How did European settlers choose where to live in America?

There were several reasons that European settlers chose a specific area to live in. However, nearly all of these reasons deal with the resources the land could provide. For example, Jamestown was chosen because it provided security. Jamestown was on a peninsula that protected the Europeans from their Spanish threats. Secondly, there was a vast array of fresh and sea water fishing capabilities. Imagine you were a settler at this time—you would want to place yourself in an area that provided as much protection and food as you could.
As the years progressed, colonies began to evolve and offered many other reasons for settlement, particularly religious protection. If you were Puritan, you would likely choose New England as a destination. Quakers would settle in Pennsylvania. Another reason for settling in an area was the person's career in Europe. A farmer in Europe would probably choose a Southern colony to continue his work. All of these reasons played a role in why Europeans settled where they did.
http://www.virginiaplaces.org/vacities/7jamestown.html

What do you learn about Joel and Malthace in the first chapter of The Bronze Bow?

Joel and Malthace are presented to the reader through the eyes of Daniel. Even before he is able to identify them, he observes that they must be siblings:

Brother and sister, that was evident. They moved alike, with a sort of free, swinging ease. They had the same high cheekbones and dark ruddy complexions. Their voices were sharp in the clean air.

Afterward, when Daniel hears the girl call his brother by name, he recognizes the boy as Joel Bar Hezron, a boy he used to go to synagogue school with and who had a twin sister called Malthace. Without being told so, the reader then guesses that the girl with Joel must be his twin sister Malthace. It appears that the two are extremely fond of each other and that they love the land of their people, for they dare to climb the dangerous mountain all by themselves just to admire various things in the valley below. When the brother and sister see Daniel, they do not run away even though Daniel looks rugged and wild. Instead, the boy “clenches his fist,” and Daniel knows that he is no coward; he is ready to defend himself and his sister should the need arise. Joel and Malthace are kindhearted youths, for they talk to David, freely giving him all the information they have about his loved ones back in the valley. They even share their lunch with David.
Further on in the chapter, the reader learns that Joel shares David’s disdain for the Romans. The twins are patriots and dream of the day when their people will be delivered, by the Messiah, from Roman rule.

What happens to Odysseus when he makes it home to his wife?

First, Odysseus takes on the challenge of stringing his own bow and shooting it through the handles of a line of axes, something none of the suitors could do. Then, he must get rid of all the suitors who have been squatting on his property and vying for his wife's hand in marriage. Once they're all dead, he has to take care of the duplicitous maids who fraternized with them. When he finally presents himself to his wife, she is suspicious of him, and so she says that she will have their bed brought out of their bedroom so that he can rest comfortably on it. This is a test by clever Penelope: long ago, Odysseus built their bed out of a tree that grows up through their home, and so it cannot be removed from the room. If the man knows this, then she'll know that he is really Odysseus; if he agrees to have the bed brought out, then she'll know he's an impostor. When Odysseus gets really angry, thinking that she's somehow gotten rid of or destroyed their old bed, she knows it's him and she embraces him as her husband once again.

What did Brian discover when he followed the tracks to the sand in Hatchet?

Hatchet, a novel released in 1987 by Gary Paulsen, tells the story of thirteen-year-old Brian as he struggles to survive in the wilderness after a plane crash. Though he has great difficulty in finding food, Brian gets lucky after finding some turtle eggs.
After noticing the tracks in the sand that come out of the water by some large aquatic creature, Brian investigates and contemplates as to what biological reason the animal would have in coming to shore. He then digs in the sand nearby, discovering seventeen eggs that had been laid by a sea turtle.
This particular moment is quite significant in telling Brian's story. He feels a boost of confidence in his survival skills, as he was able to find the eggs, eat them without much issue, and even determine the animal that laid them. However, he is unable to feel fully satisfied, as he realizes he needs to ration his eggs rather than eat them all now. This, in itself, is a powerful moment for Brian, as his survival skills that tell him to ration begin to overpower his more fearful and forcefully optimistic thoughts that he is going to be rescued so soon that rationing would be pointless.
In this moment, Brian realizes that he may be able to survive in the wilderness. However, he also begins to truly accept that he may have to survive in the wilderness for a long time.

What is institutional isomorphism?

When institutions are said to be isomorphic, it means that they are similar in practice and procedure. This can occur due to one organization imitating another or developing independently but under similar circumstances. The word "isomorphic" comes from the Greek "iso," meaning "equal," and "morphosis" meaning "to form." The prevailing theory of institutional isomorphism maintains that any organization, regardless of how unique it sets out to be, will eventually operate in much the same way as other organizations of its kind. Institutional isomorphism has three sub-categories:Normative isomorphism occurs when organizations must conform to professional standards in order to continue as a competitive force in their network, such as licensing or employee standards. Mimetic isomorphism occurs when the organization elects to mimic another, namely one that is leading in a market. This is typically done when the best independent course of action seems unclear. Coercive isomorphism occurs when the organization is shaped by the public and professional opinion of the world around it and must adhere to the social standards of the society in which it operates.

Insitutional isomorphism is a description of an often-predicted phenomena whereby global institutions tend towards homogenization of structure, goals, and function. These predictions are borne out when, for instance, a new nation enters the global stage and quickly adopts diplomatic, economic, and political systems that are replicative of those already existing on the global stage. This can occur because of coercive cultural or diplomatic pressures from other groups on the global stage, out of a belief that existing structures have developed because they genuinely work, or out of a desire to be seen as legitimate within established systems. These three pressures work together, for better or worse, to produce a generally standardized global approach to economics, schooling, legal systems, and many other institutional forms.

Institutional isomorphism occurs when two organizations are similar to each other. Paul DiMaggio and Walter Powell developed the concept of institutional isomorphism. In the paper “The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields,” they discuss what makes organizations similar. They find that the main drivers are rationalization and bureaucratization. These forces lead to organizations acting in a similar manner because of standardized processes and the desire to maximize their outcomes, typically profitability for businesses. However, institutional isomorphism is more likely to occur in mature industries, and it comes about as organizations seek legitimacy in these industries, which means they may not actually be maximizing efficiency. They also discuss the reasons institutional isomorphism can occur. These reasons are classified into three types of isomorphism: coercive, mimetic, and normative.
Coercive isomorphism occurs when outside forces shape organizations into a similar form. These types of forces include cultural norms or societal regulations. To adhere to these requirements, the organizations become similar, since there is often only one way to meet these requirements.
Mimetic isomorphism occurs when there is significant uncertainty about the best path forward in a given area, so organizations mimic each other or the market leader. This type of isomorphism makes organizations similar as they pick up traits of other organizations that they believe are beneficial. The goal of this mimicry is to make sure that the organization picking up the “beneficial trait” does not fall behind. This type of mimicry, however, can be risky because it can occur without a full understanding of why the “beneficial trait” leads to positive outcomes in another organization, or traits that are even negative instead of beneficial can be selected. However, because this type of mimicry superficially reduces uncertainty, it is still often done by organizations.
Normative isomorphism occurs when professional standards shape organizations. This can be due to licensing requirements or education for a given profession or larger professional organizations that develop standards for an industry. This leads to a labor pool for multiple organizations that has standardized ideas about the way to do things. This, in turn, leads to uniformity of the organizations, since they are all hiring from the same labor pool.
http://faculty.babson.edu/krollag/org_site/org_theory/Scott_articles/dimag_powel.html

Describe the relationship between George and Lennie. What does each gain from the relationship?

Within the context of the novel, the relationship between our two protagonists is indeed unique. George states in chapter one that, as far as relationships go, he and Lennie share something special. Unlike other ranch hands who come to a ranch, work up a stake, spend their wages, and soon find themselves on another ranch, he and Lennie

"got a future. We got somebody to talk to that gives a damn about us. We don't have to sit in no bar room blowin' in our jack jus' because we got no place else to go. If them other guys gets in jail they can rot for all anybody gives a damn. But not us."

Lennie is quite proud of what they have and supports George's sentiment by mentioning that

"I got you to look after me, and you got me to look after you, and that's why."

It is this aspect of their relationship that makes the two men different from others. They care for one another and share a dream, which is lacking in the other men. George further proclaims that

"Someday—we're gonna get the jack together and we're gonna have a little house and a couple of acres an' a cow and some pigs and—"

Lennie excitedly says that they will "live off the fatta the lan'," meaning that they will own property one day and enjoy its produce. They will not be reliant on anyone; they will have achieved independence. Their destiny will be in their hands. Lennie wishes to tend rabbits once they have reached their goal, and George agrees that Lennie will have as many rabbits as he wants.
The two men are proud of their close friendship. George, who is the more intelligent partner, makes all the crucial decisions and decides where they should work. Lennie is a mighty hunk of a man and can do the work of many men. The two have arguments now and again when George expresses his frustration about Lennie always getting them into trouble. This happens because of Lennie's intellectual limitations and his inability to understand and control his strength.
In spite of these disagreements, it is apparent that the two men care deeply about one another. George has made a promise to Lennie's aunt Clara that he will look after him, and he has done that with aplomb. At the end of the novel, he, for example, takes the ultimate step in securing Lennie's dignity and safety by shooting him before Curley and his men get to him. George realizes that they would torture Lennie before finally killing him. His desperate act indicates the depth of his love and care for Lennie.
It is ironic that the two men's dream is shattered by Lennie's unfortunate inability to control his strength, for it is his power that George uses as a selling tool whenever they arrive at a new ranch. Further irony lies in the fact that after Lennie's death, George finds himself in the same position as all the other ranch hands: his dream is in ruins, and he is without a confidante.

How did rational thinking and emotions impact the Progressive Era?

The reform movements during the Progressive Era were in many ways an attempt to bring a rational, scientific approach to the problems of society. The belief of many reformers was that science, technology, and a rational approach to government could improve the conditions in which people worked and lived.
Many of the reformers were college-educated, including many women who put their education to use in reforming social problems and developing the new field of social work. This field used scientific methods to try to reform social problems. Other academic fields developed and became more scientific during this time, including economics and business. The administration of business became a scientific discipline with college and graduate schools attached to it. In addition, the study of political science became an academic field. No longer were business and politics left only to practitioners; instead, academics played an important role in studying these fields and attempting to regulate them. The Progressive Era was essentially rational in its approach to regulating and reforming society and to solving problems that were at times emotional in nature, including alcoholism, poverty, and family dysfunction.

