What does the speaker of the poem "Ode to a Nightingale" want to forget?

The speaker, listening to the beautiful song of the nightingale, wants to forget all the problems that go with human consciousness. Keats would like to fly away and be amid the beautiful flowers with the nightingale. He wants to forget about such situations as stress, disease, old age and despair. From his perspective, the nightingale does not ever experience anxiety about such human problems as:

The weariness, the fever, and the fret
Here, where men sit and hear each other groan;
Where palsy shakes a few, sad, last gray hairs,
Where youth grows pale, and spectre-thin, and dies

Although the speaker has mixed feelings about death—he says he is "half in love with easeful Death" and feels it would be lovely to die while listening to the intoxicating nightingale's song—he nevertheless contrasts the human consciousness of mortality to the nightingale's oblivion as it lives in the present moment. He calls it an "immortal" bird because it stays the same throughout history. It lives just as it did in Biblical days, singing the same sweet song without forethought about the future.
To become a nightingale represents, to Keats, leaving behind the pain that human consciousness brings.

Compare and contrast the types of igneous rocks.

There are two types of igneous rocks, which are classified as intrusive igneous rocks or extrusive igneous rocks. Both types of igneous rocks are formed from the solidification and cooling process of molten rock material. The rate at which these rocks cool and where this cooling takes place are defining distinctions between the types of rocks.
Intrusive igneous rocks are created through a crystallization process that occurs below the surface of the earth. As the rock cools beneath the surface of the Earth, large crystals form, which is a defining characteristic of intrusive igneous rocks.
Extrusive igneous rocks are created on the surface of the Earth. These rocks cool more quickly than intrusive igneous rocks, and the result is a rock that is made of smaller crystals.

What are four causes of the American Revolution and why?

I would suggest, in answering this question, that you consider that the road to the American Revolution was ultimately a long, gradually evolving process. The American colonists did not simply wake up one day and decide they no longer felt like being British subjects.
Ultimately, I would suggest that at the heart of the break with Britain was a shift in British colonial policy, shaped by the impact of the French and Indian War. Before the French and Indian War, Britain practiced a policy known as salutary neglect. There were mercantile laws on the books and certain expectations in play, but in practice, the difficulties of actually governing and administering the colonies across the Atlantic (given the technological limitations available) made the effort of strictly enforcing those laws not worth the costs accrued. With that in mind, traditional British policy towards its colonies was one of general autonomy. After the war with France, however, this calculus swiftly changed, and Britain began more strictly enforcing those mercantile laws and imposing taxes on its colonies, creating resentment and anger among colonists. This resentment can be seen displayed in the famous rallying cry, "no taxation without representation."
This change in policy was one of the most significant long-term driving factors of the American Revolution (and it particularly hurt the interests of the colonial merchant elites). At the same time, as turmoil and resistance began to build within the colonies, Britain responded with a show of force. Soldiers were sent to maintain law and order, which only further inflamed tensions. We can also point towards the so-called Intolerable Acts, which were passed in response to the Boston Tea Party, that only further rallied Colonial complaints of British tyranny and further resistance.
At the same time, we should be aware of the intellectual underpinnings of the American Revolution. Enlightenment principles are embedded deeply within the Revolution, and within post-Revolutionary politics, and these ideas had been circulating for decades within educated circles, both in Europe and in the Colonies. The circulation of this discourse certainly helped contribute to the Revolutionary Movement as it continued to evolve.
Finally, I would suggest you consider the actions and discourse of the Revolutionaries themselves, and the various ways in which they organized and advance their cause. They were very energetic, and as the years moved closer to the outbreak of the American Revolution, they became more and more radical in their ideology and intentions, a process which culminated in the calls for independence.

How did Hamlet find ways to make Claudius guilty about Hamlet Sr.'s death?

At the end of act 2, Hamlet declares that "the play's the thing / wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king." This refers to a play he plans to have performed in front of Claudius, in which the players will act out "something like the murder" of Hamlet's father. Hamlet hopes that Claudius will be made to feel so guilty and so "struck so to the soul" that he will then confess. Appropriately, Hamlet decides to call the play "The Mouse-trap."
In act 3, scene 2s, just before the play is about to begin, Hamlet instructs Horatio to observe Claudius. He says that if Claudius's "occulted guilt" does not "itself unkennel in one speech," then the ghost they have seen, and which told them that Claudius murdered the previous king, must be "a damned ghost." Thus Hamlet puts on this play not simply to make Claudius feel guilty, but to reassure himself that Claudius really is guilty.
Hamlet's plan seems to work. When in the play the murderer pours poison into the sleeping victim's ear, Claudius rises to leave. This is, of course, the same method he used to kill the previous king, Hamlet's father. As the king rises, startled, Hamlet comments, contemptuously, "What, frighted with false fire!" At this moment, the king's guilt is confirmed.

Why was the Iroquois League symbol a bundle of arrows together, not one individual arrow?

The five-arrow symbol represents the founding of the Iroquois League, or the Haudenosaunee Confederation, as it's also known, by the Peacemaker in 1142. As the symbol would suggest, the founding of the Confederation involved the coming together of five nations, each with its own distinct culture, language, and hunting grounds. According to tribal legend, the Peacemaker united the five nations into a single Confederacy because he believed they'd be much stronger together than if they remained separate. "United we stand, divided we fall," as the saying goes.
Haudenosaunee means "People of the Longhouse" and is often used in preference to the term "Iroquois," which is thought by many to have derogatory, colonialist connotations. Whichever term is used, the Confederacy originally consisted of the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca nations—one nation for each arrow of the Confederacy's symbol.
https://www.haudenosauneeconfederacy.com/symbols/

Who is the antagonist of A Step Toward Falling?

Both the structure and the themes of A Step Toward Falling work against identifying any one individual as either the protagonist or the antagonist. Author Carrie McGovern establishes a structure with two alternating narrators, Emily and Belinda; either one or both can be considered the protagonist. However, the themes that McGovern emphasizes show the moral gray areas of inaction as well as action. The boy who assaults Belinda is clearly an antagonist, but he does not end up being a main character. Emily and Lucas are established with negative characteristics because they failed to intervene in the attack. Their inaction does not make them antagonists, however, either to Belinda or to each other. An abstract opponent is perhaps the best way to characterize McGovern’s goals: bullying, violence, and apathy are among her numerous targets.

How do you explain the evolution of indentured servitude to hereditary slavery?

As is often the case, economic reasons lie at the center of this answer. In this answer, we will examine the evolution of indentured servitude to hereditary slavery in the British North American colonies. We can trace this story back to the earliest British colonial settlement in Jamestown, Virginia. The settlers of the Jamestown colony, after some early struggles, discovered that the colony was profitable, particularly through the growth of cash crops like tobacco. As the Jamestown colony grew and profitability was realized, the size of the colony began to expand.
With a goal of gaining wealth in the "New World," colonists would acquire land and begin to farm it (for our example we'll say for tobacco). How can you grow more wealthy through this? Well, theres a high demand for tobacco, so if a colonist were to grow tobacco and sell it, they would earn money. Now if you can grow even more tobacco, you can earn even more money. The problem encountered by these early planter colonists was the lack of labor that they faced. In order to grow the crops, you need people to work the land, especially as the land you are farming is growing larger. The initial way that this lack of labor was addressed was in the form of indentured servitude.
The "New World" provided opportunity for Englishmen. Going to the "New World" meant leaving behind the struggles of England for the chance to possibly gain land and wealth in the American colonies. The problem for many adventurous and willing Englishmen was that passage by boat to the Americas was quite expensive, and thus only those with some considerable wealth were able to get to the colonies. Indentured servitude sought to solve the problems faced by the colonial landowning farmers who needed workers and those Englishmen who wanted to leave England for the colonies but didn't have the money.
Through indentured servitude, poor Englishmen who wanted to go to the American colonies would have their passage paid for by a wealthier individual. An agreement would then be made in which the indentured servant would pay back the person who funded their journey by working for them, usually for four to seven years. In addition, the indentured servant would receive a place to sleep and some other basic necessities. An indentured servant would have some rights, but not the same freedoms as somebody who was not an indentured servant. It also provided them with an opportunity to get a foothold in the Americas. When the indentured servant had completed their work agreement, they often were granted some land and were able to start working on creating their own wealth.
As the colonies continued to grow, the demand for indentured servants increased. When demand for labor increases, the price of that labor also increases; thus, indentured servants started to become more expensive.
Let's take a look at a quick hypothetical example to better understand this point. If I want to go to the Americas from England as an indentured servant but there are not a lot of landowners who are looking to bring over an indentured servant, my options are limited. Additionally, I am not the only one who wants to go as an indentured servant, so if my terms are not suitable to the landowner, then he can simply attempt to negotiate with a different indentured servant for a better rate, and I don't get passage to the Americas. As the colony grew, so did the number of landowners, and the demand for indentured servants grew with them. Now if I don't agree on the terms with one landowner, I can seek out a different one. Additionally, there is a growing number of landowners searching for indentured servants and only a limited amount of indentured servants, so if they want to have an indentured servant, they need to have a better offer available, which likely means a lower term for how long the servant will work for them.
So with the growing demand for indentured servants and thus the growing price, landowners sought to find a different solution in order to keep their profits high. Additionally, many of the wealthy landowners felt a sense of threat from indentured servants, as they sometimes gained considerable wealth and power themselves after their term as an indentured servant was finished. In the mid 1600s, some colonies began to pass slave laws. These slave laws began to codify a system where African slaves brought to labor in the colonies would not be able to gain freedom and would have very few, if any, rights. For wealthy landowners, it became cheaper and safer to purchase African slaves to work their land rather than pay indentured servants. They would also not have to worry about the slaves gaining freedom after a certain amount of time as they did with indentured servants. This meant greater profits for landowners, and thus it made business sense to stop the use of indentured servants and instead import enslaved Africans to increase their wealth.
I would also argue that there is racial superiority at play in the expansion of hereditary slavery in the Americas as well. Ethnocentric Europeans of the time saw themselves as the pinnacle of society. They saw Africans of the time, who had different beliefs and values, as being inferior, primitive, and savage. Many Europeans felt that African and Native American societies needed to be assisted in developing into societies mirroring those in Europe. Thus they would not feel much guilt towards the enslavement and treatment of Africans, because they did not view them as equals.
In conclusion, the increasing cost of indentured servants combined with the low costs associated with African slavery helped to phase out the system of indentured servitude. When you factor in the ethnocentric beliefs of Europeans and their views of African societies at the time, it is clear to see how indentured servitude would be forgotten for hereditary slavery.
http://www.pbs.org/opb/historydetectives/feature/indentured-servants-in-the-us/

Which animals have a spine?

