they can sense that she does not believe her own advice. The narrator toes the balance between telling them what they want to hear and telling them what they need to hear.
So I retract/the myth; I tell them it occurs/in hell, and that the artist lies/because he is obsessed with attainment,/that he perceives as the summit/at that place where he will live forever,/a place about to be/transformed by his burden: with every breath,
Instead of using a loose ancient metaphor, the narrator ties her advice to an imaginary artist. She is still distancing herself in the example, but rooting it much closer in truth. While Sisyphus was in the underworld, the artist lives in a less amicable hell. Unlike Sisyphus, whose troubles will amount to nothing, the artist hopes that he can make a contribution. He hopes that by the time he reaches the top of the mountain, he can "transform it with his burden."
I am standing at the top of the mountain./Both my hands are free. And the rock has added/height to the mountain.
The narrator is no longer distancing herself in her examples. She is the artist. She carried a burden. The world is better for it. The mountain is higher because of it.

Louise Gluck’s poem “The Mountain” begins, ”My students look at me expectantly.” Of course, this creates expectation in the reader. What do the students (and reader) expect? The next line clarifies; the question must be, What is the life of the artist?

"The life of art is a life
of endless labor."

By forcing “endless labor” into the next line using enjambment, the poet denies the students a short and easy answer. “Their expressions hardly change.” The students are still eager but perhaps don’t quite understand what the speaker is saying. The speaker jokes that the students might need to “know/ a little more about endless labor.” The lines stay relatively short until the speaker enters the world of myth.
Elaborating on the life of the artist in the next six lines, the speaker helps her students to understand the life of an artist by telling them about Sisyphus, who was “doomed to push/ a rock up a mountain.” The six enjambed lines about Sisyphus create the feeling of a line that just keeps going and going, just as the rock must keep going and going up the mountain, no matter how many times it falls back down. There is no end. This is the life of the artist; it is one of endless striving toward art. The speaker tries to reassure the students that there is joy in being Sisyphus, despite the fact that Sisyphus never reaches the top. But then she asks, “Why do I lie/ to these children?” There is something the speaker is not being explicit about, and the children know it.

"They aren’t listening."

They are aware that something is missing in the speaker’s words. So, in another short line, the poet produces three words, “So I retract,” leaving “the myth” hanging in the next line. She must tell the students honestly that the life of the artist is “hell” because the artist is “obsessed with attainment.” The artist lied; there is no joy in being Sisyphus. The artist is tired of that rock always rolling back down the mountain and having to start over again and again. The artist fiercely wants to be on top.

". . . he is obsessed with attainment,
That he perceives as the summit
At that place where he will live forever,
A place about to be
Transformed by his burden."

The artist wants to reach the top because at the top of the mountain the artist is transformed. “He will live forever”; the poet’s words will live on, giving the poet immortality. Not only is the poet transformed but the landscape is as well. How? The rock, made of her words, is no longer something to struggle against; it is art itself, and this art transforms the landscape. The mountain symbolizes the world’s art, and her creation has now added to the collection of Art, both changing the world and also adding to her own glory.
So which image do we believe? The artist as Sisyphus, struggling every day with no end in sight? Or the artist as Glorious, reaching the top of Art Mountain, adding her own mark upon that mountain, no longer encumbered by the struggle?
The answer lies in the irony of the final lines. The hands are “free,” no longer burdened by the rock but also impotent, no longer creating art. Can the hands of the poet ever be free? Can the poet ever rest? Or will the poet always be searching for that next rock in order to carry it up yet another mountain, again and again? And thus the poem turns in on itself, returning to the bottom of the mountain, the beginning of the poem, with students waiting to hear the answer. The poet confronts “the steep/ face of a mountain,” desperately wanting to stand free at the top of the mountain, a mountain that grows bigger and bigger with every accomplishment. And so she must do the only thing she can: she starts to climb.

In The Wretched of the Earth, what does it mean when Frantz Fanon refers to the decolonization process and what it entails as, "The last shall be first and the first last"?

