How do you think Citizen Kane relates to the American dream?

Kane's saga depicts the superficial element of the American Dream in his creation of a vast business empire. The deeper message of the film, however, is that the dream is just that—an illusion of sorts in which Kane accumulates money and power but doesn't understand how to use them properly. He believes, mistakenly, that wealth facilitates total power, and he's unable to see that no matter how rich and successful a man becomes, he cannot control other human beings or even create fulfillment and happiness for himself.
Two elements among many illustrate this theme of illusion. Kane tries to make his wife into an opera singer although she has absolutely no talent. All he ends up doing is exposing her, and himself, to ridicule. Though practically every scene in Citizen Kane is legendary among film buffs, the famous ending stands out. After Kane's death, his possessions are being sorted out. "Throw that junk!" a man directs the workmen, and Kane's childhood sled, which we now see is the "Rosebud" of Kane's last word, is cast into the furnace, going up in smoke with everything else. The symbolism is that Kane's (and by extension, everyone's) Dream has been to recreate the happiness of childhood. But for him, it was impossible, and the last shot, of smoke rising from the furnace, shows the impermanence, or the illusion, of whatever success the Dream was capable of giving him.

When was Gulliver's Travels published?

Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels was published in 1726.

What years constitute the medieval period?

The "medieval" (pronounced "MED-E-VAL, not MIDevil or MEDevil) period, also frequently called the "middle ages," is typically defined as the years 500 AD to 1400 AD. The medieval period begins with the collapse of the Roman Empire and stops with the period that begins the Reformation and the Renaissance.
The medieval period refers to literally everything that took place over that a nine hundred year span, including all works written and created.

Literary analysis for the themes in the poem "You, Shiva and Mum"?

The poem, "You, Shiva and Mum," by poet Ruth Padel is in the perspective of either the poet, or a fictional daughter of the mother mentioned in the title. Typically, children view their parents as all powerful and their ways are mysterious.
Although the narrator of the poem describes her mother as a mortal woman--e.g. praying at a sacrificial shrine in India--the mother is also likened to deities in Hinduism. The poet portrays her mother as someone who is caring for her children, not just physically, but also spiritually.
Her mother is concerned with her son's upcoming marriage, and although an octogenarian, she travels to India during monsoon season to make her offering to the gods. The poem features Indian cultural practices and beliefs found in the Hindu religion.
However, the poem is not "ethnic literature," but is universal in showing a mother's love. In the context of deifying her mother, the poet shows that she is a compassionate "goddess." Although Shiva is known as the goddess of destruction, Shiva is also the goddess of creation and sustenance, similar to the poet's mother.

How does James sees his mother in the beginning of the book? How does his view about his mother change throughout the book? Identify important turning points in his relationship with his mother.

In The Color of Water, James McBride goes through several phases of emotional connection to his mother and how she presents herself to the world. When he first becomes aware of how different she is, he is embarrassed. This is most clearly exemplified by his reaction to her tendency to ride her bicycle everywhere. To his mother, riding her bicycle symbolizes the freedom of movement against the chaos of the world, but to James, it’s just a weird way his mom showcases her quirkiness to the rest of the neighborhood.
But when James’s stepfather, the man he called Daddy, dies, his emotions toward his mother turn to anger. He does not know how to work out his feelings of loss for his stepfather, and on some level he resents his mother for not being able to prevent it, so he rebels against her reverence of education by skipping school and doing poorly when he does go. This pains his mother greatly and creates a riff between them, but she does not give up and renounce him like her father did to her. Instead, she shows her faith and pride in him is still sound when she helps him get a scholarship to take a European trip with the jazz band because of his burgeoning interest in music.
The writing of this book helps James come to his final emotional journey with his mother—understanding. Through his exploration of her past with her words to guide him, he comes to see how her upbringing and struggles before she had him made her the woman she is, and he is able to find comfort and commonality in those experiences because they mirror a lot of his own. Thus James comes full circle and feels like he’s finally become his mother’s child.

Write about the form of the poem "Daffodils."

William Wordsworth’s piece "Daffodils" is presented in a fairly simple form. Consisting of four stanzas with six lines each, this twenty-four line poem exemplifies the iambic tetrameter style (four beats of an unstressed syllable followed by one beat of a stressed syllable). This form is typically employed by writers who wish to generate a light, "carefree" mood for their piece, making it easily accessible to multiple audiences. Not unlike many nursery rhymes and children's songs, Wordsworth's "Daffodils" seeks to generate a pleasant, carefree image in the reader's mind; a goal accomplished by this simple form. "Daffodils" is widely accessible to multiple audiences: a hallmark of a legacy poem. In closing, the form of William Wordsworth's poem is simple, consisting of four stanzas with six lines each.

Wordsworth's "Daffodils," or "I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud" consists of four six-line stanzas, each following the same rhyme scheme: ABABCC. In other words, the first and third and the second and fourth lines rhyme, and each stanza ends with a rhyming couplet. This gives a simple and pleasing sense of rhythm to this poem.
The poem uses tetrameter or four-beat lines of eight syllables. Tetrameter is associated with the ballad and nursery rhyme forms and adds to the poem's simple rhythms. The deceptively easy, simple structure of the poem helps convey the simple joy--accessible to everyone--that the poet finds in nature. Wordsworth wants to communicate in ordinary language and uncomplicated form the straightforward pleasure that can be found in watching thousands of daffodils swaying in a breeze on a spring day--and the joy that recollecting this sight can later bring.

What are some examples of Holden experiencing spirituality in Catcher in the Rye?

Holden Caulfield claims to be "sort of an atheist" but is evidently more spiritual than he is religious. In chapter 14, Holden elaborates on his thoughts regarding Christianity and Jesus. Holden comments on his distaste for the Disciples in the Bible and feels like they were constantly letting Jesus down. In an argument with Arthur Childs, Holden says that he feels Jesus would not send Judas to Hell while the Disciples would be the first to condemn Judas as the ultimate sinner. Holden's thoughts reveal his spirituality and genuine understanding of Christian ideals, such as mercy, forgiveness, tolerance, and compassion.
Similar to many aspects of society, Holden believes that Christianity has been distorted by zealous, "phony" individuals, who use religion to enhance their appearance and criticize others, which is one reason Holden refuses to attend Sunday service. While Holden does not entirely reject religion, his comments indicate that he has faith in Jesus's merciful nature. In the next chapter, Holden offers a donation to two nuns he meets in Grand Central Station. Once again, Holden depicts his spirituality by generously giving a donation to the nuns without ulterior motives. Holden is not concerned about saving his soul or being viewed as a giving person by society. He simply has a capacity for genuinely helping others, which corresponds to Jesus's inherent nature and reveals his spirituality in action.

List and explain various successes and failures in the three competing Worlds as they struggled to create “modern societies” after World War II. What problems did the Third World face?

Though the ideas of the First-, Second-, and Third World are currently outdated, it is useful to consider these entities as post-World War II constructions, especially when considering the repercussions of the violent ideological conflict between democratic and communist countries.
First World
Success: Rebuilding Western EuropeAfter WWII, Europe was suffering from extreme destruction, both in terms of physical damage and economic decline. There were innumerable costs to infrastructure through frequent bombings as well as costs to the population through the incredibly high death toll. The United States took an active approach in rebuilding Europe; the Marshall Plan sent 12 billion dollars to aid Europe. This not only strengthened the relationship between Europe and the United States but had the added benefit of curtailing communism, which was seen as a threat to the American way of life. Through reconstruction, America and Western Europe would eventually form part of what would be known as the "First World."
Failure: Civil RightsThe deficit of civil rights for certain citizens was an outstanding failure in America. The First World was characterized by systems of democracy and capitalism. The respective economic success in the First World was therefore used as justification for these systems: it was argued that capitalism and democracy provided a higher quality of life than their counterparts. While many Americans did live the American Dream of freedom and prosperity, the absence of civil rights for certain minorities provided a glaring oversight in the idea that democracy and capitalism inherently provided a higher quality of life.
Success: The Civil Rights MovementIn order to remedy the previous failure, the United States eventually passed legislation following the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s that guaranteed equal rights for all citizens. This was deemed a major success for the First World, because, at least legally, a large section of the population was now guaranteed the freedom and prosperity promised by capitalism and democracy.
Second WorldSuccess: Rebuilding Eastern EuropeSimilar to how the United States rebuilt Western Europe, the Soviet Union consolidated many countries in Eastern Europe that were once controlled by Nazi Germany, aiding in reconstruction following the immeasurable damages left in the wake of the war. This act also established geopolitical alliances that would later aid the USSR in their ongoing goal to encourage the spread of communism.
Success: Education and ScienceOne of the major successes of the Second World was their focus on education, technology, and science. Stalin and the Soviets believed that an advanced society capable of producing incredible technology would create an economy that would out-pace the economies of the capitalist First World. Among these major innovations was the launch of Sputnik in 1957, which was the first satellite to enter space.
Failure: Human RightsThe most infamous failure of the Second World deals undoubtedly with human rights. Millions suffered under the brutal dictatorship of Stalin's regime. Intellectuals, artists, and political dissenters were dealt with very severely. The Gulag System housed millions of these people and put them into forced labor, which frequently resulted in their deaths.Failure: The Great Chinese FamineChina, another staple of the Second World, suffered under the dictatorship of Chairman Mao Zedong. Charman Mao's strict policies that regulated crop production and local distribution of food led to tens of millions of deaths due to starvation between 1959 and 1961.
Third World
Success: Decolonization With the fall of fascism and the decline of imperialism after World War II, many Third World countries now found themselves autonomous. This allowed for the indigenous populations of these countries to now assume control of governance—for the first time in centuries, in some cases. While there were many problems associated with filling the power vacuum left in the wake of European withdrawal as well as the lingering effects of imperialism, the process of decolonization can generally be considered positive.
Failures: Dictatorship and CorruptionIt is difficult to say that Third World countries had "failures," because it implies that the Third World is to blame for the problems that followed the process of decolonization. When discussing these issues, bear in mind that these issues almost categorically resulted from the malingering effects of imperialism.
One major problem the Third World faced was corruption. These countries were provided aid from First and Second World countries, most often to spread the influence of democracy or communism, respectively. What occurred from this was government bodies essentially using the aid in exchange for the rights to export the country's natural resources. Additionally, aid itself was frequently distributed ineffectively, in part because of corruption.
Other significant problems stemmed from dictatorships. As the Third World began to develop independent governments, factions sprung up in support of opposing forms of governance. These factions often led to intense violence and the rise of dictatorships.
https://www.history.com/topics/russia/history-of-the-soviet-union

Identify two ways that Pi tries to kill a flying fish.