Can the Declaration of Independence be considered a declaration of war? Using evidence from the text, argue whether this is or is not true.

The Declaration of Independence can be seen as a declaration of war in so many words. The main body of the Declaration consists of a long litany of grievances that the American colonists have against King George III. The colonists have tried on numerous occasions to have those grievances heard and to get a respectful hearing from the British. Yet at every turn, they have been ignored, rebuffed, and treated with contempt. That being the case, the Americans feel that they have no other option but to declare their independence from Great Britain once and for all.
To be sure, this is not an explicit declaration of war. The last thing the Americans wanted to do was to fight against the greatest military force in the world at that time. But those who signed the Declaration must've known that the British wouldn't take kindly to one of their colonies breaking free and certainly wouldn't just let America go without a fight. And so it proved.

Why does Tom throw clods of earth at Sid?

Tom Sawyer is often tempted to throw inanimate objects at his goody-two-shoes cousin. On this particular occasion, though, he throws some clods of earth at him. This is Tom's revenge on Sid for ratting him out to Aunt Polly for playing hooky and going swimming. When Tom went for a swim, he had to remove the thread from his shirt collar. Before retuning home, he sewed the collar back on his shirt so that Aunt Polly wouldn't suspect that he'd skipped school to go swimming.
But at dinner that evening, the eagle-eyed Sid notices that Tom's shirt collar is being held together with black thread, even though Aunt Polly had sewn it with white thread. Thanks to sneaky Sid, Aunt Polly now realizes that Tom played hooky to go swimming. She punishes him by making him whitewash the fence on Saturday, when all the other kids are out enjoying themselves. It's after he's finished whitewashing the fence—or rather, after the other kids have finished whitewashing it for him—that Tom throws clods of earth at Sid for snitching on him earlier.

Why did Britain colonize the Americas?

The reasons why Britain sought to colonize the Americas were largely economic. In the early seventeenth century, England was recovering from a long period of economic downturns. The nation was also emerging as a dominant power in Europe after Spain and France had experienced a number of significant setbacks of their own. As such, Britain found itself poised to colonize the New World.
With Spain still recovering from the defeat of the Armada, Britain saw that it had little competition in North America. British economists and business leaders wanted to establish a foothold on the continent to use it as a base for finding and exploiting the resources of this land. In the Americas, the English found lands that could be exploited for their resources and subsequently enrich their nation. Profits from the timber of New England, the sugar of the Caribbean, and the tobacco of the Southern Colonies led to a boom in the economy of England.
Population growth and unemployment in Britain was another motivator of colonization. There was a concern that having too many idle workers around would lead to criminality and the erosion of society. England looked to the Americas as a place where out-of-work Englishmen could go and find opportunities.
There were also strategic military advantages to colonizing the Americas. With Spain on its heels, the English took advantage of this time to establish military bases in the New World. When Spain was eventually able to regroup from the defeat of the Armada, they found a powerful foe already well-entrenched in the Americas.
Finally, there were also religious motivations for colonizing the Americas. The British were concerned that the Spanish and the French could create a large Catholic hegemony in the New World. The British hoped that through colonization they could extend Protestantism to the Americas before Catholicism could take root throughout the hemisphere. There were also English religious minorities, particularly the Puritans, who left for the Americas in the hope of being able to practice their faith without the influence or interference of other religious sects, such as the Church of England. They wanted to establish a religious utopia in America.

What is an analysis of the poem "Hope" by Ariel Dorfman?

There are a few different techniques to analyzing poetry, and the interpretation differs from person to person. What you perceive the poem to mean and the way it affects you could be entirely different from the person sitting next to you, and that's okay. Poetry is a fluid style of writing that can often be interpreted in multiple ways using the same techniques. To analyze "Hope" by Ariel Dorfman, consider one of the following:
Look at the poem line by line. Dorfman has very unique line breaks in this piece, turning sentences into choppy (or punchy) lines that each create their own effect. If you start your interpretation line by line, you can begin to imagine and piece together the feelings of the writer and the weight each of the words evokes.
Try sentence by sentence. One line isn't always a complete sentence, and that's a style of line breaks that most poets use in their works. Dorfman's sentences, specifically, extend across multiple lines and sometimes entire stanzas. The last stanza, for example, is the end of the sentence that started in the previous stanza. If you analyze this way, you can create entire meanings from each sentence and understand what Dorfman was trying to communicate in full thoughts.
Or, try stanza by stanza. Because the stanzas often aren't full thoughts in Dorfman's piece, it could be interesting to see how your analysis turns out if you interpret each stanza individually instead of looking for complete thoughts. You may find you get an entirely different result than if you tried to piece together full sentences.
These three techniques work fine on their own (and there are, of course, other ways to analyze a poem), but poetry analysis often consists of a combination. Many people will look at how the line breaks affect the stanza's overall meaning and go more in depth on the poem. Take, for example, the following stanzas, lines, and sentence:

After the car left,the car with no license plate,we couldn't
find out
anything elseabout him.

This single sentence spans across three stanzas, and Dorfman's choice to leave the words "find out" on not only their own line, but their own stanza, can create a churning effect in your stomach. It makes the phrase stand out, makes it punchy. An answer to why he may have done this could be that he wanted the narrator to seem like they're speaking in exasperated breaths. Maybe they're crying or panicking.
Try using a combination of the techniques and the example above to analyze the entire poem. It's okay if the meanings you come up with are different from others, because everyone interprets poetry in different ways.

Why were Africans used as slaves instead of Native Americans?

Actually, Native Americans were used by European colonialists as slaves some time before the transatlantic African slave trade began. As well as being a method of economic exploitation, enslavement of indigenous peoples was used as a weapon of war, a convenient way of clearing vast swathes of land for white European settlement. It's estimated that in southern coastal regions, entire tribes were wiped out through slavery, far more than perished from war and disease.
Every European nation that colonized the Americas used native slave labor for construction, plantations, and mines. Primarily, though, indigenous people were exported to colonial outposts in the Caribbean. Over time, however, Native Americans gained the reputation of not being very suitable slaves. For one thing, they proved remarkably adept at escaping if they weren't enslaved too far from their ancestral lands. As for those enslaved people exported to the Caribbean, too many of them died on the journey, succumbing to European diseases. By 1676, Barbados had banned Indian slavery altogether—not on humanitarian grounds, but because it was simply too much hassle for colonial authorities and slave-traders alike.

The normal concentration of glucose in the blood is about 5.0 mmol dm–3. With reference to a graph, explain how a blood glucose concentration of 7.5 mmol dm–3 would be brought back to normal. Ensure that you refer to homeostatic components in your explanation.

The concentration of glucose in the blood is regulated by two hormones produced by the pancreas: insulin and glucagon. Insulin is made in the pancreatic islets of Langerhans, in specialized, insulin-producing cells called beta cells. When the pancreas recognizes that the concentration of glucose in the blood is too high (7.5 mmol/dm^3 instead of 5.0mmol/dm^3), it produces insulin in the islets of Langerhans and releases it into the bloodstream. Insulin, a hormone, acts on a homeostatic complex in order to lower blood glucose levels.
Embedded within the cell membrane of body cells, particularly in the intestine, are large numbers of insulin receptors. These receptors are called RTKs (Receptor Tyrosine Kinases) because they function by phosphorylating (hence, a kinase) other intracellular molecules in order to initiate a specific cell response. In the case of insulin, the extracellular (on the outside) alpha-subunit of the protein, which binds insulin in the blood, would be considered the "receptor" portion of the homeostatic complex. Once insulin binds to this, it catalyzes the phosphorylation of the intracellular (inside the cell) beta-subunit of the insulin receptor, which then phosphorylates another protein called the Insulin Response Protein. The Insulin Response Protein then activates the enzyme Glycogen Synthase. This process, from beta-subunit to the Insulin Response Protein to Glycogen Synthase can be considered the "integrating center" portion of the homeostatic complex. Finally, activated Glycogen Synthase converts intracellular glucose into a compound called glycogen, which is insoluble in blood, thus lowering the total blood-sugar concentration. The conversion of glucose into glycogen by Glycogen Synthase is considered the "effector" part of the complex.
The link below provides a good overview of homeostatic controls, the role of insulin, and a graph demonstrating what happens when blood sugar rises.
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-ap/chapter/homeostasis/

In which scene do you think Odysseus best lives up to his epithet as the "man of twists and turns" and why?

Because the phrase pertains to his personality and overall reputation, no single event neatly encapsulates this description. Cumulatively, this reputation is built up through the many instances—each an individual twist or turn—in which he thinks quickly on his feet, makes up elaborate lies, disguises himself, and fools others so that he either escapes or gains some advantage.
One instance that shows his ingenuity is his manipulation and blinding of Polyphemus. Obviously at a disadvantage against the giant Cyclops, Odysseus quickly lies to him, saying only a handful of the men are shipwrecked there. Shut inside the cave, he knows that the men lack the strength to move the boulder away from the entrance, so he must use the giant’s strength. This means he cannot kill him. He is able to blind the drunk, passed-out Cyclops, who then cannot see them sneak out when he moves the boulder to leave the cave with his sheep. The wily Greek almost slips up, however; after telling Polyphemus that “Nobody” maimed him, he later admits that he is Odysseus, which later gets him into further trouble.

In The Time Machine, what do the people the Time Traveler meets in the far-future in chapter 3 look like? Make a list of five details.

The Time Traveler travels far into the future in chapter 3 of H. G. Wells's The Time Machine. At the end of the chapter, the Time Traveler finally meets the people who emerge from the landscape.
He notices that the people looking at him are wearing "rich soft robes." Soon after, several men begin running towards him. The Time Traveler at first describes one of the men as slight, meaning that he is short and small. He also notices that the man is wearing little clothing, noting a change in the environment.
In the final paragraph of chapter 3, the Time Traveler states that the people are beautiful, graceful, and "indescribably frail." Overall, the people of the future are intriguing because of this seeming weakness in their physicality.