Fanon wrote in The Wretched of the Earth that decolonization was the "putting into practice" of the sentence "the last shall be first and the first last." What he meant was that decolonization did not simply entail the elimination of colonial governments. Rather, it was a thorough and complete rethinking of the foundations of colonial society, and the mindsets that supported them. He also emphasized that colonizer and colonized were incompatible. There was no "conciliation...possible" between the two. He points out that the colonizers already realize this:

The colonized man is an envious man. And this the settler knows very well; when their glances meet he ascertains bitterly, always on the defensive, "They want to take our place." It is true, for there is no native who does not dream at least once a day of setting himself up in the settler's place.

Decolonization, then, was "a whole social structure being changed from the bottom up." Colonized people can be neither free nor independent. Fanon also thought that decolonization could only "come to pass" after a "murderous and decisive struggle" between the settlers and the colonized. In short, the colonized, or the "last," must emerge on top, leaving the settlers defeated. On a global scale, Fanon thought that the so-called "Third World," as it was known in his day, could lead a global restructuring by stopping the extraction of wealth from their countries. But the removal of the structures of colonialism by the colonizers was not enough. Fanon demanded reparations for the exploitation of several centuries, and wrote that colonized peoples must realize that "it is their due," and that capitalist nations must see that "they must pay." In short, there must be a fundamental restructuring of the economy on a global scale as well as within colonial nations. Through this process, the last would become first, and the first last.
http://www.openanthropology.org/fanonviolence.htm

What are the three most important social changes that occurred due to the American Revolution?

The three most important social changes due to the American Revolution were the migration of Loyalists, more political equality, and religious freedom.
The Loyalists made up about one-third of the population of the rebellious colonies. Their devotion to England put them in a precarious position. Thousands fought for the British. Others fled to the safety of the British lines. Their property was confiscated by the colonies. Thousands left America, and most of them ended up in Canada. Their exodus had both social and economic impacts.
The war made the new country more democratic. Those men who fought together against the British expected equality in the new nation. After 1776, property qualifications required for voting were relaxed. One key reason for the war was the colonists' dislike of taxation without representation, and that sentiment carried over into the postwar era. In addition, more commoners began serving in state legislatures.
A third change ushered in by the war was increased religious freedom. The nascent country moved toward separation of church and state. The state of Virginia and Thomas Jefferson championed this cause. In 1786, the Virginia legislature passed Jefferson's Statute for Religious Freedom. Also, the First Amendment to the US Constitution guaranteed freedom of religion.

What were some things that people in the story Fever 1793 think caused yellow fever?

In chapter 8, Mr. Carris reads the mayor's orders from a broadsheet newspaper. From these orders we can infer some of the factors which people in the story think of as possible causes of yellow fever.
The first order is that everybody "should avoid those that are infected." The implication here is that people think that yellow fever is contagious via direct contact with those already infected. This thought is confirmed by the second order, which states that "The homes of the sick should be marked." Presumably, this is to reduce the risk of direct contact with an infectious host body.
Order number nine states that "All persons should avoid being in . . . drafts." The implication here is that yellow fever can be carried in the air, and thus can be passed from one person to another not only through direct contract but also by the two people simply being in the same vicinity.
Another cause of yellow fever implied by the mayor's orders is uncleanliness. Order seven states that "The streets and wharves must be kept clean." This implies that yellow fever might spread through dirt.
Orders number eight and eleven, that people should "avoid fatigue of the body and mind" and "consume alcohol in moderation," suggest that people in the story also think that yellow fever can be more easily caught if one is careless about one's physical or mental health—in other words, if one's immune system is weaker than usual or if one is less able intellectually to take careful precautions.

What is Doodle's appearance?

Doodle, the narrator's younger brother, is evidently a rather strange-looking child, with odd proportions and generally quite sickly and unable, at first, to walk. Seven years younger than the narrator, the boy has a large head, with a small red and shriveled body which resembles that of an old man. This seems to have furthered the general supposition that he would die soon; when Doodle was still an infant, his parents had a coffin built for him. His real name was William Armstrong, but the narrator gave him the name "Doodle" because the way he crawled backwards on the hearth rug reminded him of a doodlebug.
Doodle was unable to walk until he was five years old. Until then, the narrator was tasked with pulling his brother around in a cart which had been specially built for the purpose. When Doodle was five, the narrator took it upon himself to teach his brother to walk.

