In The Metamorphosis, why does Gregor move the chair?

After transforming unexpectedly and without explanation into a giant insect, much of Gregor Samsa’s activity early in Kafka’s The Metamorphosis is reorienting himself to his new body and its relationship to the space of his room. His choice to move his chair to the window, while small, is one of several adjustments that shows the reader his changing relationship to his new body and situation.
Whereas before the transformation, Gregor was a salesman and the family’s primary financial support, Gregor’s new body prevents him from engaging with the world and, for the most part, with his own family. He remains sequestered in his room, soon becoming weary of the hours he spends there. From time to time he pushes his chair to the window so that he can stare out, an action that does not necessarily bring immediate relief but which reminds him of the self-soothing choices that once worked during his human days:

He had used to feel a great sense of freedom from doing this, but doing it now was obviously something more remembered than experienced, as what he actually saw in this way was becoming less distinct every day, even things that were quite near [. . .] His observant sister only needed to notice the chair twice before she would always push it back to its exact position by the window after she had tidied up the room, and even left the inner pane of the window open from then on.

Gregor begins to slowly realize that the actions that would have brought relief, like looking out a window, no longer work to make him feel better due to the changes in his body. Here, his insect vision prevents him from even enjoying the view.
The sister’s choice to move the chair herself in response to his perceived need is connected to a developing turn in the story’s plot. When his sister later suggests that some of the furniture be removed from Gregor’s room so that his insect body can more freely crawl along the walls, she is met with opposition by his mother, who sees virtue in keeping his room the same to remind him of his previous life. These conflicts over furniture arrangement, though small now, will contribute to a major question in this story: should Gregor admit that he has changed and adjust accordingly, or should he hang on to those habits which, even if physically useless now, remind him of his humanity?

Why did Markus Zusak choose Germany in World War II as the setting for The Book Thief?

There are several reasons why Markus Zusak might have chosen World War II–era Germany as the setting for The Book Thief. For one, Germany acted as the center of crisis in World War II, even as it radiated out massively and took over the states around it. Hitler and the Nazi Regime headquartered in Germany, and Germany is the site where Nazi antisemitism grew and horrifying misinformation about Jews was allowed to take root.
Since the novel is historical fiction, this is one way to look at it: the choice in setting—in tandem with Death and Liesel (presumably non-Jews) being the main points of view—focuses on the everyday German much more than texts like The Boy in the Striped Pajamas. This choice explores the role that common people had in the Holocaust.
When trying to answer questions like this about a text, it helps me to think about what would be different if the author had chosen to go in another direction. If The Book Thief were set in Poland, focus may be shifted away from everyday life of Gentiles in Nazi Germany. Everyday Poles dealt with invading German forces rather than forces from within. That scenario has a very different flavor than focusing on the source of the Holocaust and the people who had the most power to either enable antisemitism (by joining Nazi forces because it was easier than standing up to them) or resist it (like when Rosa and Hans hide Max). Likewise, if the book were set in America during World War II, the characters would be at a significant geographical and emotional remove from the scene of the crisis, and would likely not have the same information that Liesel has.
So, it seems that something about the cultural and political setting in Germany specifically was important to Zusak. The Book Thief is centered around Liesel seeing tragedy and hatred targeted at people she loves—Max and, although we don't see it directly, her father—by her own community. However, the book is equally centered around Liesel seeing her foster parents resist German Nazism, injustice, and authoritarianism to their deaths. Liesel and Max both survive because of the choices Rosa and Hans make to protect people who are persecuted and to protect access to truth and knowledge. Notably, Liesel herself survives because she has reason to be in the basement in the first place: she is reading stolen books that Hans had let her rescue from the burnings and helped her learn how to read with. Death says at this time,

As always, one of her books was next to her.

Here's another quote by Death that I think sums it up:

I wanted to explain that I am constantly overestimating and underestimating the human race—that rarely do I even simply estimate it. I wanted to ask her how the same thing could be so ugly and so glorious, and its words and stories so damning and brilliant. . . .
I am haunted by humans.