In the story The Thing Around Your Neck, is the narrator making choices about her life or is she driven by circumstances?

In The Thing Around Your Neck, the narrator speaks to the social, political, and economic realities of being a black immigrant woman in America. In her struggle to adjust to the racist, sexist, classist American system and the interpersonal oppression she faced upon her arrival, the narrator is forced to make choices about how to navigate her new life. These choices are directly related to the circumstances she faces as a Nigerian immigrant woman living among mostly white faces.
Being driven by circumstances and making your own choices are not mutually exclusive realities, and the narrator navigates her life holding both of these realities. She can not escape the oppressions she faces, yet she works to maintain her autonomy as much as she can.

What are the duties of a PACU nurse?

PACU stands for post-anesthesia care unit, and PACU nurses are specialized nurses that work in the PACU. These nurses are also known as perianesthesia nurses or recovery room nurses. These nurses provide care for patients who have undergone anesthesia, typically for a surgical procedure.
Such nurses are responsible for observing and treating patients post-operation. They must ensure that the patient wakes up properly and safely and that the effects of anesthesia wear off completely. They are responsible for monitoring the patient's vital signs and consciousness levels, and they must attend to the potential side-effects of anesthesia, including nausea, pain, agitation, fear, and so on. In relation to this, they must provide comfort and reassurance to the patient and their family members, patiently answering questions and providing important care information. PACU nurses are important parts of an interdisciplinary medical team and must keep accurate records, keeping the medical team informed of the patient's progress. They must have a good understanding of anesthetic drugs and recovery management, and they are responsible for administering pain medication as needed.

What is the general temporal and geographical setting of "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream"?

In "I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream," Harlan Ellison sketches a grim and disturbing nightmare of a future by which the last survivors of humanity are being ceaselessly tormented and tortured by the sadistic machine intelligence AM. This is a story set in a post-apocalyptic world. All of humanity has been rendered extinct, save for the story's protagonists, whom AM has preserved so it can continue to have victims to torment. Their torture is motivated by AM's sadism and by its inconceivably deep hatred of humanity.
In terms of physical geography, the story is set entirely underground, within the vast series of complexes which houses AM. It is a world where conventional geography doesn't mean anything anymore, given that humanity has been destroyed and its survivors are under the domination of the machine intelligence.

what is the significance of ending the first paragraph with the phrase "and him only"? defense of the native american religion

The first paragraph of the speech ends with the phrase “and him only” because the speaker, Red Jacket, is grateful for the beautiful sunny day and for his people’s open eyes and open ears: “for all these favors we thank the Great Spirit, and him only.”
That extra phrase, “and him only,” is significant because it indicates that Red Jacket thanks his god, the Great Spirit, and no other god: not the Christian god that his listeners want him to accept and worship. He refuses. So, the line is significant because it immediately asserts Red Jacket's polite but absolute refusal.
Let’s put these remarks in context. In 1805, Red Jacket, a Seneca orator and chief, also known as Sagoyewatha, delivered some remarks to a Boston missionary society whose members wanted to preach Christianity to the Seneca nation. In these remarks, which some refer to with the title “Red Jacket Defends Native American Religion,” Red Jacket rejects the missionaries’ requests, points out the hypocritical, deceptive, and greedy behavior of the missionaries, and reaffirms the validity of his own religious beliefs.
Let’s take a close look at the whole first paragraph:

Friend and brother; it was the will of the Great Spirit that we should meet together this day. He orders all things, and he has given us a fine day for our council. He has taken his garment from before the sun, and caused it to shine with brightness upon us; our eyes are opened, that we see clearly; our ears are unstopped, that we have been able to hear distinctly the words that you have spoken; for all these favors we thank the Great Spirit, and him only.

Here's what it means. Red Jacket is basically saying,

Look, here we are, meeting together on a beautiful day. We are blessed with healthy bodies; we can see and hear each other and communicate openly. We’re grateful for these favors, and we’re grateful to our god, not yours.

In chapter 7, why does Papa want the kids to hear the story about Mr. Morrison on Christmas?

In chapter seven, it is Christmas Eve, and part of the festivities include sharing family stories and reminiscing about the past. While most of the stories are fun, Mr. Morrison tells a different kind of tale. His family was killed on Christmas by night men when he was six years old. A white woman accused neighbors of molesting her, and so the night men burned down their houses and killed the inhabitants with swords. Mr. Morrison only escaped because his mother threw him out of the burning house. She wasn't able to get to his sisters in time, nor save her husband or herself. It's a disturbing story from Mr. Morrison's past, and Mama doesn't think the children should hear it. Papa, however, thinks it's important for the children to listen:

“These are things they need to hear, baby. It’s their history.”

Although grim, Papa believes the children need to have an awareness of the world and know how black people have suffered and been attacked.

Describe the speakers voice in "Legal Alien." Which lines best illustrate the speaker's voice?

Pat Mora is a Mexican-American poet, and "Legal Alien" is about the struggles that Mexican-Americans face. The poem is thus likely to be at least in part autobiographical, meaning that the speaker's voice and the poet's voice might be one and the same.
In terms of the tone of the voice, the repetition of the phrase "able to" in the first half of the poem perhaps suggests pride, whereas phrases in the second half of the poem, like "American but hyphenated" and "viewed by Mexicans as alien" suggest a sadness. Despite the ability of Mexican-Americans, like the poet, to straddle both cultures, they seem to be looked down upon for not being entirely of one culture or the other. As the speaker says, she is "an American to Mexicans, / a Mexican to Americans."
The speaker's tone is also perhaps somewhat sad, implied by the lines, "masking the discomfort of being prejudged." However, in the final lines of the poem, the repetition of the word "by," followed by the homophonic "Bi," suggests a tone of defiance. "Bi" is a prefix meaning two, so by finishing with this word, the speaker is perhaps closing the poem with the insistence that Mexican-Americans are not half, or less than, but are in fact twice, and more than.

Why did Uri shoot Misha in Milkweed?

In brief, Uri shoots Misha to save him. In Milkweed, Uri is one of Misha’s closest friends. Near the beginning of the novel, he not only rescues the homeless street urchin but gives him an identity, including a name and a plausible life story. Uri himself is Jewish, but Misha is not. Although Uri plays an active role in the Warsaw ghetto uprising, he also takes on the identity of a Nazi soldier. Taking careful aim at Misha, he shoots to injure but not to kill him. Misha is wounded in the ear and loses consciousness. Assuming the boy is dead, the Nazis do not load him onto the train. By wounding his friend, Uri saves him from sure death in a concentration camp.

There are a lot of books written about war that might not qualify as literature. What makes a text “literary”?

This is the sort of question that has been debated for decades! You've filed your question under "military history," but the question itself could be broken down into two elements which are, while connected, different.


Why is something like Remarque's All Quiet on the Western Front (fiction) considered to be a work of literature, while something like Bernard Cornwell's wildly popular series of historical novels about the Napoleonic wars, as seen through the eyes of rifleman Richard Sharpe (also fiction), might not be?


At what point does a work of military history (non-fiction), particularly a narrative one which incorporates the perspectives of multiple people, become literature, rather than simply an engaging history?


Let's look at the definition of literature to help us out here: literature is "written works, especially those considered of superior or lasting artistic merit." So, there's a value judgement inherent in this definition. We're not just thinking of literature as what it really means, i.e. "something written down."
The answer to sub-question one then is extremely subjective, and comes down to essentially snobbery. Many works which are now considered literary were dismissed in their time as being immoral fluff: most notably, the concept of the novel itself was originally thought of as something purely for women, and of no real value to society. Samuel Taylor Coleridge, for example, was hugely critical of early Gothic novels, such as Ann Radcliffe's works, which are now thought of as literary classics. Melville's Moby Dick was panned by contemporary critics who thought it a disaster, but it's now considered a cornerstone of American literature. So, this subquestion utilizes "literary" as a term bestowing value or importance on the work. Something might be considered more literary if it is less popular, less widely read, and perceived as more "difficult." But what falls into this category of literature, in this sense, can change over time.
Let's look at question two with this in mind. What literature does not mean is "something fictional." That's nowhere in the definition. However, people often make a connection between literature and, if not outright fiction, the idea of being able to hear people's viewpoints on things, get inside their heads, as it were, even if that means some poetic licence on the writer's part. Shakespeare's history plays, for example, aren't always entirely historically accurate, but they do what we want "literature" to do. They show us insight into the characters, make us feel engaged in the story, and they tell us the broad strokes of what happened in some (often very confusing) wars that make up part of our history. Are they great accounts of history? Maybe not. Are they literature? Definitely. Can something be totally historically accurate and literary? Well . . . why not?

In modern usage, a line is often drawn between "literary" and "non-literary" texts, even though the idea of a "non-literary text" is really an oxymoron. But the main distinction is the purpose of the works. If something is written purely for informational or transactional purposes, like a contract, timeline, basic record of war, etc, it would be called non-literary. A literary text about war would have a narrative, and be written to entertain and engage as well as just convey information. So a totally historical accurate text which tells a good story, engages the reader, and contributes something valuable to humanity, is literature.

But as to why some totally historically accurate texts which tell good stories in engaging ways are considered trash (like Barry Davies' Heroes of the SAS books) and some are considered literature? That can be arbitrary, and (see point one) comes down to snobbery.

Governments often try to “help” people with price controls. Such “help” is most common during times of disaster (such as hurricanes). Evaluate whether or not price controls in such situations really help people. Think about potential winners and losers from such policies.