In Life of Pi, when he is stranded on the boat, Pi tries various tactics to kill the flying fish that enter the boat so that he can use them as food or bait. When the school of flying fish jumps madly into the boat, Pi tries several different approaches, to no avail, before finally killing his first fish. Upon being hit by the first fish, he grabs it and tries to throw it into Richard Parker’s mouth in an attempt to placate the animal, but he misses, and the fish survives.
After the boat is inundated with fish, Pi attempts to capture them with the blanket he has on board. He has some success but is still unable to kill them—he has been a vegetarian all his life, and this act is hard for him. First, he attempts to hit the fish with the hatchet to chop their heads off, unsuccessfully. Then he tries to use the blunt end of the hatchet to pummel them to death, but he loses his courage. Finally, he simply resorts to holding the fish with the blanket and snapping their necks.

The first flying fish "caught" by Pi isn't really intentional. Pi is worried that Richard Parker is staring at him, and he has no way to redirect Richard Parker's attention. As Pi is taking in the situation, a flying fish jumps across the boat and smacks Pi in the face. Pi actually thinks that Richard Parker has hit him in the face, but then he realizes that it was a fish. Pi believes that he can use this fish to somewhat tame Richard Parker, and he tosses the fish toward the tiger. This is probably the first way that he tries to kill the fish: let Richard Parker kill it. Unfortunately, the flying fish avoids Richard Parker's open mouth. Suddenly, Pi and Richard Parker find themselves in the midst of a flying fish school. Fish are jumping and flying all around and over the boat. Pi is being pelted by fish after fish, and he grabs a blanket to protect himself and catch some as well:

Every fish that hit me was like an arrow entering my flesh. I clutched at a blanket to protect myself while also trying to catch some of the fish. I received cuts and bruises all over my body.

Pi winds up with many fish in the boat. He realizes that he has to kill them in order to eat them or use them as bait. He selects one fish and first tries to hit it with the hatchet, but he can't bring himself to do it. Then he covers the fish in the blanket and turns the hatchet around, planning to beat it to death. Pi can't bring himself to do this either. Then he wraps the fish in a blanket in order to break its neck.

Pi tries to use a piece of his leather shoe for bait (along with fishing tackle provided to him in the lifeboat), a sign of his dwindling supplies and growing desperation. I believe this may be the first way he tries to kill the fish, though due to the wording of this question I am not quite sure.
When he is hit with a school of flying fish in his lifeboat, he tries to direct them toward Richard Parker, which could be another way he tries to kill them (this method is specific to flying fish, not just fish in general).
Also, Pi ends up catching a flying fish and killing it by wrapping it in a blanket and snapping its neck with a hatchet. This is an incredibly difficult thing for Pi to do, as a lifelong vegetarian, but it allows him to catch an even bigger fish, which he uses to feed and tame Richard Parker.

Why is Dwight D. Eisenhower important?

Dwight D. Eisenhower was the last president to be born in the nineteenth century. He served in both World Wars, was highly respected for his calm demeanor and leadership abilities, and earned an international reputation for his thoughtful approach to dealing with allies and foes. Eisenhower, in some respects, was the bridge between the generation that fought two world wars and a new generation of leaders that confronted the spread of Communism in the shadow of the rise of nuclear-armed powers.
Historians rank Eisenhower in the top ten of the most effective presidents to serve the United States. Until recently, because of his extreme modesty and a low-key approach to public service, no more than a few glimpses of his impact on public policy have been revealed. Eisenhower shunned publicity, and his appearances in public might even be considered underwhelming by today's standard image of the presidency. His decision-making style was to engage experts privately, gather the facts, and deliberate over a long time before making a decision. Many of his decisions were announced by subordinates, as Eisenhower preferred to maintain a distance between the Office of the President and the news media.
Eisenhower was influential in the transition to modern international relations defined by the Cold War, the effort to stop the spread of Communism, the return of conservative fiscal policies at the federal level, the challenge to enter into the space race, television as a media becoming a more significant influence in politics, and civil rights reforms. Eisenhower worked tirelessly behind the scenes to moderate and reduce the tensions in the cold war. As part of his efforts to reduce tensions in the world, he was able to negotiate a truce in the Korean War.
Eisenhower in domestic policies was considered to be moderate. His legislative agenda did little to obstruct the programs of the New Deal and the Fair Deal. He was generally unfavorable to raising taxes and was a fiscal hawk. Unusual for a retired general, Eisenhower was critical of what he termed the military industrial complex. While a strong supporter of the military, Eisenhower expressed concern that military spending left without stronger controls from Congress would eat into the domestic agenda and therefore was unsustainable. Eisenhower's policies focused on a combination of right-sized military, diplomacy, and strength through economic power. His administration emphasized the necessity of a balanced budget so that the economy would not be inhibited and that tax dollars would be spent wisely.
Two accomplishments that stand out from the rest of his administration's success is his work on civil rights and the interstate highway system. Eisenhower sent troops in 1957 to Little Rock Arkansas to enforce the school desegregation order of the federal court. While his action was an important milestone in the protection of the civil rights of African Americans and minorities, his order to desegregate the military may have had a greater long-term positive impact on racial relations in the United States. The second accomplishment is the interstate highway system. In June of 1956, he signed a bill authorizing the construction of more than 41,000 miles of new modern highway connecting major cities in a national highway system.
Eisenhower's status as one of the most positively influential United States presidents has risen in recent years. His demeanor in office, management of crises, and international ambassadorship have resulted in a reevaluation of the Eisenhower administration.
https://millercenter.org/president/eisenhower/impact-and-legacy

https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/presidents/dwight-d-eisenhower/

The storm sets in motion the chain of events that leads to the characters' adultery. Do you think the storm excuses the characters in any way from responsibility for their actions?

In Kate Chopin's short story, the storm itself only influences the characters' physical convergence, because Alcée has to find refuge inside Calixta's home as the storm approaches. Initially, Alcée does not intend to go inside of Calixta's house, but the intensity of the storm forces him to seek shelter.
The storm is a blatant analogy for the two former lovers' increasing passion. As the storm intensifies, so does their sexual desire for each other. Even if the storm were not featured in the narrative, it is evident that Alcée and Calixta would have initiated a short-term affair at some point. In this regard, the storm—or, rather, the chain of events that the storm causes—does not excuse their respective infidelity.
In the end, both characters decide to stay in their respective marriages and seem happy with the experience. They show no remorse, which appears to be Chopin's message: that passion and love can remain innocent even if infidelity is involved. The author wants to convey that morality is subjective and a social construct.

How could the following dilemma be resolved, in keeping with Catholic teachings? A Catholic woman is struggling with a husband who is mean and verbally abusive. She has tried hard to make their marriage work and says that this is the man that God has chosen for her; she has taken a vow “for better or for worse.” How could a friend or family member convince her that God doesn’t expect her to stay in an abusive relationship and would understand if she decided to leave her husband? The couple do not have any children, and the situation is not healthy for this woman and is causing her to have anxiety and depression. What are some words of wisdom to let her know that God will not condemn her for choosing to leave? Or should she stay with her husband according to the Catholic faith?

It can be very difficult when life seems at odds with faith. According to Christian teachings, however, the light of God will never leave us, no matter how dark our lives appear to be. Without knowing more specific details, it is difficult to say what is right or wrong, but one can say this: God wants us to live in a way that spreads his light, which is contained within us, to others. To be the best person you can be, and to do the most benefit unto others, physical and mental well-being are important.
God knows suffering; he feels it in us and sees us all struggle with it every day. But he does not want his children to suffer needlessly. That is not his way. God wants us to be loved as much as he loves us.
“In sickness and in health” means marriage partners must care for each other, must stand by each other when physical or mental health declines, or in difficult situations that test their bond. To verbally abuse a partner to the extent that they develop anxiety and depression is itself going against the promise to care for and protect one another.
One option would be for this couple to consult a marriage counselor. It sounds as though they need outside help, and professionals are able to provide perspective that we at times cannot see. Although humans are subject to patterns of behavior, that does not mean people cannot change. The behavior of the husband may have underlying factors. Remember that we do not have the authority to judge people; only God does. The church can also provide guidance. Many people with marriage issues have sought help from the Catholic Church. If the couple are not part of a congregation, they are still able to seek this help as Catholics.

Why was Louis the Pious destined to have troubles his father hadn't?

Louis the Pious was the only son of Charlemagne and Hildegard who survived to adulthood, so he was naturally made sole ruler of the Franks upon his father's death. Louis, however, had three adult sons between whom he sought to evenly divide his empire. As sibling rivalry and extreme power might be expected to mix, the empire devolved into no less than three separate civil wars between the sons.
It could also be noted that the two rulers had vastly different ethics and ruling styles, which may have influenced their heirs. Before his other sons' deaths, Charlemagne maintained a confederacy of sub-empires that were to be each directly ruled by a different son. The sons were also sent on trans-regional military quests to encourage a sense of unity between the sub-empires. As luck would have it, though, Louis became sole ruler and then acted in the exact opposite manner from his father. He immediately silenced and disenfranchised any potential opposition to his rule within his family. Perhaps Louis's greed and poor morals influenced his own sons to fight amongst each other, dissolving the empire's unity and thus its integrity.
In summary, Louis was destined for problems with his empire's succession because he had multiple heirs and also because he espoused greed and singular authority. His father, Charlemagne, never had such problems, as he had only Louis as his heir and likely would have sought a united confederacy between his heirs, had they survived.

How does the narrator's reference to several Latin writings remind the reader of his roots as a Jesuit priest?

The narrator of “The Star” is speaking to an image of “Loyola” depicted in an engraving by the Flemish artist Rubens; it hangs on the spaceship wall. The Spanish priest Ignatius of Loyola (1491–1566), whom he addresses as “Father” or “Father Loyola,” was the founder of the Society of Jesus, a Catholic order generally known as the Jesuits.
As he speaks, he refers to a book that the engraved figure is holding. On it, he reads the words “Ad maiorem Dei gloriam,” which is the motto of the Jesuit order and means “for the greater glory of God.” “Majorem” is an alternate spelling of the motto, which is often abbreviated AMDG. The narrator tells Father Loyola that he no longer believes this message. However, the fact that he continues to speak with and question him shows that his loss of faith is probably not total.
The questions he poses include how the annihilation of an entire society can “be reconciled with the mercy of God,” He can arrive at no answer, even though he has consulted the Exercitia Spiritualia—in English, “Spiritual Exercises.” These are a set of Christian meditations that Loyola wrote from 1522 to 1524.
https://sites.uni.edu/morgans/astro/course/TheStar.pdf

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Jesuits

How has government policy shaped corn production and, thus, in part, what we eat?