Here, Death speaks to the power of words to both build beautiful things and destroy them. So much of what the Nazi regime used to control people and to kill millions of Jews—and LGBTQ people, disabled people, people of color, and Romas—was the suppression of information and the subsequent substitution of misinformation. The Book Thief catalogues book burnings, manipulation of impressionable children into the Nazi Youth, and groupthink. Liesel resists Nazi Germany with exactly the same things that they tried to use against her: words. She reads banned books that equip her with critical thinking skills, speaks to those around her about her doubts, and listens deeply. By placing his protagonist at the center of the Nazi regime, Zusak is able to discuss the power of resistance and the detrimental nature of passivity in a climate where people are actively manipulating others with misinformation and suppression of critical thought.
It's also interesting to consider that, in Judaism, words are highly valued because the world is created by speech rather than any use of physical force. Genesis reads, "And God spoke . . ." as the first thing G-d does. Zusak may be alluding to this tradition with the way Death talks about the power of words as the power of humanity.
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/indoctrinating-youth

Using textual evidence, explain why Dr. Jekyll’s will is disturbing to Mr. Utterson.

Mr. Utterson is quite bothered by Dr. Jekyll's will as a result, as explained in the following section:

in case of the decease of Henry Jekyll, . . . all his possessions were to pass into the hands of his "friend and benefactor Edward Hyde," but that in case of Dr. Jekyll's "disappearance or unexplained absence for any period exceeding three calendar months," the said Edward Hyde should step into the said Henry Jekyll's shoes without further delay . . . .

In other words, if Jekyll dies or mysteriously disappears for longer than three months, it is provided that Mr. Hyde will receive all of his property and goods and can assume any and all of his possessions immediately and without question. Most people try to plan for their death, as death is inevitable, but most people do not make provisions in case they just happen to mysteriously disappear; it is quite a strange line. Further, Utterson does not know Hyde, and he finds it strange that Jekyll would leave all to this man (about whom he has recently heard terrible things from Mr. Enfield). This document "offended him both as a lawyer and as a lover of the sane and customary sides of life, to whom the fanciful was the immodest." He now fears that Hyde is a fiend and has, perhaps, coerced Jekyll into making such provisions. He resolves to go and see a mutual friend of his and Jekyll's, a Dr. Lanyon, in order to see if he can shed any light on the situation.

How is prejudice shown in "The Body" by Stephen King?

"The Body," the novella on which the film Stand By Me was based, is the story of four boys who hear of a body in the woods and take a trip to find it. Although they encounter others during the story, notably a few teens once the body is located, most of the action involves the relationships between the boys. Gordie, Chris, Teddy, and Vern talk to each other, support each other, and have conflict over both trivial and weighty matters.
Most of the prejudice in this book has to do with how the characters interact with each other, the ways they make fun of each other, and the ways they evaluate their status in society. The narrator is telling the story in first-person narrative years later and notes that all three of his friends died relatively young—a way of illustrating just how poor they were and how their lives were rarely free of violence. They lived in poverty, survived alcoholism and domestic violence, and had few economic opportunities.
These truths are revealed in dialogue in which the boys (who are 12–13 years of age) creatively mock each other for their inadequacies. Ultimately, they accept each other but are well aware of their reputations and those of their families. They are protective but realistic. They point out each other's differences.
This story doesn't explore prejudice so much as it reveals themes of status, especially status based on age (the teens almost wreck their trip), education (Chris is the victim of prejudice by his teachers), and implicitly, money.
Chris's father is an alcoholic and a criminal and he is treated like trash by his teachers even though he is intelligent. Teddy's father, suffering from PTSD, abused him as a child, leaving him with scars due to burns. Vern's family is relatively functional, but not in the upper strata of society. Teddy, with his physical scars and hearing aids, is made fun of for his disability. Vern is serious, but the other boys pity him because they believe his brother stole his change jar but don't have the heart to tell him. Chris comes from a family of criminals, but he's still respected for his smarts.
These characters are living in rough conditions and mock each other for their differences, but they also don't look down on each other because they all come from a small, poverty-stricken town. Being poor isn't anything to be ashamed of, and what prejudice occurs in the book has to do with how they are seen as outcasts of various sorts by others, including their teachers, parents, and siblings.

How does love influence the characters in Romeo and Juliet?