There are an estimated 8.7 million animal species on Earth, of which more than 90 percent lack spinal cords. Animals without spines are called invertebrates, while those with spines—including humans—are referred to as vertebrates.
The evolution of a spine in some animals is a relatively recent phenomenon, which arose in the Cambrian period about 500 million years ago.
Following is a partial list of vertebrate animals, or animals with spines:
Domestic cats
Domestic dogs
Giraffes
All elephant species
Zebras
All bear species, including the following:
Cinnamon bear, Ursus americanus cinnamomum

California grizzly bear, Ursus arctos californicu


All horses
All fish
All primates, including humans, monkeys gorillas, etc.
All amphibians and reptiles, including frogs, snakes, and lizards
All birds, including the following:
Little grebe, Tachybaptus ruficollis

Red-necked grebe, Podiceps grisegena

Northern pintail, Anas acuta

Ornate hawk eagle,Spizaetus ornatus

Green-winged teal, Anas crecca

Bearded vulture, Gypaetus barbatus

Bald eagle, Haliaeetus leucocephalus

Southern cassowary, Casuarius casuarius
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160812-why-we-have-a-spine-when-over-90-of-animals-dont

What's a "newsie"?

At the end of Chapter 12, "Merry-Go-Round," Sam Spade takes Wilmer Cook's two guns away from him while they are on the way to Caspar Gutman's suite in the Alexandria Hotel. Then in Chapter 13, "The Emperor's Gift," Spade gives the guns to Gutman as they enter and tells him:

"Here. You shouldn't let him run around with these. He'll get himself hurt. . . . A crippled newsie took them away from him, but I made him give them back."

Dashiell Hammett's novel The Maltese Falcon was first published in 1929. In those days newspapers were not sold out of machines as they are now. Many of the daily newspapers were sold on the sidewalks, especially at big intersections. Since papers sold for only five cents each, the men, usually called "newsies," had to work hard, often in fog, wind, and rain, to earn a living. They were typically men who were mentally or physically disabled. To embarrass and antagonize him, Spade is suggesting that Wilmer couldn't even cope with a physically disabled man who couldn't get any better work than selling newspapers for pennies at a time.
The other common ways of selling newspapers were in hotel lobbies, lobbies of office buildings, cigar stores, a few restaurants, ferry landings, and train stations. In all cases newspapers had to be bought from live persons. Some boys sold afternoon newspapers on busy streets after school let out. The Call-Bulletin, in which both Cairo and Spade saw the notices of the arrival of La Paloma, was an afternoon paper.

How does Skloot proceed with her research when it becomes clear that Sonny is not going to meet with her?

Rebecca Skloot begins the process of speaking with Henrietta Lacks’s surviving relatives with Lacks’s husband, Day. Their son, David Lacks, Jr., called “Sonny,” agrees on the telephone to meet her in Baltimore. After she arrives and checks into a hotel, her series of pager messages to David goes unanswered. While hoping and waiting he will call, Skloot does two things: she starts looking in the telephone book for people with the Lacks surname, and she rereads a 1976 article about the Lackses. Having only one land line, she hesitates to start randomly calling Lacks people in case Sonny is trying to reach her on that line. As she reads Michael Rogers’s article, she is stunned to realize that when he was in Baltimore, he had proceeded in the same way. His conclusion that “just about everyone knew Henrietta” encourages her to start dialing. In addition, she reads another article, which mentions Henrietta’s address and the neighborhood where she lived, Turner Station. This prompts Skloot to head for Turner Station.
https://books.google.com/books?id=GFevO-QxQDgC&source=gbs_navlinks_s

Why is Macbeth portrayed as a tyrant?

For plot purposes, Macbeth has to become a terrible tyrant. There is no psychological reason why he should become so tyrannical just because he killed Duncan, or because he had Banquo killed, or because he had dealings with the witches. He could have become a good king and capable ruler, which was probably exactly what he intended. He certainly seems to have those benign capabilities when the play opens. Claudius in Hamlet is a villain and a usurper, but he seems to be a wise and popular monarch. The reason Shakespeare had to emphasize Macbeth's tyranny was to make it plausible that the English king, at great expense, would authorize the raising of what in those days was a enormous army of ten-thousand men to invade Scotland. Otherwise, the English king would not have felt morally justified in interfering in Scottish politics.
Malcolm and Macduff are not this king's friends or favorites. Macbeth has been lawfully elected king of Scotland, and it would be impossible for Malcolm to ask the English king for military assistance just because Malcolm was next in the line of succession. The English king has no way of knowing that Malcolm was not responsible for Duncan's murder. Even if the king had believed Malcolm's story, those assassinations and coups were common in Scotland and none of his business. He had nothing to gain by trying to place Malcolm on the Scottish throne, and of course there was no assurance that his army would have been victorious. He could be making a bitter enemy of Macbeth and even risking a counter-invasion.
Another reason why, for plot purposes, Macbeth had to be depicted and reported as tyrannical was to make it plausible that so many people would flee Scotland to join the ranks of the English army. Evidently, those who were fleeing were not only many of the important thanes, but liegemen of those thanes and ordinary commoners as well. This flight of so many people was creating additional havoc in Scotland. Crops were being neglected and animals untended. A state of anarchy was emerging. If economic hardships developed in that country, it could affect English imports and exports and might also lead to a influx of refugees who could commit thefts, robberies, burglaries, assaults, and murders, and who could become a permanent threat and liability to the English people and their government.
Thus, the unprecedented crisis in Scotland would give the English king a practical motive for attempting to overthrow the great tyrant Macbeth, and Macbeth's tyranny would lead to the swelling of the ranks of the English army, which could make the difference in the military balance. Macbeth himself says in Act V, Scene 5:
Were they not forced with those that should be ours,
We might have met them dareful, beard to beard,
And beat them backward home.

Why is Christopher Columbus important to history?

Christopher Columbus has vital historical importance as the person who initiated the European colonization of North and South America. After receiving rejections of financing from Portugal, Genoa, Venice, and England, Columbus finally received sponsorship from Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain. Columbus's intention was to sail westward to reach Asia, not realizing that the continents of North and South America were in the way.
He never actually landed on mainland North America. In all, he made four voyages to the New World. The first voyage—with three ships: the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria—landed in 1492 on an island in the Bahamas that Columbus named San Salvador. He then went on to explore part of the coastlines of what is now Cuba and the Dominican Republic. On subsequent voyages, Columbus visited more islands in the Caribbean and also discovered mainland South America, landing at the mouth of the Orinoco River in Venezuela.
After Columbus's initial discoveries, the nations of England, France, Portugal, and the Netherlands all sailed westward to stake their claims to the New World. Trading and settlement efforts began which eventually resulted in the colonization of North and South America. Columbus has been revered for centuries as the discoverer and pioneer of the New World, but modern historians also point out his brutality in the widespread enslavement, torture, and massacre of Native Americans as well as his harsh treatment of Spanish colonists under his governorship.
https://www.biography.com/explorer/christopher-columbus

What are examples of pathos in Into the Wild?

In using pathos, an author appeals to the emotions of the reader. To be convincing, a written work must use both pathos and logos. Logos is an appeal to logic: it persuades through use of facts, statistics, and other details. In Into the Wild, Krakauer effectively uses both pathos and logos, but here we will focus solely on pathos.
Krakauer primarily uses pathos to urge us to sympathize with McCandless. After Krakauer wrote the original article about Chris that led to his book, many readers were convinced Chris was foolish, impulsive, and possibly suicidal. In this book, Krakauer instead paints a much more positive picture of his subject as an idealist whose plans went awry.
One way Krakauer builds pathos is by showing how the young, handsome, and charismatic Chris befriended people who were older or perhaps a little odd. He touched lives by living in simplicity and reaching out to people who struck him as authentic. One such friendship was with the eighty-year-old Ron Franz, and Franz would later speak about how close he felt to Chris:

“Even when he was sleeping, I was happy just knowing he was there.” At one point Franz dared to make a special request of McCandless. “My mother was an only child,” he explains. “So was my father. And I was their only child. Now that my own boy’s dead, I’m the end of the line. When I’m gone, my family will be finished, gone forever. So I asked Alex if I could adopt him, if he would be my grandson.”

This request touches our hearts because it shows how deeply Franz felt affection for McCandless and speaks to the influence the young man had on the people he met. We feel good about McCandless because of this story.
Krakauer handles McCandless's death with pathos, showing how brave and happy Chris looked and acted even in his last days. As we can see, from the passage quoted at length below, the many details Krakauer includes touch our emotions and build our sympathy for him:

McCandless penned a brief adios: “I HAVE HAD A HAPPY LIFE AND THANK THE LORD. GOODBYE AND MAY GOD BLESS ALL!” Then he crawled into the sleeping bag his mother had sewn for him and slipped into unconsciousness. . . . One of his last acts was to take a picture of himself, standing near the bus under the high Alaska sky, one hand holding his final note toward the camera lens, the other raised in a brave, beatific farewell. His face is horribly emaciated, almost skeletal. But if he pitied himself in those last difficult hours— because he was so young, because he was alone, because his body had betrayed him and his will had let him down—it’s not apparent from the photograph. He is smiling in the picture, and there is no mistaking the look in his eyes: Chris McCandless was at peace, serene as a monk gone to God.