In the end, Jack wears a mask. What other masks or disguises are found in the story ?

The first reference to a mask in the story is in chapter 4, when Jack sees his own face in the reflection of the pool. He has just smeared his face with clay and charcoal, and laughs excitedly as he sees, instead of his normal face, "a mask." This point in the story marks the beginning of Jack's transformation into the monster he later becomes. With the clay and charcoal mask, Jack's "laughter (becomes) a bloodthirsty snarling." The mask is also described as "a thing on its own, behind which Jack hid, liberated from shame and self-consciousness." In other words, with the mask to hide behind, Jack felt liberated to exercise his more primitive, animalistic, uncivilized impulses.
In chapter 10, Jack insists that his followers had, the previous night, beaten but not killed the beast. We know of course that the so-called beast was in fact another of the boys, Simon. Jack, however, says that it was the beast in disguise. The disguise in this scene is a symbol of Jack's denial, and of his own mind's refusal to acknowledge the horror of the murder of the night before. It is also potentially a ready-made excuse for Jack to kill anyone else he wants to later on. He can always insist that the victim is in fact the beast in disguise.

Does the band saturation effect prevent global warming from CO2? If not, what effect does it have?

Methane, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases are collectively referred to as greenhouse gases. Although some of these gases are naturally occurring, their volume has increased rapidly since the Industrial Revolution. Greenhouse gases are byproducts of industrial processes, like fossil fuel combustion and modern agricultural practices. The absorption and emission rates of heat between Earth and space depend upon the makeup of the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases alter the makeup of the atmosphere and contribute to global warming.

People who deny the role of greenhouse gases in global warming sometimes cite carbon dioxide’s band saturation as the reason. Their theory looks like this: an increase in carbon dioxide concentration doesn’t matter when you’re dealing with high levels, and the levels are already high. This means that when you add CO2 to an atmosphere with no CO2, it’s a big deal. When you add more CO2 to an atmosphere that’s full of it, the effect is smaller—the level is already saturated. So far, this is mostly true. The doubling of CO2 from 10ppm to 20ppm has about the same global warming impact as the doubling of 1000ppm to 2000ppm. The amount of CO2 currently in the atmosphere is already absorbing as much heat as it can, so even if the CO2 levels doubled, it wouldn’t lead to much more heat absorption. This is true but misleading. CO2 probably can’t absorb much more heat, but that doesn’t mean it is saturated. The effect of CO2 will continue despite diminishing returns.

Most importantly, though, is that the anti-climate change theory of CO2 saturation only looks at what is happening between Earth’s surface and its atmosphere; it ignores what is happening between the atmosphere and space. Even if CO2 has already reached its peak absorption capacity from Earth, adding more CO2 would still lead to global warming. This is because increasing the concentration of CO2 is like adding another heat-insulating layer between Earth’s atmosphere and space.

Consider what you would wear on a cool autumn day. A sweatshirt or fleece, probably—something warm but breathable. A permeable layer keeps most of the heat from the body in, but not all of it. Some heat escapes into the atmosphere, which keeps you comfortable. Now think about what would happen if you added an impermeable layer, like a water-resistant shell. Body heat would no longer be able to escape through the knit fibers like it could with the fleece. Pretty soon, you’d overheat. An increase in CO2 concentration has a similar effect: it adds another layer to the atmosphere, which makes it harder for heat trapped by CO2 to radiate off of the planet.

Identify examples of color imagery in the poem "New Orleans" by Joy Harjo. What effect does this imagery create?