Government policy has shaped corn production at every stage since the end of the Second World War. As Pollan points out, in 1947 the American government had a surplus of ammonium nitrate, the main ingredient for making explosives. It also happens to be an excellent source of nitrogen for plants. So the government, seeing an opportunity to boost food production, instructed a munitions plant in Alabama to make chemical fertilizer from bomb material. Thus modern-day fertilizer was born, which facilitated the exponential growth of corn and other crops.
Soon, farmers realized they could grow vast quantities of corn without exhausting the soil. In turn, this led to a huge glut of corn on the market, which kept food prices low. Ever since the war, successive governments have given massive subsidies to farmers growing corn in order to keep food prices at a sustainably low level. To date, every single bushel of corn enjoys a 50-cent subsidy from the US government.
As corn is cheaper than sugar, high fructose corn syrup has increasingly replaced sugar as a sweetener, to the extent that something like a quarter of all the products sold in an average American supermarket contain corn.

There was a presidential election that year, with the two major candidates being: Andrew Jackson of the Democratic Party, and John Quincy Adams of the National Republican party. Answer this question: in that election, which candidate would you have voted for, and why? In your answer, be certain and discuss, for the candidate for whom you choose to vote, the policy positions he held, and explain why those positions lead you to vote for him.

Coming into the 1828 U. S. presidential election, President John Quincy Adams was not on firm ground, as his election in 1824 had been uniquely decided by the House of Representatives because no candidate earned majority of votes. Andrew Jackson, who had earned more popular and electoral votes in 1824, was considered to many to have been the rightful winner. The fourth candidate, Henry Clay, then Speaker of the House, wielded the most influence when he threw his support to Adams. This solution became known as the “Corrupt Bargain” because it was believed that Clay opposed Jackson in order to gain a cabinet post and improve his own strategic advance in 1828.
Many voters' reasons for choosing either candidate were related to the previous election, as well as to Adams' performance while in office, the parties' platform points, and information brought out in the campaign.
In addition to being the incumbent president, Adams had served as Secretary of State under James Monroe, in which capacity he was considered the architect of the Monroe Doctrine. His previous service included Senator from Massachusetts, Ambassador to Russia, and chief negotiator of the Treaty of Ghent. Andrew Jackson, the former Senator from Tennessee, had gained national fame as a victorious general in the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812. Jackson had previously served in the U. S. House of Representatives and as Governor of Florida (while it was a territory). The fundamental difference between the two was Adams’ considerable experience and skill as a diplomat, contrasted with Jackson’s military orientation.
In 1824, both men had been members of the Democratic-Republican Party, which crumbled in the wake of the hotly contested election. Jackson led the effort to create a new party, the Democratic Party, supported by John C. Calhoun, who ran with him for Vice President. The other faction became known as the National Republicans, and backed President Adams. The new trend was also to run only one candidate per party, and to have only two main candidates.
In reality, the two candidates’ platforms were not very far apart. Both focused primarily on domestic issues, advocating increased taxation to pay for infrastructure—especially railroad expansion—and agricultural improvements. However, the protectionist tariffs that both had supported in 1824 became a point of division. Adams had succeeded with the passage of a tariff bill in 1828, which Jackson now strongly opposed. With his roots in Massachusetts, Adams won New England but Jackson dominated all other regions of the nation. His westward-looking, frontier expansionist focus helped him win among newly enfranchised Western-state voters.
The differences were primarily in experience, style, and region. Adams’ strong belief in loyal service was played out in his approach to the campaign, which refused involvement in dirty politics. With a reputation for decency but also passivity, even before becoming president, his political experience had far outstripped that of Jackson. Adams was criticized primarily for his lackluster performance while president, as well as for the contested election itself. Jackson, the war hero, was known as a firebrand who promoted aggressive action in politics as well as the battlefield. He was challenged for being a slave owner, his anti-Native American policies in Florida’s “Indian Removal,” and for being an enemy of the Constitution.
https://www.britannica.com/event/United-States-presidential-election-of-1828

Who is the antagonist?

One could argue that the antagonist in Woodsong is nature herself. Paulsen must overcome the harshness of the Alaskan landscape if he's to compete successfully in this challenging sled race. Though Paulsen develops a deep, abiding respect for nature due to his experiences in Alaska—and also those of his previous life in Minnesota—that respect is still tinged by a certain fear. Paulsen is acutely aware that, no matter how much he respects nature, it still has the power to destroy him, especially in this neck of the woods. This, above all, is what makes Mother Nature his antagonist in Woodsong—and a very formidable one, at that.
Equally, one could also say that perhaps Paulsen is his own antagonist, for he must overcome himself and his own fears in order to run the Iditarod. Paulsen is not just competing against the other sleds, or the harshness of the Alaskan winter, but also against himself. He knows that if he can rise above his innermost fears, then he stands a good chance of staying the course.

In Woodsong, there is no traditional antagonist. Instead, Gary Paulsen faces off against nature as he grows up in the north and later lives in an isolated home with his wife and family.
Paulsen sees both the beauty and the danger of nature throughout the book. He sees a deer torn apart by wolves, and as he watches them begin to eat her alive, he has a realization. The wolves—and by extension, the harshness of nature—are not necessarily bad. They just are what they are. He says that it would be wrong for him to expect them to be anything else.
When Paulsen decides to run the Iditarod, he tests himself and his team of dogs against nature. Though he is injured at times and occasionally strained to the point of hallucination, he still completes the race. He finds joy in nature, even though nature itself is the only thing that presents danger throughout the book—whether it's in the form of a hungry bear or in the form of an extremely low temperature.

What is an example of a poor conductor?

Poor conductors are any material that does not conduct electricity, heat or both very well and are generally known as insulators.

Non-metals are typically insulators (poor conductors) while metals, i.e. Copper, are very good conductors which is why they are used in cookwear and electric wiring.
Examples of poor conductors:
wood, rubber, air, paper etc.

When speaking in terms of a physical conductor, a poor physical conductor is one that does not rapidly or efficiently transfer energy in the form of heat or electricity.
With that definition you can identify good and bad conductors around you quite easily. Metals such as copper are good conductors—that is why they are used in electrical wiring and cookware, while materials such as rubber are poor conductors. That’s why wires are insulated with rubber or rubber-like plastics.
Conductivity can vary between electrocity and heat, so it is important to identify the purpose of the conductor. Glass, for example, can conduct heat fairly well but not electricty.
The property of conductivity is determined by the molecular structure of the substance. Metals generally allow the flow of electrons (electrical conductivity) while nonmetals resist the flow.

To read more about the chemical properties of good bad conductors visit this link: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/conins.html

Best of luck!!

A material can be a poor conductor of heat, electricity, or both.
A poor conductor means that the substance will not easily conduct heat or electricity (or both) as easily as a conductor.
For example, sand is a poor conductor of heat and electricity. During the daytime, when the sunlight hits the sand, it traps the heat instead of conducting it. Similarly, it does not conduct electricity. In comparison, copper is a conductor of both heat and the electricity, and hence we can use utensils made of copper for cooking and copper wires for electrical applications.
Non-metals are generally bad conductors or insulators. Metals, on the other hand, are good conductors.
Some other examples of poor conductors of electricity are mica, paper, wood, glass, rubber, Teflon, etc. Some examples of poor conductors of heat are air, lead, etc.
Hope this helps.

What is your first impression of Clarisse?

When Montag first meets his teenage neighbor, Clarrise McClellan, she comes across as charismatic and thoughtful. Clarisse begins by describing herself as seventeen and "crazy" and proceeds to comment on her affinity for nature, which is surprising to Montag. When Montag looks into her eyes, he sees a mirror image of himself and feels comfortable because of her inviting presence. She then questions Montag about the history of the fireman agency and asks why he laughs when she hasn't made a joke. Montag comments that she is odd, but the reader perceives her as uniquely authentic and curious.
Clarisse goes on to mention that she thinks drivers should slow down on the highways and enjoy the natural scenery. She also tells Montag that she barely watches the parlor walls, enjoys having insightful conversations with her family members, and asks Montag if he is happy before she heads home. Overall, Clarisse is depicted as a genuine, thoughtful girl, who is curious and has an affinity for nature. Her presence is magnetic and she is a breath of fresh air. Her thoughtful questions and sincere nature influence Montag to dramatically change the trajectory of his life.

What can I write about if I start my introduction to an essay about "A Rose for Emily" with this question: "is it possible to love someone until death do you part?"

If one were to write an essay regarding the topic of loving someone until death in relation to Faulkner's "A Rose for Emily," one would certainly have to elaborate on her complex, disturbing relationship with Homer Barron. Tragically, Emily Grierson suffered under her father's oppressive supervision as a young woman and missed out on numerous opportunities to date local men. Following her father's death, Emily remained reclusive for some time until eventually taking an interest in a northern foreman named Homer Barron. The two began dating and received enormous criticism from the community because the citizens believed that Emily was way above his social status. Despite the fact that Homer was not a marrying man and there were rumors that he was homosexual, Emily continued to date him and eventually purchased rat poison to solve her relationship issues.
One could argue that Emily poisoned Homer Barron because she was aware that he would not marry her and eventually skip town. Therefore, Emily believed that by killing Homer, she could remain with him forever, which is a twisted act of romance conceived from her diseased mind. It is also implied that Emily committed necrophilia with Homer's dead body and slept next to him in the attic. Emily's disturbing actions reveal that she never lost her love for Homer and continued to love him after death, which corresponds to the essay's topic.

If you started your introduction with the question "is it possible to love someone until death do you part?," you'd have to state your stance and give supporting points. For example, if the answer is yes, you can talk about Miss Emily and her forbidden romance with Homer Barron. Despite coming from a noble family and being accustomed to the good things in life, Emily didn't mind the fact that Homer was from a poor family. She dated him despite objections from the townsfolk and her family members. Even when he mysteriously disappeared, Emily was never seen with another man. It was only after her death that people discovered the corpse of Barron in her apartment. There was a strand of gray hair next to the dead body, which showed that Emily would occasionally sleep with her dead lover. In the end, only the death of both of them could separate the two lovers.

What is Paul's muck fire that is always burning?