One way in which setting is related to theme in "The Garden Party."

Katherine Mansfield closely ties setting to theme in “The Garden Party” as she highlights the sharp contrast between the upper and lower classes.
Mansfield describes the elaborate party plans for an afternoon of extravagance. The family speaks of trivial things such as hats, sandwiches, and songs as their servants prepare for the arrival of the guests. Everything is in overabundance, and clearly the Sheridans can afford to overspend, as evidenced by the lavish decorations. They give no thought to the significance of money but just spread it around without care. For instance, Mrs. Sheridan purchases a surplus of lilies to decorate the garden. She carelessly remarks, “for once in my life I shall have enough canna lilies. The garden party will be a good excuse.” There is no actual need for that many flowers, but she purchased them simply because she wanted them and she had the means to do so.
Mrs. Sheridan and Jose sum up the upper-class mentality toward the lower class. As she sits in her bedroom surrounded by expensive items, Mrs. Sheridan reacts nonchalantly to the accident once she confirms it does not involve anyone she knows. Her first reaction to hearing of a man’s death is, “Not in the garden?” When Laura replies no, her mother is relieved and continues looking at her hat. Human life is unimportant to her, unless it directly affects someone she cares about—someone in her class. When Laura, horrified at the tragedy, tries to call off the party, Jose tells her “Nobody expects us to” stop the party. Mansfield clearly depicts how the upper class is unfeeling toward the lower class.
Laura is the go-between of the two worlds, the conscience. Only she is affected by the tragedy, and only she suggests they bring food to the widow and children. Therefore, only she can actually make that journey—the others are too uninterested to bother.
The depiction of the widow’s house is a shocking opposite of Laura’s house. This is a real home, where people care for one another and real emotions show. The cottages in this neighborhood are described as an “eyesore, and they had no right to be in that neighbourhood at all.” In fact, the narrator describes the smoke coming from chimneys as “poverty-stricken.” Here, people speak “revolting language,” but their emotions are more genuine than those in Laura’s neighborhood. Laura is immediately welcomed into the “wretched little low kitchen” to pay her respects. She is quickly ushered into the bedroom by Em’s sister, who “fondly” shows her the body who “looks a picture.” The young man is described as peaceful; although he has died, he is surrounded by the ones he loves. This poverty-stricken environment is a true home, in sharp contrast to the feigned caring of the wealthy household.

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

The character of Mariam in A Thousand Splendid Suns is both insecure and misguided. Her mother gave her a negative impression of herself and her ability to succeed in life, and those feelings were subsequently reinforced by others. She is undervalued by an abusive and domineering husband, and her overwhelming sense of discontent leads her to look for happiness outside herself. She believes her baby will make her happy, and when she miscarries, she believes that unhappiness is what she deserves.
Mary Carson in The Thorn Birds, on the other hand, demonstrates a clear sense of entitlement. Whereas Mariam believes she deserves unhappiness, Mary believes she deserves the best of everything and whatever she wants – and she makes it her mission to get it. Mary controls people, whereas Mariam allows herself to be controlled, both by others and by her insecurities. Mary is domineering and aggressive, willing to stop at virtually nothing to achieve her goals. She makes things happen; Mariam, on the other hand, allows things to happen to her. Mary takes action to control the course of her life, albeit in self-serving ways. Mariam resorts to murder when she finally takes action. After a life of abuse and subjugation, she spins out of control.

What is Brinker Hadley's Role?

Brinker Hadley is portrayed as a responsible, law-abiding student, who serves as Finny's foil in the novel. Unlike the spontaneous, carefree Finny, Brinker is one of Devon's top students who has an affinity for order and structure and is depicted as the rigid, obedient leader of his class.
Initially, Brinker is Finny's antithesis, and his character coincides with Devon's winter session. Brinker takes life very seriously, is an avid supporter of the war effort, and encourages Gene to enlist early in the army. Unlike Finny—who lives in a fantasy world and believes that the war does not exist—Brinker accepts the facts of life and attempts to get to the bottom of Finny's injury by investigating the accident.
Despite all of Brinker's patriotic enthusiasm and passion for joining the war, he quickly becomes disillusioned with the idea of fighting and ends up enlisting in the Coast Guard to avoid entering the conflict. Brinker's decision to abandon his earlier ideals depicts his growth and maturity, which are prominent themes explored in the novel.
Overall, Brinker Hadley's character serves as Finny's foil and his transformation into a jaded, cynical adolescent corresponds to the other characters' maturation and growth.

Brinker Hadley is “the hub of the class,” a student politician who busies himself with official duties as a class officer and a member of most school clubs and committees. An arrogant, self-appointed authority, Brinker places himself at the center of every discussion with his peers and consistently interjects himself into their affairs. Brinker projects a careless, ironic disregard for the war that belies his struggle to deal with his fear of combat. He grows increasingly bitter throughout the novel.

What is the significance of the summer session?

I think that the significance of the summer session is best viewed symbolically in contrast to the winter session. The summer session is a much slower pace of things for the boys on the Devon campus. They are freer to be kids because there is less oversight on their behavior and fewer time commitments in terms of their schedule. They get to play during the summer session, and I think the summer session can be used to represent things like innocence, peace, and youth. The war is happening, but it is such a distant concern that characters are even able to make comments about how there isn't actually a war. The winter session stands out in stark contrast. It could represent rules and authority. With school in full session and friends going off to the war and returning with a full mental breakdown, the winter session very quickly turns the boys from kids to adults.
The summer session is also important in terms of character building. Through the summer session, Knowles is able to show readers exactly how carefree, gifted, and altruistic Finny really is. That characterization is key to understanding how warped Gene is internally. Gene is our narrator, yet we have a really hard time fully liking him because of his growing jealousy and dislike of Finny. The summer session is critical to readers because it sets up that friendship base that falls apart so completely by the story's conclusion.

Written in the retrospective point of view with Gene Forrester narrating the events of his final year at Devon School, the novel is structured primarily as a flashback that develops chronologically from the summer of 1942 through the spring of 1943. Throughout the novel, Devon and the atmosphere at the school are often described in relation to the changing seasons. The motif enhances the setting and establishes the passage of time, but more significantly, it contributes to thematic development. The changing seasons parallel Gene and Finny’s emotional states and the encroachment of World War II into their lives and the lives of their classmates. In drawing these literary parallels, John Knowles unifies the novel and enhances the drama and the poignancy of its primary theme: the destruction of innocence. In the novel’s chronology of seasons, summer is the season of innocence, the brief, transitory time at Devon that precedes the unrelenting loss of illusion.
In the summer of 1942, World War II is raging in Europe and the Pacific, but under the “open New Hampshire sky,” Devon is a refuge of peace and natural beauty. Gene describes summer at Devon in vivid detail, recalling the “healthy green turf” of the playing fields “brushed with dew” and the “faint green haze hanging above the grass, shot through with the twilight sun.” He remembers hearing “the cricket noises and the bird cries of dusk.” The woods beyond the playing fields and Devon’s two rivers underscore the presence of nature at the school and serve to emphasize Devon’s tranquil separation from the war and from the world at large.
The atmosphere at Devon during the Summer Session is careless and undisciplined; with most of the students and the regular faculty away, the pace is slower, and the rules are rarely enforced. Summer is a time for swimming in the pristine Devon River and playing games. Leper collects snails, and Gene and Finny make an illicit overnight bicycle trip to the beach. Gene recalls, “We spent that summer in complete selfishness, I’m happy to say. The people in the world who could be selfish in the summer of 1942 were a small band, and I’m glad we took advantage of it.” Central Europe is being bombed, but the devastation of war seems unreal to the boys at Devon. “Our place here was too fair for us to accept something like that,” Gene remembers. Throughout the summer, the reality of war is pushed aside, and the illusion of peace prevails.
Although Gene and Finny generally ignore World War II as the Summer Session continues, they think of the war from time to time as they go about their daily activities. They play “blitzball,” a game Finny invents that is named for the German “blitzkrieg,” and Finny acknowledges the bombing of Central Europe in a conversation with Mr. Patch-Withers. Finny’s discussion of the war, however, is offered only as a nonsensical explanation for his having worn a pink shirt to the Headmaster’s Tea. The war does not become real to Gene and Finny until the following spring when they realize how completely it has destroyed Leper Lepellier’s mind and spirit.
During the summer of 1942, Gene and Finny could not have imagined Leper’s ultimate destruction, nor could they have imagined Gene’s betrayal and Finny’s death. The innocence of youth was yet to be shattered by the reality of war and by the knowledge of the human impulse to strike out blindly in ignorance, fear, and hatred. As the season draws to a close, Finny is irreparably damaged, and Gene has begun his painful psychological struggle with shame, guilt, fear, and remorse. Summer and all that it suggests about youth and innocence ends “in the last long rays of daylight at the tree, when Phineas fell.” Remembering Gene, Finny, and their “gypsy band” as they had been in Devon's beautiful summer of 1942 makes their loss of innocence tragic.

Why are the assassinations of Presidents Garfield and McKinley not treated the same as those of Lincoln and Kennedy?

Presidents Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy were the first and last presidents to be assassinated, and this is one reason why they are better remembered. This is not the only reason, however. Historians generally regard their presidencies as more important than those of James Garfield and William McKinley.
Lincoln is loved and remembered for overcoming his humble background and rising to the presidency. He led the country through the Civil War—the greatest crisis in its history. He set the slaves free, too. Lincoln always tried to do the right thing: he was a man of integrity. His assassination—the first presidential assassination in American history—was a sad and shocking event.
Kennedy is well remembered for his youth, charm, and the fact that he was the first and only "modern" president to be assassinated. His death marked the of the glorious era of Camelot. Another reason why is is so well remembered is the speculation over the motives of his assassin: Lee Harvey Oswald. Some believe believe Kennedy's murder was the result of a conspiracy. Also, his last moments were captured on film and that has given Americans an indelible memory of that tragic event.