The quotation marks in the question suggest that the person phrasing the question considers price controls ineffective. While in many cases price controls can cause problems, in others they can be a useful part of a toolkit for recovery.
The first issues one should address in relation to this question are the specific items being subject to price controls and the companies offering the items. For example, if a single company has a monopoly on a certain medicine and suddenly raises prices far above the cost of production to take advantage in a crisis, price controls seem to be the only humane response. Many people would, in such a situation, say that there is something fundamentally wrong about profiting from a humanitarian crisis. Even outside of extreme situations, it seems morally wrong for a company to charge parents over $600 for the EpiPen, which costs only a few dollars to manufacture and might be needed to save the lives of children with severe allergies.
On a more generic level, some governments will institute price controls to prevent price gouging in times of disaster. However, the problem with this is that the control of prices may stifle supply and distribution. Take canned foods as an example; assuming that there is a demand for canned foods during a disaster, if companies cannot raise prices, they may not wish to incur the expense of transporting cans of food into disaster zones. Additionally, if prices are low, it may not be profitable for shops to pay the expense of portable generators to stay open. Furthermore, price controls can lead to criminality when customers--usually corrupt officials--buy items at controlled prices and then smuggle those items to other areas to sell at a profit.
Owing to these considerations, governments need to consider how to ensure that people suffering from disasters can afford basic necessities through a combination of price controls, subsidies, and aid which balances the need of producers to sell at a sustainable price with the needs of consumers.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/04/business/angry-about-epipen-prices-executive-dont-care-much.html

Why did Makar disclose that he had killed the merchant?

"God Sees the Truth, But Waits" is the story of a man, Ivan Dmitrich Aksionov, who is imprisoned in Siberia for over twenty years for a crime he did not commit.
He tries to make the best of his life as a falsely imprisoned man. He devotes his life to God and becomes a friend and confidant for the other prisoners and the prison guards.
Some prisoners, including Makar Semyonich, are transferred from another facility. As he hears them talking amongst each other, Aksionov becomes convinced that Semyonich is the man responsible for the crime he is accused of committing. But he keeps this information to himself.
Semyonich attempts to dig a tunnel that will free him from the prison. The guards discover it and question Aksionov about it, but he refuses to tell them what he knows—partially out of fear of Semyonich, but also out of a lack of certainty that he actually saw what he thought he saw. Semyonich is so moved by Aksionov's act of protection that he freely admits to killing the merchant—both to Aksionov and the authorities. This leads to Aksionov being cleared of all charges, but he dies before he is released.

What happened to Jamestown settlers between 1609 and 1610?

This period, the Starving Time, was a difficult and decisive one in the history of Jamestown. It was characterized by new leadership, hostile Indians, famine, and a near evacuation of the colony.
John Smith, the charismatic and forceful leader of the colony, was badly wounded by a gunpowder accident. He sailed back to England in the fall of 1609, where he recuperated. After his departure, the colony faced formidable challenges.
Powhatan, the Indian chief, tried to starve the colonists out. He cut off all trade with the settlers. Englishmen found outside the fort were killed by the Indians. The situation became desperate as the starving colonists ate animals—including rats and mice—and even shoe leather. There were instances of cannibalism: one man even ate his pregnant wife. Less than one-fifth of the settlers survived.
In May 1610, two ships arrived. They were surprised to find the colony in such a wretched state, and the colonists decided to abandon Jamestown in June 1610. As their four small ships were leaving port, another English expedition arrived under the command of De La Warr. De La Warr spent the next year rebuilding the colony and brought it back from the brink of extinction.
The Starving Time had nearly ruined the colony, but the fortuitous arrival of a relief expedition marked a turning point. There would be more lean years for Jamestown, but it never again came as close to complete failure as it did in 1609–1610.

What does Zora do when two white travelers pass by her house?

As Zora herself describes it, she'd often sit on top of the gatepost and watch the world go by. From her unique vantage point, Zora sees numerous carriages and cars pass by the house. As one of life's dreamers Zora fantasizes about a better life, and in the figures of the white travelers who pass by her front gate she sees a strange, exotic, potentially exciting world full of hope and promise.
Zora hails the travelers as they go past, asking them if they'll let her go part of the way with them. They always do, much to the horror of her grandmother, who's always worried that in this deeply racist society Zora might end up being lynched.
One day, a couple of white woman pay an unannounced visit to Zora's school. A number of children, including Zora, are required to read out in front of the class. Zora reads from the story of Pluto and Persephone, one of her favorite Greek myths. The two white ladies are very impressed by Zora's performance, so much so that they invite her to read to them again in their hotel room. As a parting gift, they give Zora what looks like a large cylinder tied up with a fancy ribbon. It's only when she returns home that she discovers what's inside it: a hundred gold new pennies.

What is a character sketch of Mrs. Bernick in The Pillars of Society?

Mrs. Bernick tries to be a good wife in the play. She entertains others, as expected from her station as the wife of a prominent businessman, and she strives to be polite and proper at every turn. The issues she deals with generally stem from her attempts to fit perfectly into the realm of civility, causing problems when she cannot assert herself or defend those she should.
While she does a good job keeping her household in order and supporting the work of her husband, he has betrayed her. Despite his excellent reputation as a pillar of society, he has done terrible things in the past and attempts to do terrible things during the play to cover them up. Mrs. Bernick attempts to help her husband and protect his reputation, but she is always pushed around. For example, in act 1 of the play, we see the following exchange:

Mrs. Bernick (at the verandah door): Karsten, dear, what is it that—?
Bernick: My dear Betty, how can it interest you? (To the three men.) We must get out lists of subscribers, and the sooner the better. Obviously our four names must head the list. The positions we occupy in the community makes it our duty to make ourselves as prominent as possible in the affair.
Sandstad: Obviously, Mr. Bernick.
Rummel: The thing shall go through, Bernick; I swear it shall!
Bernick: Oh, I have not the least anticipation of failure. We must see that we work, each one among the circle of his own acquaintances; and if we can point to the fact that the scheme is exciting a lively interest in all ranks of society, then it stands to reason that our Municipal Corporation will have to contribute its share.
Mrs. Bernick: Karsten, you really must come out here and tell us—
Bernick: My dear Betty, it is an affair that does not concern ladies at all.

Mrs. Bernick, despite her traditional wifely qualities, does not make an impact on her husband. He does not honor her sacrifice or accept her grace. Instead, he treats her like a nuisance. Despite the condescension from her husband, she continues to seek to do good in the world. The truth about Betty Bernick is in her relationships. She is an honest, hard-working, and considerate character. She loves her husband dearly and worries that she has failed to get him to love her. By the end of the play, she is happier than she has been because, in his revealing the truth of only marrying her for her money, he gives her hope that she might still capture his love.
While Lona might better represent the spirit of freedom, Mrs. Bernick represents the spirit of truth. She fulfills her role with fidelity, despite gaining little from her marriage to Bernick. Her continued loyalty and her commitment to doing good for his reputation show that even when he was doing evil, she was doing good because she was committed to the truth of her love for him.

What is a colony forming unit and how is it used to infer microbial numbers in a sample?

A colony forming unit (CFU) is a measure of individual bacteria or fungi that are viable in a sample, therefore able to produce colonies. It quantifies the number of microbial cells that can grow visibly under defined conditions of energy (carbon) sources. Scientists use this measure to determine the number of viable cells in a known volume of a sample. As an example, if 1mL of a sample is spread onto a petri-dish containing nutrients, aminoacids, and minerals that are essential for bacteria and fungal growth, the resulting number of colonies would reflect the CFU/mL in the original sample. If the original sample were highly concentrated, a scientist may dilute it by a known factor before spreading it onto a petri dish to determine CFU. In this case, the scientist would perform calculations to determine CFU in the original sample. Here is an equation that could be used for this purpose: CFU in original concentrated sample = number of colonies from diluted sample × dilution factor.

A Colony Forming Unit (also known as CFU or cfu) is a measure commonly used in microbiology to determine the number of bacteria (or fungi) present in a sample that have the ability to multiply under controlled growth conditions.
If someone wishes to know the number of microorganisms present in a sample, one way would be to count all the microorganisms under a microscope. However, this would be time-consuming. An easier way is to dilute the sample and spread a small aliquot on a petri dish. Given suitable growth conditions, the microorganisms will grow into a number of small colonies. Assuming that each colony was formed from a single viable microorganism, we can estimate the total number of microorganisms present in a sample.
For example, 100 colonies are counted on a petri dish made by spreading 1 ml of a sample that was obtained after diluting the original sample in a 1:100 ratio. In such a case, the original sample contains 10,000 (= 100 x 100) microorganisms per mL or 10,000 CFUs per mL.
Hope this helps.

How does the author’s use of imagery to describe General Zaroff impact the overall meaning of the story?

When an author uses imagery, he or she is using figurative language to better describe objects, actions, people, and/or ideas in a way that targets a reader's senses. In "The Most Dangerous Game," Connell describes Zaroff in a way that targets the visual senses of a reader. We don't get descriptions of his smell or taste, but we do get great descriptions of what he looks like.

He was a tall man past middle age, for his hair was a vivid white; but his thick eyebrows and pointed military mustache were as black as the night from which Rainsford had come. His eyes, too, were black and very bright. He had high cheekbones, a sharpcut nose, a spare, dark face--the face of a man used to giving orders, the face of an aristocrat.

Notice how Connell describes Zaroff's eyebrows and mustache. He uses a great simile that tells us that those features were as black as the night. We do get a bit of narration about how Zaroff sounds as well.

In a cultivated voice marked by a slight accent that gave it added precision and deliberateness, he said, "It is a very great pleasure and honor to welcome Mr. Sanger Rainsford, the celebrated hunter, to my home."

Both of the above descriptions serve to create an image that shows Zaroff as a cultivated gentleman. He is somebody that should be respected. Of course, a part of this story does show that appearances can be deceiving. Zaroff's island is a good example. He has designed it to look like a channel where no channel actually exists. He does this to capture sailors in order for him to hunt down at a later date. Zaroff's appearance is equally deceiving and manipulative. He appears to be a kind gentleman that has Rainsford's best interests in mind; however, that is a facade. Zaroff is a ruthless killer that is always looking for his next great challenge. He may look cultivated, but his motivations and inner person is just as dark as the hair on his face.

What were the English colonies in America?