Muck fires are often the result of lighting strikes that generate great heat, and the muck fire in Tangerine is not an exception. Though the muck fire was already there, the lightning strike made it rage harder than ever before. Paul's mother seems shocked that everyone seems to have generally accepted that the muck fire will rage indefinitely and that there's not much that anyone can do about it.
The muck fire is an ugly thing that creates noxious fumes in the vicinity. It is a fire that rages underground. No one sees it directly, but all experience its effects. It may be representative of the aggression that is just beneath the skin of Erik and Arthur, or it may be a symbol for the web of lies that is just beneath the presentable exterior of the Fisher family.

Muck fires are fires that burn underground. They're usually started when decomposing vegetation catches fire, often as a result of the heat generated by lightning strikes. As muck fires take place underground they seldom represent a threat to human life. Nevertheless, they are virtually impossible to put out, and cause discomfort to anyone in the vicinity by emitting an unpleasant, noxious stench into the atmosphere.
A lightning strike is responsible for igniting the muck fire near Paul's house in Tangerine. The nearby field is full of lignite—kind of like coal—which is highly flammable. All it took was for one bolt of lightning to stir things up. The muck fire's been raging for as long as anyone can remember, but it's much more intense now that lightning has struck. Paul's mom is shocked to discover that the muck fire will never go out. She wants to complain to the Homeowners' Association, but the fire fighter advises her that she'll just have to learn to live with the muck fire like everyone else in the neighborhood.

Why does Mullet Fingers put a bag on Roy's head?

Mullet Fingers is a boy of mystery and doesn't want anyone to know anything about him, especially in relation to his protection of the owls' nests. So when Roy comes across a bag of cottonmouth snakes that Mullet Fingers has been keeping, it's just a little too close for Mullet Fingers' liking. He feels like his long-cherished privacy is threatened by someone poking around his things.
In addition, he's waging a one-boy crusade against the building site and so is deeply suspicious of any outsiders. For all he knows, Roy could be one of "them": one of the enemy. So he puts a bag over Roy's head and ties him to a tree. At the same time, Mullet Fingers isn't a bad kid; he has no intention of hurting Roy. He only uses the cottonmouth snakes to scare off the guard dogs. Besides, he soon frees Roy, telling him to count to fifty before turning around. When he's finished counting, Roy turns round, only to see that Mullet Fingers has vanished.

Knowing what you do about trends and patterns in crime, how would you counteract the assertion that people who commit crime are physically or mentally abnormal? For example, how would you explain the fact that crime is more likely to occur in western and urban areas than in eastern or rural areas? Aside from becoming a criminal, what other career paths are open to psychopaths?

There is a misconception among the public regarding the origins of criminal thought. In previous decades, the general population believed that crimes were committed by those with sociopathic or psychopathic tendencies, whether officially diagnosed by a clinician or not.
However, multiple studies in criminalistics, sociology, and forensic psychology have shown that there are various factors that contribute to criminal acts and trends. For instance, the state of the economy is a major factor in criminal activities. The perpetrators of a crime may not have any mental or physical abnormalities, but rather may be simply desperate for money in order to survive.
The only effective way to combat stereotypes and misconceptions about crime is to educate the public via internet articles, videos, fact-checked blogs, and social media campaigns. Over the past few years, there has been a trend on social media to proliferate education on mental health. If health officials treated criminology as a subgroup of mental health, new avenues to educate the public about the causes of crime could be available.
While studies regarding the trend of crimes more likely occurring in western and urban areas than in eastern or rural areas is still up for debate, urban studies scholars believe that dense populations contribute to the rise of crime. Urban settings themselves aren't a major factor in contributing to crime, but a simple fact of probability: more people means more chances that a larger portion of the population are criminals. Additionally, criminals would be more likely to target high-population areas, like a city, rather than a sparsely populated rural regions. More people means more available victims.
There is a stereotype that all psychopaths are criminals and serial killers. This misconception is due to film, television, and general ignorance. There are many functioning psychopaths who have never committed a crime, nor do they have violent tendencies. While a very small portion of those diagnosed with psychopathy and other mental illnesses do commit crimes, it would be statistically false to generalize all psychopaths as prone to criminal acts. Psychopaths can work in many professions just like anyone else.
http://www.jneuropsychiatry.org/peer-review/misconceptions-regarding-psychopathic-personality-implications-for-clinical-practice-and-research-neuropsychiatry.pdf

https://res.mdpi.com/genealogy/genealogy-01-00008/article_deploy/genealogy-01-00008-v2.pdf?filename=&attachment=1

https://www.vrc.crim.cam.ac.uk/vrcresearch/paperdownload/manuel-eisner-historical-trends-in-violence.pdf

Can someone explain to me David Hume's principle of conversion with the following examples? When viewing a well-written tragedy as a work of art, two movements are created in the soul, or mind, according to Hume. On the one hand there is what he calls the predominant movement, which is caused by the genius, eloquence, beauty, and talents displayed in the tragedy along with the fact that the tragedy is an imitation, i.e. is unreal. This movement might reasonably be said to be the appreciation of the aesthetic merits of a work of art. Along with this movement in the soul there is, when viewing a tragedy as a work of art, a subordinate movement which is the result of affected passions. This latter movement is a negative, or disagreeable, one owing to the kind of passions that arouse it in the spectator, e.g. sorrow, indignation, woe, etc. The Principle of Conversion is the principle whereby the subordinate movement is converted into the predominant movement, and upon such conversion the latter is strengthened. The result of this conversion is an increased feeling of pleasure, or delight, in the spectator of the tragedy. To help validate his theory concerning the problem in question, Hume offers six examples of instances where the Principle of Conversion is operative. In his first example, novelty, or the feeling of 'newness', is considered a subordinate movement which gives strength to whatever emotion is predominant, e.g. joy, sorrow, pride, shame. In the second, the predominant movement of jealousy in Othello is increased by the subordinate one of aroused impatience. Examples three, four, five and six are cases where the predominant movement is increased by a subordinate movement which is occasioned by situations of difficulty or adversity. In three, the feeling of affection in parents is said to be strengthened by the difficulties involved in rearing a sickly and weak child, so that the parents commonly have greatest affection for him or her. The fourth is a case where the sorrow caused by the death of a friend increases the sentiment of endearment which was felt prior to the friend's death. In five, jealousy and the uneasiness caused by absence of a lover are viewed as the cause of a movement which helps the agreeable affection of love to subsist. Finally, example six is a case where esteem, or being prized, is given such additional force by the grief for the artistic creator who struggles with death that one prizes his last unfinished work most. Although one might (perhaps justifiably) take issue with certain of the technical points of Hume's examples- for instance, by suggesting that a parent's sympathy for a weak and sickly child accounts for his or her additional affection, or that one often has merely additional appreciation for the final works of artists struggling with death-I think that the main point he is attempting to establish by them, viz. that what he takes to be a predominant movement is strengthened by the conversion of a subordinate one, is quite discernible.

When asking for clarification as to what Hume's principle of conversion actually means and entails, it's useful to get a larger sense of Hume's discussion in "Of Tragedy." What question is he asking? Who is he in conversation with? What is he trying to explain to begin with? What's the focus of the essay?
With that in mind, Hume begins his essay "Of Tragedy" by noting a phenomenon quite common to dramatic tragedy: often, viewers tend to receive greater degrees of pleasure and enthusiasm from more intense displays of sorrow and suffering. Of course, this raises his question, how is it that these extreme displays of suffering can evoke this response? He cites one Abee Dubos, for one particular explanation, which suggests that the real enemy of human happiness isn't so much unhappiness, but rather apathy, and any kind of emotional response (whether pleasant or unpleasant) is still to be held as better than the lack of one. However, Hume is unconvinced by this explanation, because it does not explain how this negative emotional response is transformed into something positive. Even if it is better to feel sorrow than to feel nothing at all, this still doesn't explain how people can turn sorrow into happiness. Next, he cites one Fontenelle, who argues that emotional responses are ultimately interchangeable, so that one can be transformed into its opposite. As an example, one can turn pleasure into pain and pain into pleasure. One can find joy in sorrow, and one can find sorrow in joy. This logic forms the basis for his theory of conversion, which you ask about above.
From here, he comes to the role of oratory and of artistic expression, which serves as the medium through which skillful writers/poets/artists can manipulate the emotions to achieve a desired effect. As he here writes, "this extraordinary effect proceeds from that very eloquence, with which the melancholy scene is represented." Thus, a great dramatist or artist can use their artistic abilities to create this effect, by which sorrow is transformed in the mind of the viewer.
From here, we come to his examples, which serve as illustrations of his theory. What's interesting is that these examples are meant to illustrate ways in which one emotional reaction can be converted to another. In any case, these examples are ultimately drawn from real lived experience, as examples by which one emotional reaction (usually negative) can be converted into another, more positive emotional experience.
The first example is Novelty, which I would suggest reads a lot like suspense. As Hume himself writes,

Had you any intention to move a person extremely by the narration of any event, the best method of increasing its effect would be to artfully delay informing him of it, and first excite his curiosity and impatience before you let him into the secret.

From here, he draws on the example of Othello and how Iago uses this kind of technique to intensify Othello's jealousy, by playing on impatience. By holding back information, by keeping a listener in suspense, a person can more effectively maintain their interest and create a much stronger emotional reaction in them as a result.
As further examples of this Principle of Conversion, Hume mentions the role by which "difficulties increase passions of every kind; and . . . they produce an emotion, which nourishes the prevailing affection." He gives an example of parents with a sickly child, who could be expected to cherish that child all the more greatly as a result of their uneasiness concerning the child's health. Fear and anxiety are here converted into love.
He mentions the role by which a recent death can result in far warmer sentiments toward the deceased on the part of the survivors. He uses the example of jealousy and separation, which can actually intensify affection and strengthen relationships. Ultimately, through the examples, Hume suggests that his Principle of Conversion is actually based in reality and can be seen as a facet of nature and of human behavior, and if we can see it expressed in the real world, we should not be surprised to find the same principle at play on the stage.
(Do note, Hume's essay does not end here but continues onward, but this does cover much of reasoning which your question asks to clarify. I hope it has proven helpful in this task.)

What does Percy discover about the Greek gods and Camp Half-Blood in The Lightning Thief?

At the beginning of the story, Percy Jackson believes he is a troubled youth who suffers from ADHD and dyslexia. After he loses his mother in a battle with the Minotaur, Percy finds himself at Camp Half-Blood. Here, Percy learns that the gods he once believed to be myths are real. He also learns from Annabeth that the gods often have children with humans. These children are known as demigods. Annabeth explains to Percy that Camp Half-Blood is the safest place for demigods. Percy also learns that his characteristics of ADHD are a result of his "battlefield reflexes." In addition, Percy discovers that his difficulty in reading is due to his brain being "hardwired for ancient Greek."
When Percy first arrives at camp, he is labeled as "undetermined." This means that he is a demigod whose parent has not yet been identified. Percy stays in the cabin with the children of Hermes. However, it soon becomes evident that Percy is the son of Poseidon. As a result, Percy relocates to cabin three, which is reserved for the children of Poseidon. Percy is its only inhabitant.