How could a Marxist critique be applied to the novel How the Steel Was Tempered?

The Russian author Nikolay Ostrovsky's (1904– 1936) 1936 novel (compiled from an earlier serialization), How the Steel Was Tempered, is an important contribution to the literary genre of the larger Socialist Realist movement. More than just a piece of fiction, it is designed to advance the greater cause of internationalism, democratic centralism, and militant revolution in the cause of working-class solidarity.
The novel tells the story of Pavel Korchagin, a Bolshevik soldier during the Russian Civil War, and his lover ,Tonia Toumanova. Their background and relationship closely parallel the theories of dialectical materialism and pre-revisionist Marxism.
Korchagin's lover, Toumanova, is not herself a member of the proletariat. Born into a family of wealthy means, Toumanova rejects the artificiality of class imposed by the bourgeois and ruling elite and treats all persons with an egalitarian mindset. In the book, this is juxtaposed against the attitudes of Toumanova's friends. The romantic union of Toumanova and Korchagin represents the subjugation and ultimate destruction of constructed class divisions and the exhortation of the greater cause of unity among the workers and peasants.

Find an entry in The Oxford Companion to Fairy Tales by Jack Zipes that could be useful in a "Cinderella" research paper. Create a works cited page that includes each chosen entry. Write an annotated bibliography for the chosen entry.

You did not specify what the "Cinderella" research paper entails or the guidelines for the assignment, so when researching and choosing a useful entry, I focused on the popular fairy tale with its various versions in mind. Below is the citation in MLA style, as well as material for an annotated bibliography. Keep in mind, again, I am not sure what you are asked to do in this research paper, so I took a general approach to the material.

Goldberg, Harriet. “Cinderella.” The Oxford Companion to Fairy Tales, edited by Jack Zipes, Second edition, Oxford University Press, 2015, pp. 110-113.

In this entry, Harriet Goldberg begins by telling us a bit about the first European literary appearance of the Cinderella fairy tale in the sixteenth century. She focuses mainly on its circulation in Europe but mentions that the story has been adapted and re-adapted across the world, from Africa, to China, to Australia, to Japan. The reason for this is that the story has universal appeal and common features, such as that it is easily segmented, it includes a magical helper, it explores social mobility through marriage, and it features an identity test such as Cinderella’s lost slipper. Goldberg emphasizes that there have been many versions (literary, dramatic, musical, poetic, cinematic) of the fairy tale but that it remains a stable story and that scholars are still working on understanding it fully.
You might consider adding to this by tailoring it to your assignment guidelines and researching other entries in the encyclopedia. You can use this example as a guide.

How did World War I and its aftermath affect freedom and civil liberties in the United States? For whom?

World War I and its aftermath greatly curtailed civil liberties in the United States, with everyday citizens and dissidents who were not in support of the war being most greatly affected. The main vein of civil liberties to be diminished dealt with First Amendment rights, with freedom of speech and freedom of the press being reduced as a result of the war. President Woodrow Wilson attempted to suppress opposition and dissent among American citizens, as the American government did not want anything to hamper victory over the Central Powers.
Legislation and court cases weakening civil liberties included the Espionage Act, which was appealed and eventually wound up in the Supreme Court as Schenck v. United States. In the case, Schenck was convicted of attempting to obstruct the draft because he distributed pamphlets which denounced and discouraged the draft. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction, with the Court citing the "clear and present danger" of a crime being committed that would negatively affect national security as the basis for the decision.
The Trading with the Enemy Act and Sedition Act were two pieces of legislation enacted to severely quash any anti-war sentiment. The Trading with the Enemy Act affected businesses and trade to a certain extent, but it affected individual freedoms by censoring materials that were imported from and exported to all foreign countries. An example of items censored under this act were Socialist mailings and pamphlets.
Under the Sedition Act, the government could imprison an individual for any “disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language” aimed at the government, governmental policies or positions, or even the American Flag. The Sedition Act was also appealed and wound up in the Supreme Court in the case Abrams v. United States. The Court upheld the law even though it was viewed by many as too broad and ambiguous in nature; essentially anything remotely non-supportive of the war effort could be construed as breaking the law.
Strassfeld, Robert N. "Espionage Act (1917) And Sedition Act (1918)." Major Acts of Congress, The Gale Group, 2004.

What were the values of pre-American colonists?

By pre-American, I assume you mean colonists prior to the founding of the United States of America. There was not one value held by all the colonists, but there are generalizations that we can make by region. Keep in mind that the following is just a brief and incomplete overview of the general values of the colonists as each colonist held his or her own values.
The New England colonies were largely settled by the Puritans. These religious dissenters from England hoped to make a religious utopia for themselves in the New World. For them, strict adherence to religious precepts and authority was paramount. Even though they came to North America to freely practice their own religion, the Puritans were not tolerant of other religious practices. The community was also an important aspect of Puritan values. Individualism was shunned and priority was given to the needs of the community overall with all working towards the common good. Doing work was seen as a way of glorifying God. Many leisure activities were typically forbidden, idleness was considered sinful, and attendance at church services was mandatory.
By contrast, the Middle Colonies were much more diverse than Puritan New England. Most of these colonists came to the region as individuals or as smaller family units. Many colonists there made a living carving small farms out of the wilderness or as fur trappers. As such, self-sufficiency became a common value. Pennsylvania was largely settled by Quakers, who founded the colony with religious freedom and tolerance as one of its main values. This was a value in the other Middle Colonies as well since they were settled by Europeans from many different backgrounds and religions.
The Southern Colonies remained largely rural and more sparsely settled than the colonies to the north and their values reflect this. There were often conflicting values between independent yeoman farmers from the backcountry and wealthier slave-owning plantation owners. The former championed populist values while the latter emphasized the role of the oligarchy.
http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/outlines/history-1994/the-colonial-period/the-southern-colonies.php

https://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1601-1700/who-were-the-puritans-11630087.html

https://www.radford.edu/~rvshelton/Middle.htm

In The Call of the Wild, how does Buck initially respond to the kidnappers when they try to tie him up with a rope? What can we infer about Buck’s nature from his initial response?

Initially, Buck's response to the dognappers is one of quiet acceptance. But that's because he doesn't yet know he's being stolen. He instinctively trusts Manuel, and so has no reason to think that he's up to no good. So when Manuel places the rope around his neck, he accepts it with quiet dignity. As we can see from his behavior, Buck may be a big, strong dog, but he's also quite trusting.
However, when Manuel hands the rope to a stranger, Buck knows there's something up. Now he starts growling menacingly. When the stranger begins tightening the rope Buck springs right at the man, who flings Buck over his back, pulling the rope ever tighter until the poor dog eventually passes out. The next thing he knows, Buck is in a baggage car, jolting from side to side as the locomotive on which he's traveling makes its way up to the wilds of Alaska.

How do Jim and Huck escape after their raft breaks loose and floats away?

In the classic novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, Huck journeys down the Mississippi River with an escaped slave named Jim. Five days after they pass St. Louis, Missouri, they encounter a terrible storm bursting with thunder and lightning. In the flashes of lightning, Huck notices a steamboat that has run onto a rock. He persuades Jim to go over to it and explore, thinking that there might be something aboard worth pilfering. They tie their raft to the wrecked ship, and Huck goes to investigate voices that he hears.
It turns out that three men are in a stateroom. Two of them have tied up the third and are threatening to kill him. When Huck returns to Jim, he finds out that the raft has broken loose, and he decides to find the skiff that the men came in. For a moment it looks as if two of the men will escape in the skiff, but then they go back inside. Huck and Jim get in the skiff, and Huck cuts the line attaching it to the steamboat. They float downriver without using the oars until they are safely away. Then Jim takes the oars, and they search for their raft. When they find the errant raft, they hoist the skiff onto it. Eventually they sink the skiff and continue their journey on the raft.

In chapters 12 and 13, Huck and Jim discover a damaged steamboat that is slowly sinking. Curious, Huck asks Jim to tether their raft to the boat. When Huck climbs aboard, he sees three robbers: one tied up, one wanting to kill the tied-up robber, and the third suggesting they leave the man there to sink with the steamboat.
When Huck rejoins Jim, he is informed that their raft has untied and drifted down the river due to the storm. Huck and Jim then decide to look for the robbers' skiff. They find it, jump inside, and cut the rope to escape before the robbers make their way to it. By doing so, they not only escape but make sure the robbers won't get away.
Huck and Jim speedily float downstream in the skiff. Moments later, they find their raft and leave the skiff behind. However, Huck feels guilty leaving the robbers in the sinking boat, and he decides to inform a nearby ferry night-watchman about the steamboat.

I don't understand how to compare and contrast two Martin Luther King Jr. speeches. I need to write a two-page essay on "I've Been to the Mountaintop" and "Remaining Awake."

Compare and contrast essays are ultimately about taking two separate topics (or, in this case, two speeches), looking at them both separately and in connection with each other, and then working to discern what they have in common and where they diverge. From that perspective, your first task is to read both speeches to see what they say and how they say it. At the same time, it would be useful to consider the larger context behind the two speeches—when they were written and what was going on in the world and in Martin Luther King's career—to try to get a deeper sense for how they might interact.
In this case, you're looking at two speeches, "I've Been to the Mountaintop" and "Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution." The first of these was given in 1968, at the end of Martin Luther King's life. The second is trickier, because King seems to have given several speeches entitled "Remaining Awake" over the years. To my knowledge, 1968's appears to have been the most famous of them, and I've assumed it's the version your question addressed, but be aware that there are other versions out there. Make sure you know which version you're looking at and when it was given, because that's where you find the context. In any case, the specific context matters. If you're looking specifically at the year 1968, you'll see that the Civil Rights Movement had split with the rise of a more radical generation of leaders—such as Malcolm X, who was himself assassinated in 1965. Additionally, there was a great deal of turmoil in the United States surrounding the Vietnam War.
With this in mind, it's time to consider the two speeches themselves, and here we need to consider what they have in common and what separates them. Ultimately, to write this essay, it's all about asking questions of the texts. Do they focus on the same theme? Is one more topical than the other? Are they concerned with different moral problems? Is the rhetoric different? Does King draw on different examples to illustrate his points? Is one more optimistic, or combative, or reflective in tone than the other? Asking these kinds of questions should give you some idea as to where the two speeches differ, providing one half of the assignment.
For the other half, you need to look at what the two speeches have in common. Keep in mind that they're from the same speaker, and that should give you certain expectations. Martin Luther King Jr. was a Christian minister by vocation, and his rhetoric was immersed in a moral vision. Also, remember that he advocated civil disobedience. Can you see any of these larger themes reflected in both speeches? Do you see similarities between their rhetoric, or in the examples King gives to illustrate his points, or in the concerns he expresses about the battles which need to be fought?
When looking for similarities and differences, you should ultimately be reading these speeches from two different perspectives. The first perspective is focused on the message: that is, what is King aiming to achieve with his speech? The second is focused on the rhetoric: how does he actually communicate this message to the audience?