In 1607, merchants from the London Company founded a settlement that they called Jamestown in a territory known as the Colony of Virginia. Although life was initially difficult—they suffered from famine and conflicts with the natives—they slowly developed a strong colony under the leadership of the explorer John Smith. It was John Smith's book, A Description Of New England, published in 1616, that then attracted the attention of the Puritans.
The people that became known as the Pilgrim Fathers arrived in New England on the Mayflower in 1620. Seeing that there were few natives, they settled into a small area that they named Plymouth.
From there, the British extended their influence across what became known as the thirteen colonies. These included the colonies of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.
After the American Revolution, these colonies became the states that made up the United States of America.
https://www.history.com/topics/colonial-america/thirteen-colonies

What contributions did the Sumerians contribute to the development of libraries?

Libraries weren't possible until people developed a way to record their ideas in writing around 5,000–6,000 years ago, and the Sumerians are credited with developing the first writing system. Because of their location in Mesopotamia, they discovered that they could press reeds into wet clay to create marks that remained in the clay after it dried. This first system of writing was called cuneiform.
Archaeologists have discovered places where thousands of these huge tablets were stored by the Sumerians. It seems that the Sumerians stored each of these tablets one after another, in a series. The tablets recorded economic, commercial, and administrative records for the city. This organization of written records into a central location provides the backbone of the earliest libraries.
https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/development-libraries-ancient-world

What is the use of radioactivity in food preservation?

Radiation, or irradiation, is used to kill microorganisms and parasites that would otherwise cause food to spoil, thereby greatly increasing that food’s shelf life. Irradiation also kills off the bacteria that causes salmonella and E. coli poisoning in humans who ingest improperly treated or maintained foods. When used in proper doses, the radiation, in the form of gamma rays, quickly dissipates and is not present in the food when it is later sold or consumed.
The idea of irradiating produce and meats intended for human or even animal consumption is frightening to many people. The association of radiation with cancers and other illnesses is well founded. Radiation is also associated with lethal military applications, such as in the effects of nuclear weapons, the environmental testing of which in the 1940s and 1950s resulted in numerous cases of debilitating and critical illnesses. And, of course, the dangers of a nuclear reactor accident, such as the one that occurred at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania, in March 1979 and, far more famously, the one that occurred at the Chernobyl nuclear reactor plant in Ukraine in April 1986, understandably influence popular perceptions of radioactivity.
Radiation is a known substance, however, and is routinely used in medical diagnoses and treatments, at carefully monitored levels, and its application in the food preservation industry is similarly strictly regulated. The kind of radiation used in food preservation has a very short life span and poses no hazards to animals and humans.
http://www.radioactivity.eu.com/site/pages/Food_Preservation.htm

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9414630

Was America a penal colony?

There is an interesting notion that a significant portion of the colonies' population were from jails and prisons in England. A penal colony is defined as a place far removed from the general population that contains exiles from a country. Penal colonies are places where the exiles have little or no freedom, are forced to work, and have no alternatives outside of being imprisoned.
In that respect, historians debate how much of the British colonies in the Americas fit the description of a penal colony. A significant number of the early colonists were indentured servants released from debtor prisons to pay debts they incurred in Great Britain. When they were unable to pay their debts, they were sentenced to lengthy jail sentences in Great Britain until someone either paid the debt or they were released. Rather than spend time in a debtor prison in Britain, many were offered the opportunity to come to the colonies and work to repay the debts they owed. For most, this was a much better option than debtor prison and it offered the prospect of once the debt was satisfied, freedom in a new country where the person could restart their life.
Some historians estimate that as many as fifty thousand prisoners were shipped from Great Britain to America. This is an astounding number given that it represents nearly a fourth of the total of early British colonists in the 1800's relocated to America!
The answer to your question is the British used debtor prisons and indentured servants as a source for labor in colonizing America. In this respect, you can accurately say America was colonized and the home for British penal colonies. It is inaccurate to characterize all of the early settlements and America as a penal colony.
Also, you have to separate the forced labor of slavery as a different issue and much more pernicious form of servitude than indentured servants. Indentured servants did not experience the same level of hostility and animosity as slaves. Some conflate the institution of indentured servant with slavery. They are totally different elements in the colonization history of America.

Describe how Gregor’s insect-like body changes from the opening of the story to the ending. How do these physical changes reflect Gregor’s evolving emotional state in The Metamorphosis?

As we all know, Gregor Samsa fully turned into a giant, "monstrous vermin." This is, essentially, the biggest physical transformation that he goes through in the book. Interestingly enough, however, he doesn't seem to be particularly shocked or surprised about his newly acquired body form, nor does he wish to know why the change happened; in fact, he immediately tries to adapt to his new lifestyle as an insect and doesn't try too desperately find a way to transform back into a human. He soon realizes that some tasks are harder to do—like sleeping, for instance—but he also learns that he very much enjoys climbing and crawling on the walls.
The minor physical changes he goes through after his transformation, such as the brown liquid that comes out of his mouth whenever he hurts himself or the changes in his physical appearance, are usually metaphorical and symbolic. Thus, it's safe to say that his confusing physical transformation and metamorphosis does affect some aspects of Gregor's life, but his personality and his emotional state remain constant throughout the book; he never truly loses his humanity, and he still does everything out of love for his family. Unfortunately, his family is disgusted and repulsed by him, and they are embarrassed of his existence. Samsa fails to understand that he only lived to work and provide for his family and realizes that the only way to please his family is to die. Thus, he stops eating and eventually dies, unceremoniously and alone, similarly to how he lived.

1. How do you think Nurse Ratched’s strategy of silence at the staff meetings establishes her power and control over the others? 2. Who do you think is smarter—Ratched or McMurphy? Explain. 3. Based on what you have read about shock therapy and by Harding’s description of the treatment, do you think that it is a justifiable therapy for the mentally ill? 4. Why do you think McMurphy organized the fishing trip? Also, how would you describe McMurphy’s mood as he passes through the town where he lived in his youth? What does this suggest about him?

1. Nurse Ratched wields silence as a weapon. Others want her approval, and when she says nothing, she is hard to read. It keeps her subordinates on their toes, never knowing exactly where they stand with her.
2. Wow, what a question! "Smart" is such a nuanced word. Both Nurse Ratched and McMurphy are calculating, shrewd, insightful, and quick-witted. McMurphy is street smart and good at deceit. He's faking mental illness to get into the hospital, which he thinks will be more comfortable than prison. In the novel, McMurphy and Nurse Ratched parry mentally. McMurphy appears to "outsmart" Nurse Ratched several times, especially at the end when he sneaks the patients out for a fishing trip. But Ratched has the last laugh, because McMurphy doesn't realize until it's too late that being committed to the hospital is different than serving a prison sentence in one crucial respect: the hospital has no set release date. So ultimately, Nurse Ratched triumphs in the power struggle. Does this make her smarter than McMurphy?
3. No, shock treatment does not seem to me to be justifiable therapy for the mentally ill. Rather than curing patients's illness or improving their brain, shock therapy does the opposite. It deadens part of the brain, possibly damaging it, so that the patient is quieter and easier to control. The threat of shock therapy prevents patients from acting out for fear of being shocked, but then they are repressing their illness instead of dealing with it and trying to improve it.
4. I think McMurphy organizes the fishing trip for a couple of reasons. First, he sincerely wants his fellow patients to get outside of the hospital, to see what they're missing, loosen up, and have genuine fun. Second, he wants to give a symbolic middle finger to Nurse Ratched by pulling off as outrageous a stunt as possible.
As McMurphy passes through the town of his youth, he is jovially telling childhood stories and pointing out landmarks, such as his old house. However, as passing car lights illuminate McMurphy's face in the windshield, the narrator notices,

an expression that was allowed only because he figured it’d be too dark for anybody in the car to see, dreadfully tired and strained and frantic, like there wasn’t enough time left for something he had to do . . .

I think McMurphy is wistful and anxious. He realizes, perhaps, that his childhood innocence is gone, time is ticking, and there is no guarantee of tomorrow. His battles with Nurse Ratched, who symbolizes the establishment, seem to be wearing him down—a foreshadowing of the ending to come.
https://www.somersetacademy.com/ourpages/auto/2015/9/29/56608819/cuckoos%20nest.pdf

Compare the characters of Orsino and Viola in Twelfth Night.

Orsinio, the Duke of Illyria, is an intense, emotional, and passionate man who is in love with the idea of love. A statement he makes early in the play characterizes him:

If music be the food of love, play on!

Orsinio loves sensual pleasures and is often overly emotional, sentimental, and bombastic—tending to use inflated or exaggerated language.
Viola, in contrast, is self-controlled and dignified. As a person shipwrecked in Illyria, she has to survive by her wits and does so by pretending to be a man. Witty and intelligent, she has to be careful about everything she does so as to not slip up. Despite her ruse, however, Viola's manners and personality are attractive to the duke.
Orsinio, as a duke, can indulge his emotions and temper; he expects others to cater to him and overlook his excesses because of his position of power. Viola, because of her relative powerlessness, must keep her emotions under control and be attuned to the moods of those who are higher ranking than her.
What they share, however, is love. Viola is in love with Orsinio, but because she is disguised as a man, can't show it, while Orsinio, though he doesn't know it, is in love with Viola. Viola's love is much more restrained and silent than Orsinio's sentimental outbursts, but it is still love. She explains (while pretending to speak of someone else):

She never told her love,But let concealment like a worm i' th' budFeed on her damask cheek. She pined in thought,And with a green and yellow melancholyShe sat like Patience on a monument,Smiling at grief. Was not this love indeed?

How does Euripides explore the complexities of family in Medea?

Family life in Medea is presented as a source of conflict and chronic instability. Medea defies her father and, by extension, the established social norms by helping Jason to escape Colchis with the Golden Fleece. Though she abandons her family, Medea wants to start another one with Jason. She seeks the kind of stability that only an ordered family life could give to a woman in ancient Greece. At that time, women were defined almost exclusively by the role they played within their families as wives, daughters, and mothers. In helping Jason make his escape, Medea is hoping to exchange one conventional family structure for another. She knows how crucial it is for her to have a role in life. That is why she makes Jason promise her that he will marry her.
This is also why Medea's reaction to her abandonment by Jason is so bitter and vengeful. Jason's desertion has left her without any kind of family structure or support network. In ancient Greece, she is almost a nonperson, a woman without any kind of meaningful status in society. As Medea effectively has no place to go and nowhere to turn, she rejects the society that has rejected her and systematically sets about undermining its values, especially its valorization of the traditional family unit.