How long does it take for some one to die from the red death?

In all, it takes about half and hour to die from the red death. This doesn't sound like a particularly long time, but for those poor unfortunate souls afflicted with this diabolical disease, it must seem like an eternity.
First of all, those infected by this deadly plague experience sharp pains and sudden dizziness. Then blood starts oozing from every pore, causing large scarlet blood stains to form all over the body, especially upon the victim's face. (This is how the red death got its name).
As one can imagine, it's a truly horrifying spectacle to have to see someone in such a terrible state. But whatever pity or sympathy one may have for the victims, there's absolutely nothing that can be done for them. And after half and hour of seizure, progress, and termination of the disease, the victim lies red and dead.

Why is Athena an important female character?

The goddess Athena, daughter of Zeus, plays an important role in Homer's Odyssey for several key reasons. She is the goddess of wisdom and takes on the role of guide and mentor for the main character, Odysseus. Her advice and guidance encourage and direct his actions during his journey. She not only helps Odysseus, but also his young son Telemachus who is at home with his mother while Odysseus is gone fighting in the war. The responsibility of protector to his mother falls on his young shoulders and the goddess aids him when possible. With the aid of Athena, Telemachus is able to mature into a strong and confident young man who is wise and well suited to defend his family. Athena helps direct the choices of these main characters and is a central female figure in this classic literary work as she guides the characters through the story and helps them reach the final outcome.

Athena is an important female character in The Odyssey because she offers a substantial amount of guidance to Odysseus's son, Telemachus. Telemachus starts off as a young boy who does not like the suitors that are vying for his mother's hand, but he feels that he has no ability to control the situation. Athena disguises herself as Mentor and offers Telemachus guidance, allowing him to make decisions and to ultimately become much more sure of himself. Athena gives Telemachus the wisdom and guidance needed to forge alliances and begin the search for his father. This ultimately decides the fate of everyone involved, as the suitors are only vying for Penelope's hand because Odysseus is believed to be dead. It is fair to say that Athena determines the outcome of The Odyssey

What is the conflict in City of Joy?

City of Joy, by French author Dominique LaPierre, was published in 1985. It is considered a novel, although LaPierre relates true stories of his experiences in Calcutta and uses the names of real people.
The novel unfolds through the stories of three characters—a priest from Poland, an Indian rickshaw puller, and an American doctor—all living in Calcutta for their own reasons. The overall conflict that the novel explores is the stratification of society along socioeconomic lines and among religious beliefs. Even among the poor in the slum Anand Nagar, LaPierre observes that there are levels of poverty, from the working poor to the abject, and that instead of solidarity there, caste distinctions further separate people who are all struggling. In this way, the book transcends the common trope of the rich exploiting the poor and authorities doing little to prevent the injustice (though this is part of what LaPierre documents).

Who is the character of Moustique in Dream on Monkey Mountain?

Mostique is Makak's friend and business partner. The playwright introduces him in the first scene, immediately after the prologue, when he arrives at Makak's house to accompany Makak to the market to sell their coal.
Though Walcott describes him as a "little man with a limp," Moustique seems to be the more proactive of the business partners. He berates Makak for not being ready on time—as always—and tells him that he has no time to go mad because it is market day and they have to make money. So far it has been a bad week for them.
As the scene continues, the reader finds out that Makak saved Moustique from life on the street:

You find me in the gutter, and you pick me up like a wet fly in the dust, and we establish in this charcoal business.

Written by poet and playwright Derek Walcott, Dream on Monkey Mountain is a play which was first published in 1970. The play tells the story of Makak, a poverty-stricken elderly man who makes and sells charcoal in a West Indian Island village. It opens just as Makak has been jailed for smashing up a cafe whilst drunk. Whilst in jail he has a dream—the Dream on Monkey Mountain.
Moustique is Makak’s business partner; he sells the charcoal that Makak makes. He was rescued by Makak four years earlier when he was drunk and in the gutter. He is a non-religious, small, black man who suffers from a twisted foot. Moustique feels that Makak is the only person who believes in him. Moustique dies twice in Makak’s dream.
When Makak’s dream ends at the end of the play, Moustique is at the jail begging for his friend to be released, not realizing that he already has been. He and Makak then return to Monkey Mountain.

How did the princess indicate to her lover the door of her choice?

"The Lady or the Tiger" by Frank Stockton is one of the most famous short stories of all time. Its effectiveness lies not in providing a solution, but in posing a dilemma.
In this story, set in an ancient kingdom, a semi-barbaric king has a unique method of justice. For a crime sufficiently severe, he has the accused placed in an arena in which there are two doors. Behind one is a horrible ravenous tiger that will tear him to shreds and devour him; behind the other is a lovely maiden to whom he will be wed.
When a common courtier commits the unpardonable offense of falling in love with the princess, he is thrown into prison and then taken to the arena to make his choice. When he arrives, he bows to the king but looks to his lover, the princess, for guidance. He trusts that she has learned the secret of the doors and will show him the one he must open. This is how the story says she indicates her choice:

Her right arm lay on the cushioned parapet before her. She raised her hand, and made a slight, quick movement towards the right. No one but her lover saw her.

So, she indicates through a movement of her hand that the courtier should open the right door. Then the story questions what she would have chosen for him. She would hate to see him torn apart by the tiger, but she would also hate to see him in the arms of another woman. Which fate does she decide for him? The story never tells. It is up for each reader to wonder about the answer to this question.

In Julius Caesar, who is the protagonist?

Most audiences and readers tend to regard Brutus as the chief protagonist. He is the one who most elicits our sympathy, and he fits Aristotle's definition of the tragic hero, perhaps more fully than other, much more famous characters in Shakespeare. At the close of the play, even his enemy Antony pays tribute to him in a manner that does not have a true parallel in any of the tragedies generally considered Shakespeare's greatest (i.e., Hamlet, Macbeth, King Lear, and Othello).
Unlike those plays, Julius Caesar does not have a single character who is the absolute focus of the action and themes. Why, one may ask, is the play not named Brutus? As a political drama, Julius Caesar shows us a thematic complexity different from that of the other major tragedies. Which side is right or wrong? Is Caesar, as Antony describes him, the "noblest man that ever lived in the tide of times," or is he the ruthless tyrant the conspirators see him? Is Antony good, evil, or both? In his cry to "let slip the dogs of war," do we see a man selfishly wishing to cause havoc for private revenge or one who wants war for a legitimate purpose—for the good of Rome?
These questions cannot be answered without generating a huge amount of controversy. One can say that this is true, perhaps, about anything in literature, but in this play Shakespeare deals with timeless questions that affect our view of multiple characters and their function in one of the most crucial episodes of history. Even Cassius is an ambiguous figure—not the villain he might appear on the surface. For most people, Brutus does stand out as the most admirable man in the cast of history-makers, but Antony and Caesar also can lay claim to the role of chief protagonist, depending on the weight we give to those intangible factors that endow the action of the play with its deeper meanings and its timelessness.

What is the difference between Marco and Alfieri in the ending scene of A View from the Bridge?

Alfieri's quite stoical about everything that's just happened. A man lies dead and though Alfieri deeply regrets what's happened to Eddie, he doesn't hesitate to blame him for contributing to his own downfall. This seems a perfectly valid assessment of Eddie, given that he's very much the archetypal tragic hero. Nevertheless, Alfieri does still admire Eddie for the same reason as he admires Marco: unlike most people in life, he didn't settle for less.
Like Eddie, both Marco and Alfieri see the flaws in the legal system, albeit from radically different perspectives. They see that the system is concerned with law, not justice, and that the two aren't the same things at all. In stabbing Eddie to death, Marco believed he was getting justice rather than the half-measures provided by the criminal justice system. And although Alfieri, as a lawyer, cannot agree with that, he can still understand Marco's motivations, as he also can with Eddie's.

What is a summary of chapter 1 of Ali and Nino?

In the first chapter of pseudonymous author Kurban Said's Ali and Nino (first published in 1937), one Professor Sanin lectures at a boys' school in Baku, attended by forty students of various backgrounds. The professor introduces the question to his students of the relative merits of Baku joining "progressive Europe" or "reactionary Asia." The students generally favor Asia (to the professor's chagrin). The narrator, Ali Khan, remembers going to Tehran and seeing autobuses—a memory he relates to his professor when called upon. The professor remarks that these are used in backwards countries in place of railroads.
During a break, the narrator visits the neighboring school for girls, where he sees his cousin walking with a girl, Nino, whom he greatly admires. She tells him that they are lucky to be in Europe, else she would have to wear a veil.
The narrator's commentary at the chapter's close discusses his childhood home with rich carpets from exotic places. He feels a sense of pride in his hometown. People that came to his country for oil, he says, are not the real people of Baku.

In The Grapes of Wrath, what role does the bank play? What power do the small farmers have against the banks and the tractors?

In The Grapes of Wrath small farmers are presented as being at the mercy of the banks. The banks and other finance companies own the lion's share of the land on which the farmers work. With the Great Depression in full swing, and with the need for profit ever more urgent, landowners start kicking tenant farmers off their land to satisfy the insatiable appetite for money of the banks back East, portrayed as savage, greedy monsters with their own army of snub-nosed tractors.
The bank is depicted as an especially rapacious, hungry monster that feeds off the hard work of tenant farmers. The financial needs of the banks will always come first. It doesn't matter how long a farming family has occupied a particular plot of land; the bank won't think twice about sending in the tractors to turf out the tenant farmers just to squeeze some extra profit out of the land.
In truth, there's virtually nothing that the tenant farmers can do about it. The main problem is that the decision-making process is entirely subject to the dictates of profit, and so it's impossible to pin the blame for evictions on any one individual. At every stage in the process, individuals—whether they're bankers, landowners, or tractor drivers—are controlled by the need to turn a profit. Among other things, this somewhat absolves them of individual moral responsibility for kicking tenant farmers off their land. It's nothing personal; it's strictly business.

How is Widge harmed by Adam?

Adam steals Widge's savings. When the boys arrive at Leicester to stay at Simon Bass's, there are already people living and working there. One of them is Adam, who works in the stables. Adam is a large boy who Widge feels will have more privileges than him because of his tenure there. When Adam steals the money Widge brought with him, Widge decides not to turn him in, because he doesn't think that anyone will believe him over Adam.
Since Adam already understands the city and the household, he's able to take advantage of the newcomers. They won't be given the benefit of the doubt.
Adam's theft of Widge's money harms Widge because he doesn't have a lot of ways to replace it. He's only there to steal the play; he doesn't have the time or the opportunity to replace what was taken without difficulty.