Cite no less than three prominent examples of the repeating cycles that shape the plot of Invisible Man, and explain how Ralph Ellison uses this cyclical motif to articulate his broader critique.

One repeating cycle in Invisible Man is the narrator's habit of placing trust in powerful (usually white) authority figures, only to be let down or betrayed by them.
In the first chapter, the narrator recounts his high school graduation. After giving his valedictorian speech to his classmates, he is invited to present the same speech to a group of white leaders in the town. He believes that this is an opportunity to gain respect from these white leaders, and he thinks that they are giving him an opportunity to interact on a semi-equal level. These hopes are dashed when he appears and learns that the leaders are actually planning to make the narrator and a group of other black graduates engage in a "battle royale" for the amusement of the white leaders. The narrator is disillusioned both with the ploy and with his own internal desire to find the approval of these individuals by going along with their desires.
Once in college, the narrator gains the opportunity to act as a driver and guide for the white donors of the school. He views this as an opportunity to gain some respect and learn how to interact with white people. While driving a donor around the town, he accidentally takes the donor to the poor side of town and feels constrained to follow the donor's orders to keep moving forward. This leads to the donor interacting with an African American man that the school believes is a detrimental example to the race and to a visit to a local bar with a rough atmosphere. The narrator is sent away by the leader of the school, though he is given a set of letters that are to be given to specific donors in New York in order to help the narrator obtain a job. The narrator is grateful for this offer and heads out. Only after handing out all of the letters does the narrator learn that the college leader had lied to him and had actually made sure the narrator would not obtain a job. This leads the narrator to become disillusioned with the college leader and, by extension, the African American leaders of the time.
After some misadventures, the narrator defuses a near-riot with a powerful speech and is contacted by members of the Communist Party. They offer him the opportunity to give speeches in favor of Communism in order to better the condition of the poor. He believes that this will help remove some of the racism that exists in society while also helping to pull African-Americans out of poverty. However, he learns that the Communist Party is uninterested in dealing with racism and only wanted the narrator so they could have a black figurehead for political messaging. This leads the narrator to become disillusioned with self-professed white allies in the Communist and Socialist parties.
Ralph Ellison uses this motif to demonstrate that racism is pervasive in American society and that African-Americans will always fail to find themselves if they constantly look to the supporters of white America. The narrator has difficulty determining who he is and what he should do. During each cycle, he tries to find those answers through someone else. Each time he becomes disillusioned when he discovers that these answers are not helpful to him and that he has been used for selfish purposes. Ultimately, Ralph Ellison is trying to make the case that an individual must find his own answers if they are to have any real value.

How am I protected from religious discrimination?

If you are a citizen of the United States, the First Amendment to the Constitution says that everyone has the right to worship or not to worship as they please without fear or interference from the government. Constitutional guarantees only go so far. As to discrimination, there are two types: overt and covert. Covert is the discrimination that is institutionalized and while a person may be aware of it, the discrimination is subtle and nearly undetectable. Overt is open and public, whereby a person encounters hostile and discriminatory actions specifically due to their religious beliefs.
In the workplace, a person is protected from all types of discrimination, including religious, by federal and some state laws. Prohibited in the workplace by law is the intentional discrimination in benefits, pay, hiring, termination, job assignments, promotions, layoff, training, or other benefits accrued by being an employee of a company. Although you may be protected by the law, employees have to follow a process and procedure which begins with filing a complaint with the employer. If this does not solve the problem, an employee may file a complaint with state and federal government labor organizations.
Religious discrimination should be treated no different from other forms. However, because of the nature of religion and the number of different religious beliefs, religious discrimination remains hard to end.
https://www.aclu.org/other/your-right-religious-freedom

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/discrimination/discrimination-because-of-race-religion-or-belief/discrimination-because-of-religion-or-belief/

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm

What did Jane find unusual about the third story?

When Mrs Fairfax shows Jane up to the third story of Thornfield Hall, Jane observes that many pieces of furniture are of older fashions, as if they had been removed to the third story once they were no longer needed lower down, which gave it a sense of being "a shrine of memory." The floor was gloomy and the rooms dark, and the hangings looked "strange" in such a way that Jane did not feel inclined to spend much time up there. Essentially, the third story had a dark and vaguely unsettling aspect, such that Jane opines to Mrs Fairfax that the third story would be were the Hall's ghost lived, if there was one. The front and back rooms of the story were even separated by a corridor whose doors were all shut as if "in some Bluebeard's castle."
Already feeling unsettled, then, Jane is very surprised to hear what she believes to be a "curious laugh." However, Mrs Fairfax assures her that it is only one of the servants.

Why did Kit live with her grandfather in Barbados?

Kit Tyler, the protagonist of The Witch of Blackbird Pond, begins her journey with the passage from Barbados to Wethersfield in Connecticut Colony. Kit has grown up on the island of Barbados, where she lived with her grandfather. Kit's father is originally from Barbados, but is sent to school in England. In England he meets Kit's mother and returns with her to Barbados. The two marry and have Kit, but they drown in a shipwreck near Antigua when Kit is very young—young enough that Kit does not remember them. With her parents gone, Kit is raised by her grandfather, who has lived in Barbados for some time as an aristocrat of England. Kit grows up in the lap of luxury, and she has a wonderful relationship with her grandfather and loves her life in Barbados. After he dies, she is forced to leave Barbados and come and live with her Aunt Rachel and the Wood family in Connecticut Colony, because they are the only people that remain of Kit's family.

Which characters in the story Miss Tempy's Watchers are round, flat, dynamic, or static?

There are only three characters in Sarah Orne Jowett's short story "Miss Tempy's Watchers," and they are Temperance Dent (Miss Tempy) and her two longtime friends, Mrs. Crowe and Sarah Ann Binson.
Miss Tempy is a static character whose characterization is somewhat flat. She does not grow and change over the course of the story, either in reality (because she is deceased) or in her friends' recollections of her. Her personality is defined by gentleness, kindness, and generosity, which is confirmed by each anecdote her friends share. There are no complexities to Miss Tempy's character: she was simply a good woman who was well-loved by her community.
Mrs. Crowe is a dynamic character whose characterization is quite round. She changes over the course of the story, letting down her guard and revealing her faults and fears, which show her to be a complex person. She appears friendly to others in the community, and holds high social status due to her wealth, but she admits that she is not as good or kind as people imagine she is:

"It ain't so easy for me to give as it is for some," she said simply, but with an effort which was made possible only by the occasion. "I should like to say, while Tempy is laying here yet in her own house, that she has been a constant lesson to me. Folks are too kind, and shame me with thanks for what I do. I ain't such a generous woman as poor Tempy was, for all she had nothin' to do with, as one may say."

Mrs. Crowe is emboldened by the intimate circumstances of the wake to confess that she is not the person she wishes she was. She confides to Sarah Ann that she is "humbled to the dust" by Tempy's example, and will strive to be more like her henceforth. Mrs. Crowe and Sarah Ann come from different sides of their small community, and Mrs. Crowe's shy admission does much to bridge the divide between them:

Sarah Binson was much moved at this confession, and was even pained and touched by the unexpected humility.

Mrs. Crowe must also face up to her fear of death when she and Sarah Ann go upstairs to look in on Miss Tempy's body where it lies in repose. She finds viewing the body very difficult, but she goes through with it nevertheless, and afterwards, is able to speak about death and Miss Tempy's dying much more freely than she was at first. When the story opens, Mrs. Crowe says:

"It is strange to set here without her, but I can't make it clear that she has gone. I feel as if she had got easy and dropped off to sleep, and I'm more scared about waking her up than knowing any other feeling."

After viewing Miss Tempy's body, Mrs. Crowe is able to accept her friend's death, and to remark that "Tempy aged all of a sudden," and there were indications of her declining health for a few years before her passing. She is able to speak about Tempy in the past tense, and she feels a kinship with Sarah Ann for having shared that difficult moment with her.
Sarah Ann Binson is less dynamic than Mrs. Crowe, for the changes within her are subtler, but she too is a very round character. While her personality is described as "sharp and anxious" and her life seems hard-driven and unglamorous, she is actually a kind person who finds great happiness in her lot:

However pleasureless her life appeared to outward view, it was brimful of pleasure to herself.

Sarah Ann is at first inclined to regard Mrs. Crowe with a bit of amusement, occasioned by the social distance between them and their overall lack of familiarity with each other. However, she comes to trust the other woman and to feel affection towards her as Mrs. Crowe reveals her vulnerabilities. The barriers of status and public personas break down as the women keep watch over their deceased friend, and Sarah Ann learns that Mrs. Crowe is a rather lonely person who hopes to become a better version of herself. Sarah Ann is prickly, but she relaxes her judgement of Mrs. Crowe and works in their conversation to bring the two of them closer. At an awkward moment when a touchy subject has arisen, Sarah Ann tactfully moves the conversation along:

. . . and with this modest avowal the critical moment passed when there might have been an improper discussion.