Why does the shark present a greater challenge to Santiago than the marlin?

For one thing, the mako shark is bigger, stronger, and faster than the marlin. This fact alone would present a huge challenge to even the most experienced of fishermen. But Santiago's attitude toward sharks also creates difficulties. Santiago has a much better understanding of marlins than he does of sharks; he has a deep, abiding respect for marlins. They are noble creatures, worthy opponents of a skilled fisherman. Sharks, however, are just scavengers. Santiago finds it harder to deal with them because he does not feel any natural bond with them as he does with the marlin. He can kill them, but he does not see this as the vanquishing of a noble foe in an epic battle of wills. Instead, Santiago's scrap with the mako sharks is just a brutal, debilitating slugfest, the maritime equivalent of an unseemly street brawl.

How did the other Wes Moore's first experience with alcohol impact his decision to sell drugs?

Wes's first experience with alcohol and drugs makes him feel exhilarated and shows him exactly what addiction is; he realizes that he can make money from feeding other people's addictions.
Wes and Woody meet up to skip school; Wes stole marijuana from his mother to share. The boys and some friends pick up Mad Dog 20/20 and rolling papers, then go sit under a bridge to have both. After awhile, they go to get Chinese food.
Wes is clearly affected. He's very slow on the bike ride and thinks a trash can is a pretty girl.
That night, he lays in bed as he recovers from the day. He feels excited about having been under the influence and recovered from it. He realizes that the feeling makes him forget everything else, and that it's an addictive feeling. That feeling, Wes thinks, can help him make money by selling the drugs that people want and need.

How do the young lovers hurt Miss Brill?

The young couple brutally remind Miss Brill of her loneliness and lack of companionship at the worst possible moment. Up until this point, Miss Brill had been living in a kind of fantasy about her place in the community. She speaks with no one and keeps to herself, indulging on sweets and dressing in a way that makes her feel good, with her little fur.
She imagines that the whole town is part of a play-acting company and that she is a part of this company. It makes her feel a connected-ness that gives her peace and joy. While listening to a band, Miss Brill thinks about this more fully:

The tune lifted, lifted, the light shone; and it seemed to Miss Brill that in another moment all of them, all the whole company, would begin singing. The young ones, the laughing ones who were moving together, they would begin, and the men's voices, very resolute and brave, would join them. And then she too, she too, and the others on the benches—they would come in with a kind of accompaniment—something low, that scarcely rose or fell, something so beautiful—moving . . . And Miss Brill's eyes filled with tears and she looked smiling at all the other members of the company. Yes, we understand, we understand, she thought—though what they understood she didn't know.

However, the young lovers spoil everything. Sitting near Miss Brill, they complain about her aloud, her presence making the young woman unwilling to make out with her boyfriend, the boyfriend loudly complaining she's a nuisance. They even mock her clothes, particularly the little fur.
This shatters Miss Brill's sense of belonging and her pride in her dress. She goes home and takes off the fur, without even looking at it weeping to herself. In this moment, she realizes just how alone she really is.

How has the young couple hurt Miss Brill? They have broken her love affair with the people, the "company," in the park. They have made the brutality passing by more important than the beauty visited. What, then, is the real focus or question of the story?Miss Brill has an idea in her mind about the people who go to the park on Sundays to listen to the band when in season. She imagines the attendees are similar to herself. She imagines that they are there for the love of music and for the thrill of a group of people--no matter how unknown they are to each other--sharing the fellowship of a common interest and experience just as strangers at a large church on a Sunday feel themselves to be a congregation in fellowship. Miss Brill confirms this understanding of her sense of her experience through stream of consciousness remarks about the "company" beginning to sing together, "something so beautiful--moving...."The major difficulty arises in the story in the form of the parade of brutality that marches between Miss Brill and the band. First there is the "beautiful" but calloused woman who throws away her "poisoned" "bunch of violets." Then there is the "tall, stiff, dignified" man who blows smokes in the face of the elderly, shriveled lady in the out-of-date "ermine toque" (a round-top brimless hat made of white ermine fur, once an expensive hat). Mansfield elaborates this instance in the parade of brutality perhaps to help illuminate--or perhaps contrast with--what Miss Brill is to feel and do herself a bit later on.
Then in the parade are the four girls who thoughtlessly, heartlessly nearly knock over the "funny old man with long whiskers" who "hobbled along in time to the music." Finally come the "boy and girl" who are "beautifully dressed" (unlike the yellowed lady in the old fashioned ermine toque) and who sit beside Miss Brill like the "hero and heroine" of her little drama that she "still" smiles tremblingly about. Up until her encounter with this boy and girl, Miss Brill has forgiven the brutality she sees, not knowing whether to "admire that or not!" Miss Brill, the cheerful optimist, has focused on the beauty, the vitality and united purpose of the visitors because there is a real sense in which their purposes are united: they each come to the concert every Sunday.
Now, the proximity of the cruel young couple, their direct manner of address to her and the personal nature of their remarks force Miss Brill to shift her focus to the brutality that usually only passes by as though on parade or as though entrances of bit players coming on and off the stage of the park drama. It is this contact with the brutal that breaks the love affair between Miss Brill and the "company" at the Sunday concert. It is this contact that makes the brutal more important than the beautiful. While Miss Brill has been humiliated by them just like the old lady in the toque was humiliated by the man, it is not just humiliation that causes her to hurry home and to dash past the bakery and her honey-cake with the possibility of an almond. The joy has been taken out of these pleasures by the beautifully dresses but mean-spirited boy and girl. Thus it isn't just humiliation that makes her sit on her eiderdown--a costly, luxuriant comforter when new--and put her fox fur away without looking at it. The joy has been taken out of her fur and her carefully treasured life life: her fur has been called "funny," and she has been called "stupid." She realizes too that other people view her fur necklet as out-of-date, like the ermine toque, and view her life--to her a cheerful and optimistic life--as "pathetic." This points out the real question of the story: Will Miss Brill be made pathetic by a brutal and heartless couple of young lovers or will she rise above assault, like the lady in the toque did, and restore her former cheerful optimism and pleasure in little things?

Why is Hedda Gabler frustrated?

In the most superficial analysis, Hedda is frustrated because her marriage has turned out badly. Her husband is a seemingly benign and pleasant man, but he is also remote and nerdish in an exaggerated way that would drive most spouses insane. He obviously cares more about his own intellectual work than about his wife, and he's also unrealistically self-effacing, especially when his chief concern becomes of one attempting to re-create his academic rival (also wife's ex-lover) Eilert's "brilliant" manuscript.
A deeper problem is the position of women in nineteenth-century society. Hedda clearly is a woman seeking something, clearly dissatisfied with the housewife role, even the comfortable upper-bourgeois one she has. The submissive (or even masochistic) Thea, with her unrealistic devotion to Eilert, is the opposite of Hedda, who obviously is contemptuous of her. Hedda's destruction of Eilert's manuscript is partly due to her envy of Thea's relationship to Eilert (it was "their" work, Thea's and Eilert's), but it can also be seen as an effort to help her own ineffectual husband Tesman by nullifying his rival's work, doing something actually practical even if wrong. Or it is simply a purely destructive act by which Hedda is showing her general contempt for all these people around her whom she probably regards as false and hypocritical.
This brings up a deeper issue, one of Hedda's fundamental alienation from society. It may not even be a specifically feminist issue so much as a broader existential one. Life in its normal trappings seems inadequate for Hedda, empty. The Judge's blackmailing of her, which he anticipates with glee, is merely the immediate, not the deeper cause of her suicide.

What does Polonius tell Ophelia about Hamlet's declaration of affection (iii, 102-136)? What do his remarks reveal about his opinion of Ophelia?

Polonius tells Ophelia that she is a "green girl" for believing Hamlet's declarations of love (1.3.101); in other words, he calls her naive and inexperienced. He is somewhat incredulous that she actually believes Hamlet. He tells her,

Think yourself a babyThat you have ta'en these tenders for true pay,Which are not sterling. Tender yourself more dearly,Or—not to crack the wind of the poor phrase,Running it thus—you'll tender me a fool. (1.3.105-109)

Polonius tells Ophelia literally to think of herself as an inexperienced child for having listened to Hamlet's declarations and believing them to be real, when they are so clearly not (or so he believes). He tells her to respect herself more than she does, or she will render him a complete idiot. In other words, he believes that she would be taken in by Hamlet's declarations, sleep with him and ruin herself, and dishonor her father in the process.
Polonius's remarks to his daughter reveal that he does not think very highly of her. First, he suggests that she does not have the ability or intelligence to discern when someone is telling her the truth or lying to her. Second, he seems to value her only as long as she does not harm his reputation by making herself look foolish and immoral.

What are the gothic elements present in The Scarlet Letter?

Though Nathaniel Hawthorne's 1850 novel is generally considered Romantic, the author did incorporate elements of the American gothic genre, particularly with regard to dark themes of sin, guilt, and psychological torment.
Arthur Dimmesdale's obsession with what he considers the greatest sin of his life, fathering Pearl outside marriage, destroys his physical and psychological health. He lacks the courage to face the judgment of his Puritan congregation by confessing his sin. Consequently, he holds secret his feelings of guilt and punishes himself for years until he ultimately collapses and dies.
Roger (Prynne) Chillingworth also suffers psychologically; his masculine pride will not allow him to claim Hester Prynne as his wife after she has given birth to Pearl. His love for her remains unrequited until his death, and the only pleasure he seems to get from his existence is through exacting his revenge on the man who cuckolded him. His psychological torment of Dimmesdale adds to the misery of both the fallen minister and his lover, Hester.
And lastly, gothic fiction usually contains a supernatural element. Pearl Prynne's precociousness borders on something unnatural; she is often compared to an imp, a not-quite-human child. She senses her connection to her mother's badge of shame in a manner that seems supernatural.