Why did Miss Murdstone scream when she saw the baby in David's arm in David Copperfield?

The moment you're referring to occurs in chapter 8 of the novel, when David is home from school for the holidays. David throws Miss Murdstone into a state of "violent consternation" when he "took it [the baby] very carefully in [his] arms." David describes the scene:

She [Miss Murdstone] was limp with horror; but stiffened herself to make a dart at me, and take it [the baby] out of my arms. Then, she turned faint; and was so very ill that they were obliged to give her cherry brandy. I was solemnly interdicted by her, on her recovery, from touching my brother any more.

Later in the chapter, when David's mother remarks that David's eyes and the baby's are alike, Miss Murdstone flies into a similarly upset state, saying,

Who else could compare my brother’s baby with your boy? They are not at all alike. They are exactly unlike. They are utterly dissimilar in all respects. I hope they will ever remain so.

Miss Murdstone resents the implication that the baby, who is her nephew, bears any resemblance to David, who is not biologically related to her and who is, in fact, a person she loathes, as we see through her cruel, inhumane treatment of him. Her disdain for both David and Mrs. Copperfield does not carry over to the baby because the baby is her brother's and shares her family lineage. As such, she wants to "protect" the baby from what she sees as the "stains" on the household: the presence of Mrs. Copperfield and David. When she sees David holding the baby, she reacts so dramatically that you'd think David had a contagious illness that was fatal to anyone who came in contact with him. What she's really doing is manipulating David's own relationship with his mother, testing family ties, and making David feel as though he's an "outsider" in his own home. Her compulsive need for control and to exert that control through displays of power is highlighted in this episode, when David is made to feel ashamed for holding his half-brother.

What issues did the Declaration of Independence fail to resolve regarding equality ?

The Declaration of Independence resolved no questions related to equality. Indeed, all it did was declare that "all men are created equal," a fundamental tenet of the thought of John Locke and other seventeenth and eighteenth century intellectuals. It did this by way of providing justification for a political revolution and, as the title implies, declaring independence from England. The Declaration specifically mentions enslaved people and Native Americans, but only as enemies stirred up in violence against "real" Americans. It mentions nothing about class inequality and, despite Abigail Adams's famous request that her husband "remember the Ladies," is silent about gender inequality as well. It is important to remember that the Declaration of Independence is not really a government document, and that it was not intended to establish any framework for government. Over the years, the Declaration has gained acceptance as a founding document of the United States, and therefore its principles have been cited by advocates for equality from Frederick Douglass to Elizabeth Cady Stanton to Martin Luther King, Jr. But the fact that these activists for social justice found it necessary to refer back to the Declaration to support their arguments only demonstrates that it left issues of equality unresolved. In this sense it really was, as Martin Luther King said at the March on Washington in 1963, a "promissory note" that still had to be honored by the society whose birth it heralded in 1776.
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript

When does Curley's wife die?

Curley's wife meets her death on a Sunday afternoon. This is indicated by the fact that all the men, except Lennie, are pitching horseshoes outside the barn. Lennie has the day off too, and he is inside the barn playing with his puppy. He would probably be incompetent at pitching horseshoes and not invited to participate. Crooks is not allowed to sleep in the bunkhouse, but he can pitch horseshoes with the white men. Apparently he is very good at it, too. Earlier Carlson had said, "Jesus, how that nigger can pitch shoes." This statement was merely intended to indicate that Crooks would be pitching horseshoes with all the other men and therefore would not be in his little room adjacent to the barn. Lennie and Curley's young wife would be all alone. The audience would sense impending trouble.
From outside came the clang of horseshoes on the iron stake, and then a little chorus of cries.
Steinbeck called his book "a playable novel." It was written in such a way that it could be speedily and easily converted into a stage play. Steinbeck already had an agreement to provide a script for a play to open in New York the same year the book was published. The horseshoe-pitching is only represented by sounds, which could easily be produced offstage in the play by a prop man banging iron against iron while a few stagehands occasionally emitted shouts and cheers. In the book Steinbeck simply states:
It was Sunday afternoon.
But this would have to be shown in a stage play. The audience would understand it was Sunday because the men were not working.
Curley's wife comes into the barn. She is probably hoping to run into Slim. She thinks he might be there because he must spend some time looking after his dog and her new pups. They are not having an affair--although Curley suspects the worst. Slim is the only man who is kind to her and talks to her. She runs into Lennie instead and stays to talk to him in lieu of anything better to do. The purpose of all the business about horseshoes is to show (1) that it is Sunday, (2) that all the men including Crooks are pitching horseshoes, and (3) that Lennie and Curley's wife are all alone in the barn.
The death of Curley's wife has to take place on a Sunday. Otherwise Lennie and all the other men would be out working in the fields. Although the men are free for the day, there is nothing for them to do but pitch horseshoes, which costs nothing.

In the poem "Marrysong," how does the poet use imagery to communicate?

In “Marrysong” by Dennis Scott, the poet uses imagery to reveal to the reader the difficulties that married people go through. For instance, the persona in the poem notes:
“She made wilderness again.” (7)
In this case, Scott uses the word “wilderness” to depict how the emotions of the persona’s wife are unstable. The term “wilderness” represents the excitement, danger, and unpredictability that come with love.
Another instance where Scott uses imagery to explain the difficulties associated with marriage is when he uses the term “quarried hurt” to explain the pain that is often linked to marriage. Quarries are sites that are used for extracting stone through the use of explosives. Here, the persona attempts to show the reader that he has deeply hurt his wife on many occasions.

The poet uses imagery to communicate in the poem “Marrysong” by comparing his wife to the ever-changing landscape, sometimes harsh and unforgiving like the “walled anger of her quarried heart” and other times calm and refreshing like a “cool water laughing”. He tries to map out his wife’s moods as if he was a geographer mapping out terrain, but he finds that “Roads disappeared” and the “map was never true.” The imagery uses helps to create a metaphorical meaning of the poem, where we understand that marriage is full of ups and downs.
The speaker chooses to “stay at home” with his wife, for better or worse, because his wife always keeps him guessing, keeping the excitement and mystery alive in their marriage. He accepts the “geography, constantly strange” so that he could continue to “find his way among the landscapes of her mind.” He stays in his marriage because he loves his wife and, like an explorer, wants to continue to discover and understand her. The poem creates a metaphor that shows how love is a journey that constantly changes, like the terrain. This imagery communicates that sometimes the road is rocky and dangerous, but other times it is not, which is why love is such an exciting journey.

"During the 1960s, the United States had become a more open, more tolerant, freer country." How would you defend or refute that statement with specific examples that demonstrate more openness, tolerance, and freedom or the lack thereof?

There are several examples that one might cite to support this argument. The first would be the passage of federal legislation that ended legally-sanctioned segregation and white supremacy. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 essentially outlawed segregation based on race, sex, national origin, or other basis. It was followed by the Voting Rights Act that worked to eliminate discrimination in voting, ensuring that more people had access to the political process. Very public movements for the rights of women, Native Americans, the LGBTQ community, and other groups also emerged from the 1960s, bringing their concerns before the national consciousness. The period witnessed a so-called "sexual revolution," in which people began to break free of traditional mores, and women, thanks to increased access to contraception, could live more open and free sexual lives. Some major federal initiatives that were part of the Great Society attacked poverty, especially in rural areas and inner cities. So there is little doubt that many different groups of people staked a claim to equality during this period, but I think two points should be emphasized. The first is that the difficulties of the struggles these people faced demonstrates how unequal and closed American society was for many in the 1960s. The second is that the end of the 1960s experienced a backlash against the developments described here, with many conservatives appealing to working-class white males by asserting that progress had come too fast. So despite an increased sense of openness and tolerance, and the indisputable expansion of freedoms during the 1960s, these developments were hard-won and tenuous.
https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/civil-rights-act

America became a more open, freer, and more tolerant nation during the 1960s. This is evident upon examination of four aspects of the society: the counterculture movement, feminism, the sexual revolution, and gay rights.
First, the counterculture promoted—even worshiped—freedom. Tie-dyed shirts and sandals were in fashion. Drug use and rock music became very popular. Hippies were inspired by Timothy Leary. Back-to-nature and collective-living arrangements were in vogue. The counterculture movement culminated with the famous Woodstock concert in 1969.
Second, women asserted their rights. The Feminine Mystique (1963), written by Betty Friedan, reminded women that they were much more than mere homemakers. In 1966, the National Organization for Women (NOW) was founded.
Third, the introduction of the birth-control pill in 1960 helped lead to a sexual revolution. The increased promiscuity also led to a rise in the number of sexually transmitted diseases.
On June 28, 1969, the New York police raided Stonewall Inn, a gay bar. The bar's patrons fought back and a riot ensued. The incident inspired gays to stand up for their rights.
As the new decade began in 1970, the US had become a very different place.

In some ways, the United States was a freer country as the 1960s went on, but African Americans still lacked basic freedoms. In many parts of the South, African Americans were denied the right to vote. Their rights were abridged, and their attempts to register to vote were met with fierce resistance. For example, during the initial march on Selma, Alabama, in March of 1965, protestors were attacked by the police. This day was known as "Bloody Sunday," and it helped lead to the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, enforcing the right of African Americans to vote. Still, African Americans in the North and South lacked economic parity with whites, and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. went to Chicago to publicize the poverty and lack of economic opportunity in the African American community.
In addition, even by the end of the 1960s, women earned less than 60% of what men did for the same work (see the link below). Women were still restricted to certain occupations, such as teaching and nursing, though professions such as law and medicine would start to open up to them over time. Therefore, the 1960s was still an era of limitations rather than freedoms.
https://www.pay-equity.org/info-time.html

Many examples exist to show that the United States became a freer, more open, and more tolerant country during the 1960s. One needs only look at some of the federal legislation that was passed in the 1960s to show that the country was becoming more open. For example, while segregating neighborhoods by race and ethnicity had been a common, legal, and accepted practice for more than a century, the Fair Housing Act of 1968 made segregation in housing illegal. Owners could no longer refuse to sell to person based on race, and realtors were legally required to show any home on the market to any person who might want to buy it, regardless of race.
Another important piece of legislation passed in 1968 banned race, sex, and age discrimination in hiring. Before this time, companies could advertise a position as particularly for a woman, labeling it, for example, "Girl Friday," and refusing to interview men. Women also were routinely required to leave jobs for no other reason than that were too old—such as more than 25—or pregnant. Other positions were considered male only or white only. This legislation opened up many opportunities for people who were once channelled into low-paying, low-status jobs.
During the 1960s, the lid blew off a culture that had been bottled up too long because of people being slotted arbitrarily into roles and denied opportunities based on such markers as race, sex, and age. The new freedom energized society and was manifested in more self expression in clothing and hair style and the loosening of many social taboos so that people could live and express themselves more honestly and freely.
The changes were not embraced by everyone and are still a work in progress, but the 1960s nevertheless marked a huge cultural shift in the direction of freedom.