Later, when the women go upstairs to look in on Miss Tempy's body, Sarah Ann pities Mrs. Crowe's nervousness:

Mrs. Crowe gave a little sigh, and Sister Binson’s quick sympathies were stirred toward this other old friend . . . like the comforter she truly was.

Although Sarah Ann does not need to confess any particular faults, as Mrs. Crowe does, she also grows in the story, by allowing this mutual friend of Miss Tempy's into her heart. By the time the sun rises the following morning, the two women are good friends.

In the poem "A Note" by Michael Deragon, who is the speaker and audience, and what is the rhetorical situation?

This is an interesting modern poem which is very much open to interpretation. The nature of the speaker and the audience are both fairly straightforward—the speaker does not identify himself as such, but he is presumably the lover of the person the poem addresses ("you," "your"). The speaker describes his love for this person as "a rocket."
The beloved in the poem is also the poem's audience —the poem's point of view suggests that it is addressed to this person alone, given the use of the second-person perspective (although of course, it has found another audience in us, the readers). We can assume that the beloved is an older person—presumably, members of an older couple are the subjects of the poem. Phrases such as "your rickety old heart" and the description of the beloved's hand as "spiny" suggest that the beloved is dying; while the cause of death is unclear, I think "this wounded red room" is metaphorical. Rather than there being physical wounds present, the room has been metaphorically "wounded" by what has been happening in it: this person's slow death.
The rhetorical situation in the poem, then, seems to be the beloved's last moments. The speaker is unable to speak, his throat being "dead stuffed" by the truth of what is happening. Still, he throws himself onto his beloved in order to hear the person's heart; he wants to forget that the pair has "already found the end of us" by reminding his beloved that they are "my love," as if there were still time left for them.

What were the reforms made by William Taft during his administration?

William Taft, following on the heels of the progressive reform president Theodore Roosevelt, continued into the Taft administration many of the reforms proposed by Roosevelt. It is fair to say Roosevelt paved the way for progressive change, and Taft was quick to seize momentum in the Congress for reform. Differing from Roosevelt and probably why Taft does not earn the same acclaim as Roosevelt for reform, Taft's focus was directed at administrative aspects, as opposed to Roosevelt's broad political reform agenda. Reform movements often start with visionary leadership and then give way to the pragmatic implementation of the desired reform outcome. This in no way disparages the administrator from the visionary. Without both reform remains an elusive ideal. While Roosevelt earned his reputation for his attacks on monopolies through anti-trust regulations and was nicknamed the Great Trust-Buster, the Taft administration prosecuted 99 cases of trust violations—many more than that under Roosevelt.
Taft's main thrust was in domestic affairs to shore up the economy. Taft was an executive at heart and attacked with gusto technical issues like tariffs. A special Congress convened during the early part of the Taft administration to address issues related to tariffs and to reduce the impact of tariffs through lower fees. He made changes reorganizing the government that added civil service protection to postal workers. Taft's single most heralded legislation accomplishment was when he signed the Mann-Elkins Act of 1910, which had two main effects. The first was authorized the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to establish and set rail rates. The second was the ICC's role expanded to cover telecommunications. Some historians credit passage of the act to fostering expansion of telecommunications across the country, as for the first time there was a clear set of rules and authority for settling disputes in the industry.
There are many other technical reforms Taft made through the continuing expansion of the administrative rule and authority. Taft found the execution of the law through the regulatory agencies much less of an impediment to reform than going through the political machinations of Congress.
https://millercenter.org/president/taft/domestic-affairs

https://www.ushistory.org/us/43e.asp

https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/presidents/william-howard-taft/

“Battle Royal” is constructed on the phenomenon of a spectacle. Why did Ellison construct the story this way? What notions of race does he want the reader to draw from the spectacle?

A spectacle can be defined as "something exhibited to view as unusual, notable, or entertaining." A spectacle also emphasizes the need to be an eye-catching or dramatic public display. Readers can't know for sure why Ellison decided to construct this particular event this way, but I do think a major goal of his was to make the Battle Royal scene as viscerally repulsive to readers as possible. The entire narrative sequence is a spectacle because it is presenting to readers events that are quite eye-catching and unusual. Additionally, those events are intended to be an entertaining public display to the white men attending. Different readers are likely to draw different "notions of race" from this story, but I think one message that is being shown to readers is how the rich white men believe that everyone is subservient to them. This is illustrated through their racism against the black boys and their sexism against the naked woman. Both the boys and the women are completely humiliated and taken advantage of for the sheer entertainment of the white audience members. The boys are forced to fight each other, and the woman is forced to dance naked before the men while fending off their drunken groping.

Why is it important for teachers to know about high-quality children's literature? How will this impact teacher's ability to plan and deliver standards-aligned instruction?

Part of being a teacher is "selling the content" to your students. Merely assigning them something to read is not enough to capture their hearts and minds. Having a strong foundation in young adult literature enables a teacher to select texts that will not only meet standards, but will engage and enthrall kids in the process. For example, knowing which text to use to teach character development, conflict, theme, etc. will make lesson planning so much easier and keep kids on task and focused, thus reducing classroom management issues. Additionally, students can tell when you believe in your "product." When you take them to the media center for book check out and know just which book will hook a kid, and they trust you and read it and can't wait to tell you two days later that they finished it and want to read another, that feeling can't be beat. So many students go home to poverty, domestic violence, substance abuse, divorce, etc., when they are recommended a novel to read by their teacher that matches their exact situation, they don't feel so alone anymore. They feel validated and understood, something every child deserves.

As teachers, we need to be aware of high quality literature. This knowledge makes our lessons more real world and directed to our class' needs. Pulling real world texts into a lesson will create a truer scenario for students. The old standards books such as "Blueberries for Sal" can help teach a topic but it is also helpful to stay current. Our classes are filled with many nationalities and belief systems; tapping in to those through current, good children's literature makes our lesson more meaningful.

Taking the time to research and plan to use a book that aligns with the current standards being taught accomplishes two things. First, a lesson is always better with real world literature. Second, by aligning it with the standard that must be taught, you can go outside the curriculum and bring in a different perspective. Students always react well to real world texts. Engaged students means learning is taking place!

As a matter of necessity, all teachers should be knowledgeable about high-quality children’s literature.
Literacy is a foundational skill that aids in the development of critical thinking and analysis, two cognitive processes that are required in all fields of study and facets of life. Therefore, it is important for teachers as the education-purveyors of society to promote literacy in their classrooms.
One of the key foundations for encouraging literacy is engaging students’ interests. A student who is engaged will be more focused on a learning task. To engage students in reading, then, requires providing access to texts that students will like based on their interests. However, the abundance of media available is not equal in terms of quality. Students might enjoy lower-quality, lower-skill-level texts if they deal with an “interesting” subject. To truly improve students’ literacy, teachers need to find literature that fits at the intersection between engaging and challenging.
This can also help with standards based instruction. A teacher who is relatively limited in his or her knowledge of available literature will be less likely to select the most appropriate resources to use in the classroom. For example, one of the high school English-Language Arts standards asks students to trace the development of theme across the course of a text. While this standard can be used with any number of accompanying texts, the best fit would be a lengthy work that has multiple themes from which students could choose.
Besides this, teachers should always be equipped to recommend books to students. With so few students continuing to read for entertainment beyond elementary or middle school, it is crucial for teachers to be resources for their students.

What is the irony in the story about the miner and the emerald?

The old man comes to Santiago because it is the old man's destiny to help guide people who are trying to realize their destinies. The old man tells the story of the miner who believed it was his destiny to find an emerald. He searched and searched for five years for his emerald in a riverbed. To help him achieve his destiny, the old man disguises himself as a stone:

Since the miner had sacrificed everything to his destiny, the old man decided to become involved. He transformed himself into a stone that rolled up to the miner's foot. The miner, with all the anger and frustration of his five fruitless years, picked up the stone and threw it aside. But he had thrown it with such force that it broke the stone it fell upon, and there, embedded in the broken stone, was the most beautiful emerald in the world.

Situational irony is when something happens that is opposite of what we expect. The old man expected the miner to find his emerald and thus to achieve his destiny, but just as the miner had it in his hand, he threw it away.
The novel moves on, so we don't know if the miner saw the emerald as it broke open to reveal itself, but the irony is that he was ready to give up in anger just as he was on the point of fulfillment of his dream.

What is the meaning of the territorial trap and its geographical assumptions?

The territorial trap is geographical fallacy that misinterprets the idea of nations and their development. The main issue with it is that it takes a far too simplistic viewpoint of how nations develop and are defined.
One of the main assumptions is that national borders and boundaries are physical and defined. Of course, looking at maps and nations in modern times lends an individual to that belief, because most nations are very rigidly defined. However, historically, nations could lay claim to land "as far as the eye could see" or put fluid stipulations on it such as "a day's journey on horseback in each direction." The borders or nations have only recently been rigid and well-defined.
Another assumption is that multiple nations cannot exist in the same space, which is certainly far from the truth. Many nations currently fight over the same land and are battling for dominance—though each individually is still a separate nation.
Finally, the fallacy assumes that borders do not change and nations are fixed in time the way they are. This is incredibly false. Take a look at the United States through history. It has spread West, taken over the breadth of the American continent, and then continued expanding with the additions of Alaska and Hawaii.

The territorial trap and its geographical assumptions can be wholly refuted by the modern, globalized economic and political context of the world. For example, the United States has immense power and influence that extends far beyond the reach of its fixed geographical borders that define the United States as a nation-state. US companies (and the political influences of these powerful companies) exert power and control over territories all across the world, particularly in the Global South.
Capitalism and the power of the countries of the Global North have (often immensely) negative effects over counties without actually assuming direct military control over the country or redefining nation-state boundaries. In a world dominated by globalized capitalism and trans-national corporations, fixed ideas of nation-states aren't always reflective of current political or economic realities.