In the Iliad and Beowulf, compare and contrast the cultural values shown in the characters of Hector, Achilles, and Beowulf. What are those values, and how do the characters in the epics represent them? What are the differences in the religious values shown?

Both these works are oral-derived epics, and in many ways their values are quite similar. As heroic epics, they have protagonists who combine intelligence with military prowess. Bravery and great deeds that will live in memory are both valued. Heroes are descended from noble families and are skilled in speaking as well as in fighting. A central value is loyalty to their tribes and a strong sense of hospitality as creating mutual obligations of friendship across generations. Beowulf helps Hrothgar because of a family debt.
Beowulf and Hector are in many ways more complete heroes than Achilles. Both are intelligent, morally good, brave, and wise. Both also act with piety, honoring the gods and promoting justice. They are seen as demonstrating a sense of the responsibility of leaders for their people.
Achilles is a more ambiguous character. He is overly proud and self-centered, willing to sacrifice honor and loyalty for his own ego at the start of the epic. Over the course of the epic, Achilles matures, eventually developing a sense of the need to sacrifice personal desires for community good and becoming a great hero, with a moral stature to match his physical prowess.
In both epics, religion plays a strong part in determining morality, with the gods or God seen as promoting justice. From a modern point of view, both societies are intensely patriarchal and hierarchical. In Homer, rape is only punished if it offends the gods.

The Iliad and Beowulf both celebrate warriors and a warrior culture. Valor comes from performing heroic deeds on the battlefield, as does earthly immortality. Achilles, for example, is given the choice between a short life of heroic glory and a long life of domestic happiness, and he chooses the former. Beowulf, too, hopes to be remembered for his deeds of valor.
These are both masculine, patriarchal cultures, where male physical strength is valued and bonding among male warriors occurs. Warriors are expected to sacrifice themselves for the larger community. Hector, for example, would rather stay at home with his wife and young son than go to war but knows where his duty lies. Beowulf also comes to Heorot out of a sense of duty. Hrothgar believes it is because he once helped Beowulf's father, but we are led to believe it goes deeper than that: Beowulf feels obligated to protect civilization itself by protecting the mead hall.
A difference between Beowulf and the Iliad involves scope. Beowulf is concerned with the protection of the mead hall, which is posited as the center of civilization and all it represents—warmth, safety, food, companionship—is pitted against the grim marshes and moors of nature from whence monsters arise.
In the Iliad, men fight against other men, not monsters, and the civilization they are charged to protect is larger than the mead hall. As the shield of Achilles shows, the Greeks are fighting to protect an entire society that includes outdoor areas such as pastures and fields. In Beowulf, humankind is united in a struggle against the malevolent forces of nature that monsters represents.
Finally, women are more fully incorporated into the world described in the Iliad while they play almost no role at all in Beowulf. Gods and goddesses, too, play an ever-present, participatory role in the Iliad's drama.

The cultural values in Beowulf and Homer’s Iliad have a lot of similarities. Therefore, Achilles, Hector, and Beowulf will share similar cultural values.

The Greek and Germanic code for warriors valued courage, hospitality, generosity, glory, and lineage. These values can be seen all over the place in the poems. For example, Hector is the son of Priam and this lineage matters intensely. So, he must defend the city of his fathers. Likewise, characters in Beowulf can barely speak about who they are without first referring to their lineage. The same point can be said about hospitality and xenia. In fact, the Trojan war was started because of a breech in xenia.
Arguably the most conspicuous similarity in the poems is the seeking for glory. Beowulf and Achilles both seek glory. In fact, Achilles chooses a life of glory even if it means an early death. And Beowulf cannot resist fighting the dragon for one last act of adventure and glory. Here is a quote from the Iliad.

Mother tells me,the immortal goddess Thetis with her glistening feet,that two fates bear me on to the day of death.If I hold out here and I lay siege to Troy,my journey home is gone, but my glory never dies.If I voyage back to the fatherland I love,my pride, my glory dies

When it comes to differences, there is one main difference—Christianity. Since Beowulf is written after the impact of Christianity, there are moral overtones of Christianity in Beowulf; there is an emphasis on right and wrong. There is something that we can call evil. Moreover, when there is victory, the heroes in Beowulf praise God and give him thanks.

How does The Crucible explore cruelty?

The play really shows that anyone can be cruel, that our capacity for cruelty seems to be a part of our human nature. Abigail Williams is cruel when she blames Tituba for her own devilishness; she accuses Tituba of witchcraft, knowing that she will be believed because Tituba is a black slave. Reverend Parris—a minister—is cruel when he tries to prejudice the court and the deputy governor against John Proctor and anyone who seems to present a threat to himself. He knows that people are being sentenced to death and that he is keeping secrets about his niece and her friends. He would rather see innocent people die than to lose his position in the community. Proctor behaved cruelly when he cheated on his wife with Abigail prior to the start of the play, and he yells at her in Act Two, insisting that he should have "roared [her] down" and refused to confess when she first brought her suspicions to him. Deputy Governor Danforth behaves cruelly when he refuses to postpone the hangings in Act Four because it would make him appear weak and would cause people to question him. From the high to the low, all are capable of cruelty.

The Crucible is seen as representing so many things by so many people. However, I tend to think that one of the most profound aspects of Miller's work is how it handles the issue of cruelty.
There is political cruelty in the accusations, the mass hysteria, the turning of neighbor upon neighbor, and the twisted way in which spirituality is used to repress and silence voice. What makes the drama profound is how this dynamic weaves its way into the private explorations of cruelty. The personal realm is where some of the most brutal displays of cruelty can be seen between husband and wife, minister and penitent, and between friends.
The moments in which Miller is able to capture the privatized sense of cruelty which manifests from a cruel political condition makes for some of the best dramatic literature. Miller was ahead of his time in illuminating how the true terror of the modern setting is how political and private cruelty converge to make individuals feel nothing but agonizing pain. It is here that The Crucible operates as literary text, historical document, and philosophical treatise.

Who or what is the the subject of this poem?

In "Sonnet 29," Shakespeare is contrasting the world and all its troubles with the happiness and stability he obtains from his lover. In the speaker's everyday professional life, he is subjected to numerous setbacks and indignities. Life just seems so terribly hard and unfair at times. And when life starts to get the speaker down, as it so often does, he often wishes he were someone else, someone with much greater luck:

And look upon myself and curse my fate,
Wishing me like to one more rich in hope,
Featured like him, like him with friends possessed,
Desiring this man’s art and that man’s scope . . .

But then the speaker thinks of his beloved and how much joy their love brings him. Then he realizes just how much he has in life and no longer wants to be someone else:


Haply I think on thee, and then my state,
(Like to the lark at break of day arising
From sullen earth) sings hymns at heaven’s gate;
For thy sweet love remembered such wealth brings
That then I scorn to change my state with kings.



Shakespeare is reminding us of what's really important in life. All too often we attach too great an importance to worldly fame, wealth, and reputation. Yet these are all things that are ultimately beyond our control, and so when they inevitably turn sour and we experience misfortune, our immediate reaction is to wish that we were someone else. But, as Shakespeare observes, if we were someone else, then we wouldn't be able to enjoy the love of the people who matter most in our lives.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45090/sonnet-29-when-in-disgrace-with-fortune-and-mens-eyes

Compare and contrast the lives of today’s typical teenager and the teenagers in Johnny Tremain by Esther Forbes?

In any comparison between today and the past (of whatever period), I have always found that one can identify both enormous differences and enormous similarities.
It's easy to point out the physical changes that have taken place in the world over the past 240 years. In Johnny Tremain's time, the industrial revolution and the enormous transformation it has brought about had barely begun in Europe. So kids obviously had to grow up in a world before electricity (and before gaslight as well, so at night there was only candlelight to read and study by), before the telephone, and before the automobile and railway or any other mechanized transportation. It was also, of course, a time in which medical treatment was primitive. The devastating injury that occurs to Johnny's hand, even if it were to take place today, would not be easily fixed. It was not until the middle to late nineteenth century that anesthetics began to be used and modern surgery as we know it began. So all of these conditions created physical difficulties that we no longer have to deal with today.
Now for the opposite observation: in spite of the enormous transformation the world has gone through since 1775, certain basic things are perpetually a part of the human condition and have to be dealt with by every generation. In 1775, Boston, just like the American colonies overall, was in the midst of a tremendous political upheaval. When Esther Forbes's novel begins, it is not yet specifically a question of the desire for independence causing this upheaval, but rather the colonists' sense of their rights as English men and women being violated by the Crown. Though the terms "liberal" and "conservative" as we use them had not come into vogue yet, the opposite sides in the political debates of the era were in many ways analogous to the polarization of our own time. Our cities are not occupied by the military as Boston was in Johnny Tremain's time, and we don't have to fear imminent war, but young people in the twenty-first century still have to grow up in a politically charged atmosphere where there is a heated debate about the direction our country should take, about the rights and wrongs of the current leadership's actions, and so on. The issues are not exactly the same, but the fact of political division exists today just as it did in the eighteenth century. So, to answer your question, though America and the world are now physically much different than they were in Johnny's Boston (and life was physically much more difficult for Johnny), the mental and psychological background of life is really very similar now to what it was two-and-a-half centuries ago.

How does cherry add to glory of Easter?

Easter is a Christian festival which celebrates the resurrection of Christ following his crucifixion. In the poem, "Loveliest of trees, the cherry now," the cherry tree enhances the glory of Easter for two reasons.
The first reason is that the cherry tree blossoms in spring, and thus the blossoms symbolize the idea of renewal associated with that season. The cherry tree is thus an appropriate symbol for Easter because it reminds us of the reason Christ is said to have died. Christ is said to have died for our sins, so that we could be, as it were, born again, renewed.
The second reason is that the color red, implied by the word "cherry," connotes the blood and sacrifice of Christ that Christians remember during Easter. The blossoms of a cherry tree are actually closer to pink in color, but, nonetheless, the word "cherry" still connotes the color red. In the poem, the implied red of the cherry tree is contrasted with the white of the snow. White often symbolizes innocence and purity, and in this context it alludes to the innocence and purity of Christ.