How does Mayella Ewell's situation illustrate the intersection between race and class?

Mayella and the Ewells in general occupy a unique position in Maycomb. Among the white townspeople, they rank about as low as one can get due to their poverty and lack of class-based manners. They would be considered "white trash." They are looked down upon by everyone else. However, their whiteness does lend them some privileges in specific situations, such as the Tom Robinson trial.
Mayella may be poor and looked down upon as trashy, but she is also a white woman and this means the racist townsfolk are more willing to take her word over Tom's. As a black man, Tom gets no respect from the town whatsoever. In this period and place, black men were often considered violent and hypersexual, and a particular danger to white women. White racists preyed upon the fear of miscegenation and black-on-white rape, arguing that if not kept in their place, black men would have their way with helpless white women at any opportunity.
Even though Tom is gentle and a family man, and even though all the evidence supports his innocence, his being a black man condemns him in the eyes of the all-white jury from the beginning. Mayella might not win such a case were she accusing a white man of raping her, due to being very low on the social class totem pole, but because she is white, her word is privileged over Tom's.

Even though much of the plot in To Kill A Mockingbird revolves around her, Mayella Ewell is one of the least-developed characters in the novel. But she has significance other than her role in the plot: it becomes her duty to fulfill the role of the pure and helpless Southern Woman.
Mayella Ewell's father Bob, a drunkard who represents the ignorance and hateful prejudice of the South, is probably the least-sympathetic character in the novel. The Ewells are Maycomb's poorest residents, living behind the town dump from which they scavenge everything from the roofing material for their shack to some of the food they eat. They make their shoes out of old tires, wash only when they feel like hauling water from the other side of the dump, and are often sick (Lee, pp. 172, 185). It's a dirty, trashy yard except for the one corner where Mayella grows her red geraniums in scavenged slop pails. The care she clearly gives the flowers may represent her desire for the finer life of a stereotypical Southern woman. Scout makes it clear that "people like the Ewells lived as guests of the county in prosperity as well as in the depths of a depression" (p. 172). The Ewells were only ever tolerated, not welcomed.
There is a big shift in sentiment toward Mayella Ewell when Tom is accused of raping her. Suddenly, Mayella is not the trashy, ugly guest at the table; rather, she becomes representative of the genteel, white, Southern Woman, something Atticus Finch calls a "polite fiction" (Lee, p. 149). In order to justify sentencing a man to death, Mayella has to be believable as a fragile, helpless woman who must be protected at all costs by the heroic Southern white gentleman. Suddenly, Mayella is not the ugly squatter from the dump:
A young girl walked to the witness stand. As she raised her hand and swore that the evidence she gave would be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help her God, she seemed somehow fragile-looking (p. 181).
Now Mayella is a young girl, frightened and fragile, and in need of saving.
Mayella herself contributes to this picture by crying in fear--whether mock or not is hard to tell--at being on the stand and telling everyone how she was just too weak to chop up the cabinet for kindling as her father had asked her to do. The judge responds heroically to her tears: "'That’s enough now. Don’t be ‘fraid of anybody here, as long as you tell the truth. All this is strange to you, I know, but you’ve nothing to be ashamed of and nothing to fear'" (p. 181). In her final moments in the courtroom, and in the novel, Mayella calls on the men to be men and to protect her dignity and her position as part of the privileged white class:
I got somethin‘ to say an’ then I ain’t gonna say no more. That nigger yonder took advantage of me an‘ if you fine fancy gentlemen don’t wanta do nothin’ about it then you’re all yellow stinkin‘ cowards, stinkin’ cowards, the lot of you. Your fancy airs don’t come to nothin‘—your ma’amin’ and Miss Mayellerin‘ don’t come to nothin’, Mr. Finch (p. 191).

Why did the village become unfit for habitation?

The village has been desolated by one man's greed, his avarice encouraged and facilitated by a change in the law relating to land ownership. At the time the poem was written, rural England was undergoing something of an economic and social transformation. Under the legal process known as enclosure plots of what had been common land were consolidated into larger farms. Once this process was complete, wealthy land owners were able to enjoy sole right to this property, which was no longer available to the village community.
In "The Deserted Village," a man of "wealth and pride" has done very well out of this new system of land ownership. But the same can't be said of the poor villagers. Without communal land from which to eke out a living many of them have had to flee abroad to "distant climes." As such, the village stands desolate. What had been a thriving community has been destroyed forever by a legally-sanctioned land grab.

Describe the story of "The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle" as a report.

In this 1892 short story by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, a combination of coincidences and mix-ups allow Sherlock Holmes to solve the mystery of a stolen carbuncle, a precious gem.
The Christmas season, however—not a jewel—opens the story in what Holmes describes to Watson as one of those "whimsical little incidents." Peterson, a "very honest" police officer, approaches Holmes with a hat and a Christmas goose he has retrieved after the man who was carrying the goose was attacked. Both the assailant and the owner fled from the policeman, so Peterson comes to Holmes wondering if the owner of the items can be tracked down. As Holmes thinks this is impossible, Peterson takes the goose home to cook, and Holmes keeps the hat.
Unrelated to Holmes, a priceless blue carbuncle is stolen from the Countess of Morcar's hotel room. Unlike the usual carbuncle, a bright red gem, this stone, which was found in China, is blue.
However, the two incidents come together when the blue carbuncle is found inside the goose. Now, it becomes imperative to track the owner of the goose, and Holmes is on the trail.
More than just a mystery, ethics and justice come into play. John Horner, an innocent man who happens to have a criminal record, is framed for the crime. The real thieves are the countess's maid and James Ryder, the mastermind behind the plot and a fearful, cringing little man. Holmes, who has the freedom to make moral determinations that a police officer might not, decides to let Ryder flee to the European continent, determining that serving jail time would only harden him into a real criminal. Plus, once he is gone, Horner will go free because there is now no case against him.
Thematically, therefore, the story questions the value of imprisonment as a form of justice, and Holmes enacts some of the mercy we associate with the Christmas season. As Holmes says to Watson:

This fellow will not go wrong again; he is too terribly frightened. Send him to gaol now, and you make him a gaol-bird for life. Besides, it is the season of forgiveness. Chance has put in our way a most singular and whimsical problem, and its solution is its own reward.

Literary critics usually use the term "image" to describe a moment when the language of a poem appeals explicitly to our visual sense. Images become "key" images when literature makes them a crucial part of a larger structure visual experience, designs them to encapsulate a central idea or emotion, lavishes enormous verbal ornament upon them, or causes them to shock us with their beauty, violence, or incongruity. Find two images that connect the Pardoner's "Prologue" with "The Pardoner's Tale." Write a paragraph describing the way these images work in the texts. Then, in another paragraph, write about the role of imagery in Julian of Norwich's showings.

Chaucer certainly painted some vivid images in "The Pardoner's Tale" and when describing the Pardoner in the "Prologue." After reading about the Pardoner in the "Prologue," we have a strong visual image of his long, thin blond hair and his "glaring" hare-like eyes. Chaucer ends the description of his looks by describing his unshaven chin and emphasizing that the man never would be able to grow a beard; in fact, he seemed as effeminate as if "he were a gelding [castrated horse] or a mare."
This visual image recurs with a vengeance at the end of the Pardoner's tale, when the Host responds to the Pardoner's suggestion that he purchase the first pardon. The host angrily declares that he would gladly castrate the Pardoner himself.
The other image that clearly reflects between the Prologue and the tale is the description of the relics. The Pardoner carried the relics in a "wallet" (bag) on his lap. They included a glass of pigs' bones, a pillowcase that he claimed was the Virgin Mary's veil, and a piece of cloth that was supposedly part of Saint Peter's sail. In the tale, the Pardoner describes some of these items himself and explains how he uses them in his sermons. He mentions his "longe crystal stones / Y-crammed full of clothes and of bones"—that is, the glass containing bones. Although he has clearly told his listeners that his promises about the magic powers of these relics are simply a trick ("gaud"), he has the nerve to launch into a sales pitch at the end of his tale: "I have rlics and pardon in my mail / As fair as any man in Engeland, / Which were given me by the Pope's hand." He bids the Host come forward and "kiss the relics every one." The Host turns this image against the Pardoner by suggesting that by castrating the Pardoner, he'd have a relic that he'd help the Pardoner carry in a "hog's turd," a very potent image indeed.
The flavor of Julian of Norwich's images is quite different, of course. Rather than the irreverence toward Christian symbols shown by the Pardoner and the Host, Julian describes the images from her visions, or "shewings," with great respect and awe. Her first showing, for example, is of Christ wearing the crown of thorns. She describes the red blood trickling down from the garland that was pressed on his head. In the fifth chapter, she describes a little hazel nut in the palm of her hand as being "as round as a balle." The ironic beauty of this imagery is that the tiny nut represents all of God's creation. Many people recall the American spiritual, "He's Got the Whole World in His Hands." Julian's image of the hazel nut imparts the same meaning in a more original and intriguing fashion. One could take most of Julian's showings and find vivid visual descriptions that she used to impart spiritual truths.
https://d.lib.rochester.edu/teams/text/the-shewings-of-julian-of-norwich-part-1

Why do you think Eddie was lying about his plan to go back to studying air conditioning?

Eddie is bored out of his mind studying air conditioning at Fresno City College. It seemed like a good idea at the time—a chance to learn some vocational skills that might have given him the opportunity to get a career and move out of the neighborhood. But for Eddie, college is just like high school: the teachers are uninspiring, and the other students just don't seem to care.
So it's not much of a surprise when Eddie drops out of college altogether. At the same time, he doesn't want anyone to think he's some kind of loser or a failure in life, so he keeps up the pretense that he's still studying. He manages to appear so enthusiastic to Mr. Stiles about his future career in air conditioning that he almost convinces himself that he'll one day end up tightening bolts on roof-top air conditioning units. But it's all just a big con. (An air-con, you might say.)

In the book The Pilgrim's Progress, Ignorance failed to enter the celestial city because he had no certificate. Where is the certificate meant to be collected?