The concept of territorial trap is theoretical model that examines the understanding of how nations exist and are formed. The term was developed to describe the notion that nations are based on very strict geographic definitions; however, this is shown to be a "trap" because these territorial definitions inherently limit the scope of what a nation can be. The idea of the territorial trap is thus revealed as a flawed line of reasoning if only for the reason that nations expand and change over time.
The first assumption that a territorial trap is based on is that there are defined physical boundaries of nations. This is more true in modernity simply because we have established physical borders. Historically, though, it was much more nebulous.
The second assumption is that nations do not occupy the same space—meaning that separate bodies of government control distinct areas. This is openly defied by the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine.
Finally, a territorial trap is defined by the idea that nations are historically fixed and defined. This is entirely flawed because nations change and grow over time and are passed and taken-over repeatedly. Thus, the idea of the territorial trap is established as a deeply flawed concept—but it was an attempt at creating a cohesive definition for what qualifies as a nation.

The territorial trap is a theoretical model which aims to explain the flaws in conventional thinking about the development of the nation-state. One of the leading scholars of this theory is John Agnew, who wrote an influential paper in the Review of International Political Economy in 1994.
The territorial trap makes three assumptions about how nation-states exist, using geographical principles to explain this. The first assumption is that sovereign nations are geographically fixed entities. In other words, their borders occupy a fixed sovereign space, which represents the territory of that state.
The second assumption is that there is a clear distinction between domestic and foreign policies within nation-states. In other words, nation-states take a different approach to their domestic affairs (within their own borders) than to their relationships with other nation-states. This suggests there is a clear difference between the two categories of affairs.
The third assumption is that nation-states are historically fixed entities that act as containers for their own societies. This means that the space or territory that a nation-state occupies is intrinsically linked to the society that occupies that territory.
The idea of Agnew’s work, and the use of the phrase "Territorial Trap," calls for a re-thinking of these terms. It suggests that the post–Cold War world has seen examples where conventional thinking does not fully explain the existence and development of a nation-state. Agnew points to examples where the economies and political influences of several countries have spilled outside of their territorial boundaries. Therefore, to assume that geography plays a major role in the development of a nation-state is a flawed idea.

What are the various arguments for/against educating undocumented immigrants?

The question is a little vague, but I will try to steer your conversation. On one hand, one can argue that it is not the place for American citizens to educate undocumented immigrants since they did not pay into taxpayer-funded public schools. Also, it could be argued that they are not officially United States citizens and are therefore not entitled to the services provided by the government.
On the other hand, one can argue the humanitarian need to provide all the aid and comfort possible to desperate immigrants and refugees who are seeking better lives, in accordance with the values inscribed on the Statue of Liberty and in many founding documents that shaped the United States.
One can also use a utilitarian approach for education: by providing people with an education, they are more likely to positively contribute to American society.
Illegal immigration has become a controversial topic in the United States in recent history. If your assignment is to be persuasive, I hope you take my arguments for part of your debate. If you are looking at writing an expository essay on the subject, I would examine the costs of providing both a secondary and a post-secondary education to undocumented immigrants.
Of course, if measuring the costs, one should also measure the benefits communities receive from an influx of immigrants. One can also interview teachers for their opinion on educating undocumented immigrants. Many of these immigrants do not speak English, or comefrom low-income families. Public education classrooms are still trying to provide the best possible solution for educating undocumented immigrants who face the stress of a new culture and the uncertainty of receiving instruction in a foreign language.

What are examples of hypocrisy and paradox in the characters of As I Lay Dying?

To some extent, the entire novel constitutes one huge paradox. Addie’s family members profess their loyalty and devotion to their mother and the ostensible purpose of their trip is to bury her, but almost everything that occurs on the trip works against the completion of that task. The children who consider themselves most devoted are completely at odds, as Jewel is intent on fulfilling her request and Darl is equally determined to prevent its realization.
While hypocrisy is most evident in the character of Anse. Although he seems to be a concerned husband and father, it is gradually revealed that he is not Jewel’s father and that Addie had outgrown their marriage. After her death, when the family accompanies her body to the burial site in Jefferson, he seems most interested in all the town has to offer and not in the least concerned with his deceased wife. Anse betrays the children, first by stealing money from them and then by quickly remarrying and expecting them to accept a new “mother.”

In Fahrenheit 451, what happens first: meeting with Clarisse or Mildred's overdose?

To answer this question, you will need to look over the chronology of part 1.
When the story opens, we meet Guy Montag, a firefighter, who is just finishing a shift. As he walks home from the fire station, he meets with Clarisse, one of his neighbors. Clarisse is not like anybody else Montag knows; she has a strong sense of curiosity and asks him profound questions, including whether he is happy.
It is after parting with Clarisse that Montag returns home to find that Mildred has overdosed. At first, he thinks she is just sleeping, but once he sees the empty box of pills, he knows what she has done. He immediately contacts the emergency services who send two men to pump her stomach.
Both of these events have a profound impact on Montag because they prompt him to question his role as a fireman and the nature of his society, more generally.

Neither Hester Prynne nor Goodman Brown appear to be capable of believing wholeheartedly in the piety of the Puritan community. What experiences make them doubt the ideals of their religious neighbors?

Goodman Brown initially appears to be a pious individual, but over the course of "Young Goodman Brown," it becomes clear that his faith is tied up in the faith of others in his community. While it is ambiguous whether the events of "Young Goodman Brown" are a dream or not, as he begins to think the other members of his community are associating with the Devil, he quickly decides to do the same.
While Hester Prynne strives toward sainthood, we also see the way in which the scorn of her community pushes her towards a self-reliance that is antithetical to the Puritan gender roles of her village. She is depicted as exceedingly helpful and "able," but this characterization also positions her as "un-womanly" by the standards of her village. Eventually, she starts to accept this and begins moving with a freedom and independence that is seen as rebellious.

What is the symbolism of the 13 stripes on the American flag?

The flag of the United States of America, like all national flags, is laden with symbolism. A version of the current American flag was adopted in 1777, and although the number of stars has since changed, the design has remained largely untouched. The symbolism of the colors red, white, and blue were not considered in the initial adoption of the flag. However, as America congealed into a single nation, the colors began to take on increasing significance.
The thirteen red and white stripes that form the background of the flag contain multiple levels of symbolism. According to Charles Thomson, secretary of the Continental Congress, "White signifies purity and innocence, Red, hardiness & valour . . ."
The number of stripes is also historically significant. The thirteen stripes, along with the original thirteen stars, represented the number of British colonies that declared independence from England in 1776.

What is the theme of Antonia Susan Byatt's "Rose-Colored Teacups"?

There are two main themes in the story "Rose-Coloured Teacups." The first theme pertains to the generation gap between the three generations of women. This gap is brought to light through the breaking of inherited gifts—first in the present, when Veronica's daughter breaks her grandmother's sewing machine, and then in the past, when Veronica remembers when she broke her own grandmother's rose-colored teacups. Each generation of women has filled different roles in society.
The second theme is about the status of women in society. The color of the teacups symbolizes the traditional role of women in society. Veronica, who dislikes pink, accidentally breaks the teacup, which symbolizes her rejection of the traditional role of women in her culture. The force of her mother's anger at the broken teacup represents how much her mother has embraced the woman's role in her patriarchal society. Similarly, the breaking of the sewing machine by Veronica's daughter symbolizes her rejection of the status of women in her mother's generation. Veronica becomes angry, just as her own mother was when she broke the teacups, but then she remembers how her mother acted toward her. Since she has learned from her relationship with her own mother, she is able to resolve the conflict with her own daughter.
When Jane, Veronica's daughter, exits the room singing at the end of the story, the reader is hopeful that the status of women will continue to change and improve with Jane's generation.

What is the meaning of "dropping veils of morning to where the cricket sings" from the poem "The Lake Isle of Innisfree"?

To grasp the full comparison, you have to back up a line:

And I shall have some peace there, for peace comes dropping slow,Dropping from the veils of the morning to where the cricket sings.

So peace drops from the veils of morning. What is that, exactly?
Often in wet climates (as you would find around a lake island), the mornings are blanketed in a thick, heavy fog. This "veil of morning" could represent this type of thick covering, which covers the world in a peaceful blanket of white. Peace comes dropping from this fog, as it has the power to quiet both the environment and the spirit while it persists.
Where does the peace drop to? It goes "where the cricket sings." And where is that, exactly? Most often, crickets can be found at the roots of tall grasses and under leaves.
All this means that the narrator finds a calming, peaceful presence from being in nature, especially the peaceful mornings of his lake island of Innisfree. Although not Innisfree, the photo here shows a similar, peaceful fog settling over an island.
Nature is dripping in peace, and this is captured well by the imagery and metaphors of these lines.

Why does Brian feel alone in the wilderness in Hatchet?

Brian is the main character in the novel Hatchet, written by Gary Paulsen. Brian is traveling by himself in a small plane to Canada to visit his father. During their trip, the pilot of the plane suffers a heart attack, and the plane crash lands in the Canadian wilderness. The pilot does not survive and Brian is left all alone in the forests of Canada. He has only the items he brought with him and whatever is in the small plane to help him survive.
Brian feels alone both in a physical sense and in an emotional sense. He is literally all alone in the forest. There are no towns or cities or people anywhere near where he crash lands. There is only a vast forest surrounded by more wilderness containing wild animals. He also feels alone emotionally because neither of his parents knows where he is. He does not know if anyone can even tell where his plane went down when it crashed. Both of his parents are far away, and he is scared that they will never find him. Additionally, Brian's parents have recently divorced, and he is struggling with his feelings about them splitting up. During his time alone in the forest, while struggling to survive, he has time to think about his parents and how his relationship with each of them will be in the future. These feelings about his parents' divorce make him feel even more alone in the wilderness. Brian's isolation in the forest and his emotional state both contribute to why he feels so alone when he is trapped in the Canadian wilderness.

Why does Mark's father employ Cordelia to find out why his son had allegedly killed himself if he was the one who killed his own son?