How did Pennsylvania become a state?

The colony of Pennsylvania was founded in 1681 when King Charles II of England awarded a land charter to William Penn in lieu of payment for a large sum of money he owed to Penn's father, also called William Penn. The name Pennsylvania means "Penn's woods," named—at Charles's insistence—after Willam Penn Sr. William Penn Jr was none too thrilled as he thought that people might think that Pennsylvania was named after him, that it was some kind of giant vanity project. But the king wouldn't change his mind, and so the new territory remained Pennsylvania, the name it has retained to this day.
In its time, Charles's land grant was one of the most generous in history, though Penn, as a devout Quaker, was less concerned with the enormous wealth that it would bring, seeing the new territory instead as a potential haven for those fleeing religious persecution. It was this reputation for liberty that would in due course propel Pennsylvania to such a prominent role in the American Revolution. Philadelphia, the largest city in Pennsylvania, was the site of many important events in American history such as the signing of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution. Philadelphia also served as the nation's capital before a permanent capital was established in Washington, D.C.

What was the religion in the Southern colonies?

The Southern Colonies included Maryland, Virginia, Carolina, and Georgia. In 1712, Carolina split into North and South, creating five Southern Colonies. Throughout these colonies, there was a mix of religions, but it was primarily Anglican and Baptist. During this time, there was no separation of church state. Laws within the individual colonies required the people to attend a specific church, and the taxes they paid supported that church. In Virginia, Maryland, and the Carolinas, The Church of England was the law. Since there were various religions in the colonies despite the laws, issues did arise. In the Virginia Colonies, animosity between the Anglicans and Baptists led to arrests and physical attacks. This violence led to the idea of separation of church of state.

How did an ultranationalist attitude in Japan result in greatly increased powers for the army in 1930?

The rise of nationalism in Imperial Japan meant that more and more Japanese came to see their country as a great potential power, and what a great power needs more than anything else is a large, powerful army.
During the heyday of Japanese ultra-nationalism in the 1930s, vast sums of money were devoted to making the Imperial Army one of the world's strongest. And as the army grew, so too did the political power of its leadership—especially after the ultranationalist coup of 1936, when the state became completely devoted to serving the needs of the Emperor and his Imperial Army.
It was the increasingly powerful and influential Japanese generals who devised the country's imperialist strategy in the 1930s. They saw territorial expansion into Manchuria and Korea as essential to maintaining and strengthening Japan's strategic position in East Asia. Underpinning Japanese imperialist ideology was the fanatical belief that the Japanese were racially superior to the so-called lesser races and therefore had the right to conquer and exploit them.
Economic imperatives were also a factor in Japanese territorial expansion. The country was woefully short of raw materials, many of which were readily available in China, Korea, and other parts of East Asia. Taking over these territories allowed the Japanese to plunder the available resources, many of which were needed for the war effort.

What are some paradoxes in Gone Girl?

The central paradox in the novel is captured by the title: Amy is definitely "gone" during most of the book in the sense that she is absent from her home. When the author exposes her behavior with Desi and then learns of all the steps in her intricate plot to frame Nick, the reader realizes that her mind is what is really gone—Amy is a sociopath.
Plot-wise, the salient paradox is that Amy was not kidnapped or killed; she deliberately vanished. Therefore, Nick is not guilty. But then it is revealed that they are not the perfect loving couple and he is not exactly blameless in her disappearance: part of the reason she set him up is that she is angry because he is an adulterer.

What page of A Long Walk To Water is this quote on? "Despite the numbness in his heart, Salva was amazed to find himself walking faster and more boldly than he had before."

This quote comes on page 65 in the novel.
Salva has experienced horrible events so far. His uncle has been killed and buried just prior to this, and he is walking on in hopes of finding refuge at a sanctuary city. Looters had arrived at their camp and stolen everything they had, including food and clothes. Salva, being a child, did not have his clothes stolen because they would be too small for the looters—but they tied up his uncle and ended up shooting him dead.
After the group buries Salva's uncle, they begin marching on, and Salva is hungry, upset that they had lost their food and clothes, and distraught at his uncle's death. But, knowing the urgency and the necessity to reach safety, he is strengthened with resolve and marches on.

What are two quotations that connect in book 5 of Middlemarch, and how do they connect?

Book Five of Middlemarch is called "The Dead Hand" and covers chapters 43 through 53. In this section of the novel, the chapters shift focus between Lydgate, Will Ladislaw, Dorothea, Mr. Brooke, and Mr. Fatebrother, among others. Despite the shifts, the chapters are all connected.
For example, chapter 47 follows Will as he attends the same church as Dorothea but tries not to look at her. He notices her distress. Chapter 48 then shifts to Dorothea but stays connected because she explains her distress at seeing Will, as she hoped Will and her husband (his cousin) could possibly make up.
One of the primary connections between the chapters is the death of Casaubon and what it means for Dorothea. There are multiple notable events and revelations in book 5, but the title "The Dead Hand" suggests that Casaubon's death and the reveal of his codicil are the most important.
Dorothea is unhappy in her marriage to Casaubon, but she still worries about him during his illness. She also does as he wishes, in order to please him and not upset him:

“I prefer always reading what you like best to hear,” said Dorothea, who told the simple truth; for what she dreaded was to exert herself in reading or anything else which left him as joyless as ever.

In chapter 48, Casaubon asks Dorothea to swear to follow his wishes following his death. Dorothea protests such a solemn promise, and Casaubon calls this a refusal. Dorothea responds that she is not refusing, but she is not ready to answer. She will have to think on it and will give her reply the next morning. Dorothea sees how this is upsetting Casaubon, and so she decides to answer in the affirmative:

She had been sitting still for a few minutes, but not in any renewal of the former conflict: she simply felt that she was going to say “Yes” to her own doom: she was too weak, too full of dread at the thought of inflicting a keen-edged blow on her husband, to do anything but submit completely.

I think this is very revealing of Dorothea's character. We see her loyalty, even if it means sacrificing her own happiness.

Neither law nor the world’s opinion compelled her to this—only her husband’s nature and her own compassion, only the ideal and not the real yoke of marriage. She saw clearly enough the whole situation, yet she was fettered: she could not smite the stricken soul that entreated hers. If that were weakness, Dorothea was weak.

Before Dorothea can swear to Casaubon, she finds him dead in the garden. This whole encounter is extremely distressing to Dorothea, and in chapter 50 she is eager to leave Freshitt Hall and examine her late husband's work. Her devotion is flipped upside down when her sister Celia reveals the codicil, which states that Dorothea will lose her inheritance should she marry Will.

Everything was changing its aspect: her husband’s conduct, her own duteous feeling towards him, every struggle between them—and yet more, her whole relation to Will Ladislaw. Her world was in a state of convulsive change; the only thing she could say distinctly to herself was, that she must wait and think anew. One change terrified her as if it had been a sin; it was a violent shock of repulsion from her departed husband, who had had hidden thoughts, perhaps perverting everything she said and did. Then again she was conscious of another change which also made her tremulous; it was a sudden strange yearning of heart towards Will Ladislaw. It had never before entered her mind that he could, under any circumstances, be her lover: conceive the effect of the sudden revelation that another had thought of him in that light—that perhaps he himself had been conscious of such a possibility—and this with the hurrying, crowding vision of unfitting conditions, and questions not soon to be solved.

In the above passage, we see Dorothea's internal struggle and her changing feelings. The quotes I provided are all connected because they all focus on Dorothea and her tumultuous feelings toward Casaubon. I like how, although they are written in third person, these quotes give us a glimpse into Dorothea's mind.

Why does the author include so much description of the tundra in Julie of the Wolves?

In Julie Of The Wolves, the titular character spends most of the book surviving 'off the grid' in the wilderness, living purely off the land. This is particularly difficult in arctic climates, as the ground is almost always frozen to some extent resulting in a very limited variety of plant life and wildlife to use as resources for food and clothing, etc. The author describes the tundra in such deep detail both to set the scene and paint a more detailed picture in the reader's mind, and to impress upon the reader how difficult and uncomfortable it was, at times, for Julie to live in the wilderness.

A great portion of the novel's setting in Julie of the Wolves takes place in the tundra of Alaska. The author, Jean Craighead George, includes in-depth description of the tundra for a number of reasons. For one, in order for the setting of the story to be understood, the author must vividly describe it. Additionally, for the majority of readers who don't live in a tundra, one might be tempted to only picture miles of barren, isolated snow and freezing, uninhabitable conditions. While George does describe the fierceness of the tundra, and this description helps to underscore the predicament that Julie is in, she also describes the numerous life forms who call the tundra home. She paints a picture of the tundra in all of its fierceness, she but also describes the lichen, mosses, insects, birds, caribou, foxes, and wolverines that are found in this incredible environment. This description helps readers to understand that the tundra is, indeed, an environment that can be incredibly difficult to survive in, but it can also greatly support life if one only knows how to listen to and learn from nature.

What happened to women's jobs after World War II?

After World War II, there was great concern that without war production fueling jobs, the country would fall back into a depression, raising unemployment to levels everyone dreaded. Eager to have jobs for the mass of returning male troops, government and industry both worked hard to convince women to return to the home. The campaign to turn Rosie the Riveter back into the domestic goddess was largely successful, at least for white women, who entered into homemaking and childrearing in droves.
Factory and other jobs held by women during the war returned to male hands. As it happened, most of the world needed to be rebuilt after the war, so the United States prospered and jobs were abundant. In hindsight, the country had nothing to worry about, but hindsight is 20/20, and decisions about the future are necessarily based on the realities of the past.
By the end of the 1950s, women were reentering a booming job market, albeit in part-time, low-paid "women's work." There was no legislation banning job discrimination during this period, so the ghettoizing of women into low-paid "Girl Friday" positions also helped ensure that most women would not or could not reenter the full-time job market in a way that could compete with men.