The Pilgrim's Progress is a religious allegory, and what Bunyan is saying here is simply that you can't get to heaven (the Celestial City) if you haven't been saved. The certificate is a symbol of the individual believer's salvation, and it identifies an individual believer as having been saved. But, as the character of Ignorance doesn't know God, he cannot be saved, and therefore he is not allowed to enter the hallowed gates of heaven. The character of Ignorance is so confident that he'll be allowed to enter the Celestial City that he doesn't think he needs a certificate to get in. But this shows not just his ignorance, but also his arrogance in assuming that he'll be allowed into heaven without being saved beforehand.
Bunyan was a devout Calvinist and so believed in what's called "double predestination." This means that, before a single human being was ever created, God knew in advance that a small group of people (the elect) would go to heaven and that the vast majority (the damned) would be sent down to the fiery depths of hell. (Indeed, this is precisely what happens to Ignorance.) Salvation is entirely within the grace of God; you're either saved or you're damned, and there's absolutely nothing that an individual believer can do about it. So you can only receive your "certificate" if God gives it to you, and you won't know if you have it until the Day of Judgment. In that sense, all of us are ignorant as to whether or not we've been saved.

What are venial sins and mortal sins (with regard to the Catholic Church)?

In regard to Roman Catholicism, a mortal sin is one that directly contradicts a soul's connection with the grace of God and therefore severs it, meaning that a soul that has committed a mortal sin without atoning for it is doomed. A venial sin is a less serious crime and can often occur without the sinner's knowledge.
Despite popular belief, the difference in a mortal sin and a venial sin can be different variations of the same wrongdoing. For example, if one gossips idly among friends about another person, this could be considered a venial sin. However, if one gossips about another person with intent to destroy and defame their reputation, the transgression would be considered a mortal sin. In regard to Inferno, all of the canonical souls in Dante's Hell are guilty of mortal sin, with the exception of the virtuous non-believers in Limbo. Even Francesca and Paolo, who were given poor circumstances and had good reasons for doing what they did, were fully aware of the gravity of their sin and, therefore, are doomed to the second circle of Hell. They are, however, offered some solace by being given each other's company.

In Catholic doctrine, there are two types of sins a person can commit: venial sins and mortal sins. Venial sins are relatively minor, such as being impatient, gossiping, or stealing something of low value. Venial sins are thought to harm an individual’s relationship with God but not irreparably. Mortal sins, however, are those that so egregious that they kill one’s spirit, destroying feelings of charity and grace within him, and thus separating the individual from God. Mortal sins include murder, fraud, and adultery. One may commit a venial sin accidentally, without malice of forethought, but mortal sins are committed deliberately, with a person’s full knowledge.
Dante’s Circles of Hell are modeled on the work of Sir Thomas Aquinas, who, some fifty years prior to Dante’s writing, ranked sins according to their level of offense against God, from least to greatest. Aquinas’s “system” has influenced philosophers, theologians, and writers for hundreds of years.
The worst of the worst sins, according to Aquinas, are known as the “Seven Deadly Sins.” They are:

Lust


Gluttony


Avarice (Greed)


Sloth (Laziness)


Anger


Envy


Pride


Additionally, all sin can be categorized as one or more of the following types, from least to greatest offense:

Level One: Incontinence, or lack of self-control
Level Two: Violence, a deliberate violation of God’s will
Level Three: Fraudulence or Traitorousness, using one’s intellect as a weapon

Nick wonders if Gatsby might have had a moment of a revelation and thinks that he "must have felt . . . he had lost the old warm world." What is that revelation, and how does it change his way of seeing the world? Pick out appropriate quotes.

In Chapter VII, Daisy strikes and kills Myrtle Wilson while driving Gatsby’s car. In Chapter VIII, Gatsby begins a vigil, which Nick shares with him for part of the night and next day, waiting for Daisy to come or call to tell him how she plans to handle the situation. He has already decided to say that he was driving.
While he and Nick wait together, Jay tells him the story of how he had transformed from Gatz to Gatsby and what the first love was like between him and Daisy. This includes the scene of their parting when Jay left for military service in World War I. On that day, the two of them sat together “tranquil for a while, as if to give them a deep memory for the long parting the next day promised. They had never been closer in their month of love.” Daisy, however, became restless and impatient and decided to break with Jay and marry Tom.
Jay cannot forget the sensation of being deeply in love, and for him, there is never any other love than Daisy. That “deep memory” never left him as he built his empire so that he could earn her back, refusing to understand that it was not any inadequacy on his part that prompted her to dump him.
On the day after the accident, after Nick leaves him, by mid-afternoon Gatsby probably accepts that Daisy will not call. Nick later wonders if Jay even cared any more. Perhaps he has finally abandoned his romantic image of Daisy. If he accepts that he had paid too much for “living too long with a single dream,” that of having Daisy, then the entire world would look different to him. Rather than the familiar or “old, warm world,” he would encounter a world that was “unfamiliar” and so cold it would make him “shiver”; one that is “grotesque” and “raw.” Nick thinks that Gatsby might have thought that George Wilson approaching through the tress was like him, one of the “poor ghosts, breathing dreams like air.”

What is the ultimate punishment given to Shylock?

Despite Portia's speech on the quality of mercy, Shylock receives little at the end of the play and leaves a seemingly broken and unredeemable man. In Twelfth Night, a similar failure to bring Malvolio into the fold of happy characters also occurs, but in Shylock's case the punishment seems even harsher.
Despite the antisemitism other characters espouse, the play does not seem to share that prejudice, giving Shylock a dignity and a humanity as great as any others in the play, if not greater. He has been long-suffering but has cautiously guarded his treasures.
At the end of the play, he loses his bond, his other material wealth which he must give to Lorenzo who has eloped with his only child, and he must abandon or alienate himself from his Judaism. He bears the knowledge that Jessica has taken a love token he shared with his dead wife and traded it for a monkey, has married and will have children outside the Jewish tradition, and that all his labors will profit his enemies. As Portia and the Duke hand down his sentence, Shylock claims:

You take my life
When you do take the means whereby I live.


On the surface those means are simply his ability to earn a living, but in Shakespeare life and live are not usually that simplistic. The means by which Shylock has lived includes all the things by which he has nurtured his identity in a hostile city. He has no choice but to consent to the punishment, but he leaves the stage saying he is not well.

If Shylock survives much longer after this moment in the play, it is implied that he will not be living so much as waiting to die, an utter stranger to his home and self, mouthing other nation's prayers, and denying the faith that had sustained his life.

After Shylock refuses to show mercy on Antonio by accepting three times the amount of the loan, Portia, who is disguised as Balthazar, offers a strict interpretation of the law, which makes it impossible for Shylock to harm Antonio by removing a pound of flesh. Portia then rules that Shylock must give half of his possessions to Antonio and the other half to the state of Venice because it is illegal for a foreigner to threaten the life of a Venetian. Shylock's punishment nearly cripples him as he begins to lament about losing his possessions. However, Shyock experiences the ultimate punishment when Antonio declares that he must become a Christian and leave all of his money in his will to his Christian son-in-law and daughter. If losing his money was bad enough, Shylock is absolutely devastated to learn that he must convert to Christianity and give his money to Lorenzo, whom he despises.

How did Anne Frank keep herself busy in hiding?

Anne throws herself into her writing and studies while in hiding. She mentions writing poems and short stories, sometimes as gifts for the other people in hiding with her. And obviously, she writes and edits her diary in her spare time. She also studies short-hand, English, French, history, algebra, religious topics, and other academic topics.
Reading is also a major past-time. From movie magazines to history books, Anne devours whatever she can get her hands on. Anne is a bit frustrated that her parents are very strict about what she is allowed to read, since they are nervous about her perusing material dealing with "adult" topics.
Later on, Anne forms a friendship with Peter van Daan and the two spend large amounts of time talking alone together, though the adults become concerned that their doing so is improper.

When Anne and her family move into hiding, life becomes quite boring for her because she does not have much to do. As a result, she turns to reading and writing as a way of keeping herself busy. In several instances within her diary, Anne indicates that she is keeping herself busy by reading different books that range from novels to poetry. In one such instance, Anne claims to have read The Zaniest Summer at least four times, just to keep away the boredom. To articulate her new habit of reading during her days in hiding, Anne says that every other week Mr. Kleiman brings her a couple of books written for girls her age. Additionally, it is evident that Anne keeps herself busy writing her diary, which she updates from time to time. In addition to her diary, Anne stipulates that she spends time translating chapters from La Belle Nivernaise and other French books. Therefore, it is evident from the diary that Anne keeps herself busy by reading and writing during her period in hiding.

How was Sally Thomas able to free her sons in In Search of the Promised Land?

In In Search of A Promised Land, Sally Thomas, an enslaved black woman who is able to operate as a quasi-free woman, is able to free two of her three sons through buying their freedom. While Sally is never able to become free of the horrors of slavery, she is able to work semi-independently of the evil man who owned her by operating a laundry business and, through this, is able to earn enough income to buy two of her sons' freedom. The youngest and oldest sons, both of whom she is able to free, go on to become successful barbers. Her middle son escapes from slavery in Canada and eventually returns to Mississippi, where he also works as a barber.

Who is Rupert Morrison in the story "The Man Upstairs"?

Mr. Rupert Morrison is Beverley’s friend. The latter lends him his rooms at the Albany so that “he can be perfectly quiet and undisturbed” while writing his novel. He is the one who unknowingly spills the beans, to Annette, on who Beverley really is. He calls Annette’s apartment one day when Beverley is not around. The call is picked up by Annette, who accepts to take a message for Beverley. Rupert then complains to Annette about the parcels of music that Beverley has been sending to his rooms and which he does not know what to do with. He wants to know whether Beverley wants the music sent to his present residence. Upon further conversation with Rupert, Annette realizes that it is Beverley who has been buying her songs and who has, in effect, propelled her music career to its present greatness. She also realizes that Beverley has been buying Sellers’ paintings, too, and that his purchases have made Sellers a star artist. When she confronts Beverley with this information, he does not deny it. He tells her that he is a millionaire and that his real name is Bill Bates. She is infuriated by this confession and feels that Beverley is playing a dangerous game: “And you use your money, creating fool's paradises for your friends, which last, I suppose, until you grow tired of the amusement and destroy them. Doesn’t it ever strike you, Mr. Bates, that it's a little cruel?” However, it turns out that Annette, too, has secretly bought one of Beverley’s paintings, with an aim of promoting his career, so she really cannot hold his actions against him. Beverley loves Annette and wants her to marry him.