Joy Harjo uses color imagery in her poem to illustrate the complex race relationships in New Orleans in particular and America, in general. The use of color imagery has the effect of making history come alive for us. Harjo uses dark, earthy colors to symbolize the struggle of people of color, while colors associated with coldness and artificiality represent suppression and colonialism. Three historical events form the poem’s backdrop: one, the attempts of Spanish conquistador Hernando de Soto (referred to as DeSoto in the poem) to colonize North America. Driven by lust for the fabled gold in the American South, DeSoto crossed the Mississippi in the 16th century. However, he is said to have been drowned by the local indigenous people. Two, was the removal of indigenous Creek people from the Southeast via New Orleans to designated “Indian territory” in Oklahoma in the 1830’s and 1840’s. Many Creeks dies of the cold on their way west; many drowned in the Mississippi near New Orleans when a steamboat struck their boat. The third historical event was the period between 1811 and 1862 in which New Orleans operated as a mass market for slaves. The historic French Quarter was an open market place for the buying and selling of people of color, especially black people.
This traumatic history informs the binary use of color in “New Orleans.” We see an example of this in the “blue horse/ caught frozen in stone” that pops up in lines five and six of the poem. The horse is a statue, of course, but its blue color indicates sadness and numbness. The horse is cold, no longer alive and cannot talk. It symbolizes the attempts of Spanish colonizers to suppress indigenous America.

Brought in by the Spanish onan endless ocean voyage he became madand crazy. They caught him in bluerock, saiddon’t talk.

Like the animal is rendered blue and dead, the voice of the native peoples was gradually suppressed in history. The blue horse that stands in a city square also symbolizes the manipulation of history, where events of conquest and subjugation are painted as heroic. Further, the poet says the brown Mississippi mud has voices buried in it, a reference both to the drowned Creeks, as well as the brown and black people sold into slavery. The Mississippi mud is ripe with their blood, some of the red strains of which flow through the Native American poet too. In contrast with the brown and red tones is DeSoto’s lust for pale, glittering gold. Gold symbolizes avarice and materialism; DeSoto came seeking it, only to be subsumed by the raw earthiness of the land.
The “ivory knives” being sold in the market represent white -- the colour of the colonizer - as well as the exploitative ivory trade, which went on at an unprecedented scale during the colonization of Africa. Ivory was procured from poached African and Indian elephants and used to make decorative items, piano keys, and billiard balls in Europe. Often, slaves were forced to carry the heavy tusks of the animals onto ships. It is ironic that shops in New Orleans still sell ivory, a relic of colonialism. Later, the poet notices “shops that sell black mammy dolls/ holding white babies,” a reference to the legacy of slavery. This irony is also echoed in the poet’s realization that although DeSoto was drowned in the Mississippi, his materialistic spirit must have gotten away, because it still lives on in New Orleans, as evoked by the “silver” paths.

But he must have got away, somehow,because I have seen New Orleans,the lace and silk buildings,trolley cars on beaten silver paths,graves that rise up out of soft earth in the rain,shops that sell black mammy dollsholding white babies.

The silver paths represent avarice, while the black mammy dolls holding white babies symbolize the way offensive race stereotypes still exist, and sell, in American society.

The reference to "tobacco brown bones" conjures up the images of the slaves bought and sold in their droves in New Orleans, when it was a major center of the slave trade. "Tobacco brown" refers to both the color of the slaves' skin and of the crop that many of them toiled long hours to pick.
Continuing the theme of slavery, the speaker tells us that she has a memory steeped in blood, which corresponds to the magic red rocks sold by the trinket vendor, and which threaten to destroy him. The vendor, blissfully unaware of the rocks' cultural significance for Native-Americans, is ignorant of the past whose remnants he sells to tourists as souvenirs. The speaker's blood-red memory, like the magic rocks, can also destroy, steeped as it is in the horrors of a troubled past marred by slavery and oppression.
https://frenchquarterbxb.com/2019/06/20/poet-laureate-joy-harjos-new-orleans/

One significant example of color imagery is in the juxtaposition of the image of "gold cities" with "shining streets / of beaten gold" that the Spanish conquistador, DeSoto, hoped to find with the image of the brown "earth towns" he really found, which were not golden at all. The color of brown is specifically mentioned in the third line, when the speaker says that while in New Orleans, she watches for "tobacco brown bones to come wandering / down" the street. She references this more obliquely in the final lines, which describe DeSoto dancing with a "woman as gold / as the river bottom," which would be, in fact, brown.
The stark contrast between what the explorer would have expected and what he would actually have encountered upon landing in the New World —shining golden versus earthen brown, respectively⁠—paints a vivid mental picture for the reader, showing us rather than simply telling us. However, it also points to the humanity of the people DeSoto conquered and their authentic reality versus his materialistic fantasy.