Sir Ronald Callendar hires Cordelia Gray to remove any doubts about his own involvement and to find out who changed his son's clothes after he was murdered.
After the people Sir Ronald hired to kill Mark finished the job, Mark was not only dead but painted with makeup and dressed in lingerie. That was what the man expected; it was how he wanted Mark to be found. However, when Mark's body was found, he wasn't in makeup or women's lingerie.
When he realizes someone else involved themselves in the murder, he hires Cordelia to investigate. In this way, he both looks less suspicious and has the opportunity to find out what happened. Ultimately, hiring Cordelia was his downfall. She finds out the truth—that Sir Ronald paid for people to kill Mark and ruin his reputation to make sure that Sir Ronald didn't lose an inheritance. After Mark's body was found, the person who found it removed the makeup and lingerie so that Mark wouldn't be humiliated in death.

What is psychoanalysis? How does Robert Browning explain psychoanalysis through his poems?

Psychoanalysis involves understanding the motivations behind our behaviors, especially motivations that are unconscious.
Browning, of course, did not have the advantages of knowing about modern psychoanalysis, but in several of his poems he has the narrator unwittingly reveal aspects of his personality and motivation that he himself is blind to.
For example, in "My Last Duchess," the duke, thinking he is justifying having his last wife killed, actually reveals himself to be an overly controlling and jealous man who could not tolerate the innocent kindnesses his late wife bestowed on the rest of the world. We see—though he himself is not conscious of it—that his wife was innocent and that he himself is a highly disturbed individual.
Likewise, in "Fra Lippo Lippi," the narrator attacks Brother Lippo for his innocent gestures, such as tending to plants, revealing that he, the narrator, is in fact the sick, twisted person.

What are some ways a CSR benefits from contributing to team work efforts?

Customer service means interacting with customers, and any effort put into the team's work will pay off with happier customers. A CSR who has happy customer's is going to work better, enjoy the work more, and be part of a team.
Customer service is often viewed as a somewhat passive work function; taking phone calls, or handling routine customer interactions like retail point-of-service sales. But the CSR position is active, and with excellent, consistent customer service the company benefits in many ways, large and small.
Customer retention, new customers, and employee retention are just a few of the ways superior CSR training and practice make a difference to a company. The teams that research, develop, and maintain product lines or services need the CSR but they may not realize it if the CSR remains cut off from that team.
In summary, a CSR benefits from team membership and inclusion through (1) better product or service knowledge and expertise; (2) integration into the company's overall mission; (3) better likelihood of integrated supervision; and (4) opportunity to provide feedback to the team about customer satisfaction.
In terms of the CSR and their own team (other CSRs) the feedback loop of happy customers is the main benefit. If the CSR can't handle a customer, or is absent, and that customer has a rotten experience with another CSR, the original CSR is going to experience that negativity. A secondary benefit for CSRs who contribute to CSR team efforts is cross-training, giving CSRs who are contributing an advantage in terms of job function skills and product/service knowledge.

Why did Mathilde go to her friend's house and tell her of her distress?

Mathilde is going with her husband to the ministry ball. He had set 400 francs aside so that he could buy a new gun and go hunting in the fall. However, he gives the money all to her to buy a new dress. Mathilde, nevertheless, is still distressed as the party approaches because she doesn't have any jewels to wear with her dress. Her husband suggests fresh flowers, but she rejects that idea and says it doesn't do to look poor amongst rich women. Her husband then suggests she borrow a piece of jewelry from her friend Madame Forestier.
Mathilde thinks this is a wonderful idea and relates to Madame Forestier her distress at having no jewels to wear to the ministry event. Madame Forestier is sympathetic and tells her she can choose whatever she likes from her jewel box.

How does the narration and plot arrangement serve the theme of "Tears for Sale" by Samira Azzam?

"Tears for Sale" is told from the perspective of a child. This child's naïve curiosity about death allows for objective details to be communicated—observations uninformed by personal experiences of grief or cultural awareness of the purpose of a hired mourner.
Khazna is a professional mourner, also known as a wailing woman or Moirologist. Positions similar to this can be found in many cultures around the world, including some parts of African, Asian, and Middle Eastern cultures. Historically, it is known to have been part of Ancient Egyptian culture and is also frequently mentioned in records of ancient Semitic cultures that appear in Biblical history.
The function of a wailing woman may seem somewhat foreign to a contemporary American audience, where the cultural practice of grief is highly personal. Oftentimes, when grieving, extended family, friends, colleagues, and acquaintances expect for grief to be compartmentalized away from functions and responsibilities, even just a week after a loss, to avoid awkwardness or unnecessary stress for those who are not grieving.
However, in some other cultures, one person's loss is considered the loss of the whole community. For instance, in Jewish culture today, there is a is a seven-day grieving period immediately following a loss. After that, there is a thirty day period in which the family is expected to continue grieving. Then, a year after the loss of a loved one, the deceased family's loss is publicly acknowledged, oftentimes in a synagogue. In this way, the persons who have experienced such significant losses feel understood and supported through the entire grieving process, from the immediate feelings of denial and shock to the sadness, anger, and bargaining that follow, and finally to the moment of acceptance and moving on.
Similar to these practices, Khazna's job is to show those who are grieving (or who have grieved previously) that the community has acknowledged their grief, and are there is ongoing community support for those suffering. The child is not able to communicate this context, but she is attuned to the effect Khazna has on others at funerals:

It seemed as though Khazna was not lamenting that one dead man, our neighbor, but rather, was weeping for all the town's dead, arousing one woman's anguish over a lost husband, and in another sorrow over a departed brother.

As Khazna wails and chants, she helps to unlock the grief in those present to help them empathize; her loud display is ultimately healing for the whole community.
The story takes a sudden turn at the climax when Khazna loses her own daughter to Typhoid. The plot, which includes chronological, pieced-together memories of the narrator, links the child's curious observances to the child's perplexed observance of how Khazna's personal grieving differs from her community grieving. The reader can piece-meal a deeper meaning from the text about the community's role in times of grieving by comparing Khazna's reactions.
After her daughter dies, those who are present at the funeral try to serve Khanzna by taking up her mantle as a wailing woman, but they fail miserably:

A few of the women tried to weep, to cry out, but she looked at them in such a stunned way, as though rejecting their demonstrations of grief, and they gradually fell silent, astonished and indignant.

Khazna was able to help others grieve with lamentation, but she does not seem to perceive others' attempts to lament as genuine. The text does imply that perhaps she has affected grief—or "sold" her tears to the community—which has cheapened their displays in her eyes. But the closing line brushes this cynical reading aside, speaking to the theme that the point of community support through grief is to simply "be" with those who are grieving, wherever they are at.
Instead of trying to offer solace to those with losses before their time by affecting grief, we should simply be with those who are grieving, taking cues from how they choose to grieve and empathizing. For example, if someone loses a spouse or child, instead of relating their grief to your own, you should stay on the subject of their grief; if they do not want to weep or talk about it, just sit beside them and be there to support them. You may be able to empathize because of your own losses, but your grief should not dislocate the other person's grief.

The story is told by an unnamed narrator, who is recounting her memories of Khazna, a woman who is both a professional mourner and beautician for brides. The story is told in three simple parts. The narrator describes Khazna’s duties as mourner, expertly wailing and covering her face with indigo; next, Khazna is described preparing brides for their wedding, including giving them advice about lovemaking, and generally being the life of the party. A final section tells about the death of Khazna’s only daughter, and how, despite her profession, Khazna has no tears and mourns silently.
As professional mourner, Khazna performs a vital service in her village by honoring tradition. The fact that she is not actually sad is irrelevant to her performance, which is more about outward forms and respectability. In her capacity as bride beautician, her gaiety is similarly a kind of professional attitude; her role is to enforce bridal traditions, extending even to attending the door of the bedroom while the couple consummate their marriage.
The final part of the story, in which Khazna experiences true loss with the death of her daughter, highlights the difference between her official functions, and the role of tradition, and genuine suffering. The narrator is surprised to see Khazna sitting silent in the corner beside the corpse of her child, and in fact her uncharacteristic silence causes the other women to be silent as well. One way of understanding this ending is that Khazna, after attending so many funerals, has no one to perform similar duties on her behalf. But it is also true that Khazna’s grief this time is real, and in the face of real loss, it seems, her professional talents are useless.

What is a good seven-sentence summary of "The Lottery"?

"The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson tells the story of a summer day in a small village. The town folk have gathered on the square in order to engage in a lottery of sorts. Initially, the idyllic setting suggests that the pristine town enjoys a harmonious, peaceful existence. However, as the lottery progresses, some people begin to exhibit signs of anxiety and fear. This continues until one family is singled out as the "winners." They then have to engage in another lottery among themselves, which they are unhappy about. After the final drawing takes place, the reader finally understands the fear and anxiety, as the winner of this final lottery is stoned to death by the other people of town.

What are the main differences between the children and the master? Observe the physical appearances, dress, and behavior. What can you infer from these differences?

The children of the workhouse really couldn't be more different from the master in terms of physical appearance. The stark outward distinctions between the children and the master illustrate who's in control—and for whose benefit the workhouse is being run.
The master is described as a “fat, healthy man,” while the children are pale and thin from not getting enough to eat. The children are quiet and timid, not like most children at all. This is because they live a miserable life in which they're expected to work all the time instead of playing and enjoying themselves. The master, on the other hand, is an overbearing figure; his very presence intimidates the boys. That's why they draw straws to pick who's going to approach the master and ask for more gruel, as everyone is too scared to put themselves forward.
They have every right to be scared too. In the workhouse, the master's word is law. He gives the orders and woe betide anyone who ignores that simple fact. Once the master has recovered from his initial shock at Oliver Twist's outrageous request for more food, he tries to whack Oliver's head with the large ladle he's holding. If we didn't already know who's in charge, we do now. Discipline in the workhouse is ruthlessly enforced with acts of physical violence against the children. The master's instinctive reaction to what he regards as a challenge to his authority is to lash out. He doesn't even think twice about hitting a child; violence against children is the norm in the workhouse.