Love is a powerful force in this play that drives characters out of their comfort zone.
For example, if they had not fallen passionately in love, both Romeo and Juliet would have stayed within the protective bubble of their feuding families, never questioning that their own family was in the right and the rival family in the wrong. Falling in love with someone from "the wrong side of the tracks" forces each of them to reevaluate everything they formerly believed.
Juliet, for example, manages to look beyond Romeo's Montague last name to see his true worth, declaring "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." In other words, the Montague name might stink to her, but Romeo is wonderful. This shows that love motivates her to think for herself and, hence, to be more mature. Love also motivates her to deeply grieve the death of her cousin Tybalt and yet to remain loyal to Romeo, his murderer and now her husband. Love transcends hate and family history.
Finally, the love that unites Romeo and Juliet and leads to their suicides has a profound influence on the Montague and Capulet families. Both families loved their now-dead child, and both families reconcile due to their children's lost love, ending the bitter feud.

Love is what drives most of what Romeo and Juliet do. When they fall in love, they are willing to sacrifice a great deal just so that they can be together. However, romantic love is not the only form of love which dominates this play. Familial love also plays a major part—even competing with romantic love. When Juliet learns that Romeo has killed her cousin Tybalt, she first curses Romeo as a villain; but then her love for him overcomes this anger. Her love for Romeo also motivates her to overcome her fear over drinking the sleeping potion (so that she can fake her own death).
However, love also inspires characters to do ignoble things. Romeo's friendship with Mercutio is what causes him to violently avenge his friend's death. Additionally, both Romeo and Juliet commit suicide when they see (or in Romeo's case, thinks) their lover has died. So, in Romeo and Juliet, love is a double-edged sword.

What was the speaker doing when he first saw the daffodils?

In this poem, the speaker is evasive about their exact actions. At the outset, the only verb that indicates any action on their part is "wandered." This could literally mean that the speaker was walking aimlessly at that moment, or it could refer more generally to their activities and attitudes over an unspecified period of time. The marked change in Line 3, "all at once I saw" is amplified in Line 11, when the speaker repeats the verb "saw." No other action is offered on the speaker's part. Rather, the flowers are said to be dancing or looking like they are dancing, and the waves dance as well. Again in Line 17, the poet says "I gazed—and gazed—but little thought...": the primary activity is looking, and the secondary is thinking but only a little.
Overall, the impression of passive observer is emphasized. Even when the speaker acknowledges a change in mood, they do so in the third person: "A poet could not be but gay...." The related shift is from "lonely" to feeling accompanied: "in such a jocund company."
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45521/i-wandered-lonely-as-a-cloud

He was "wandering lonely as a cloud." This is a metaphor for the poet's momentary loss of inspiration. The natural world was a deeply inspiring place for Wordsworth, as for many Romantic poets. He regarded it as a powerful, almost mystical force, with a life all of its own. It acted as a catalyst for artistic creation, fusing with the poet's imagination to generate enduring works of art. That's what Wordsworth means when he tells us that his wanderings were suddenly brought to an end by the sight of the golden host of daffodils, fluttering and dancing in the breeze. And whenever the poet finds himself experiencing a similar loss of inspiration in the future, all he has to do is cast his mind back to that glorious sight of nature, and his

heart with pleasure fills,
And dances with the daffodils.

In other words, his creative powers as a poet will have been awakened once more.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45521/i-wandered-lonely-as-a-cloud

What does Ishmael notice about Ahab's appearance?

Ishmael hears quite a bit of lore about Captain Ahab, but it is a long time before he actually sees the man himself. When he does, he notices that Ahab looks both old and strong. He has gray hair and seems bronzed, like a statue. He has a white scar running down the side of his face and neck, which Ishmael likens to the scar formed when lightening strikes a tree.
Ishmael is at first so powerfully riveted by the "grim" appearance of Ahab that he doesn't notice his false leg. When his eyes travel there, he notes it is made of the "polished bone of the sperm whale’s jaw."
Although Ahab says nothing, Ishmael finds him an intimidating figure, standing silent on the deck, his false leg fitted into a hole made to hold it. He looks both willful and as if he is suffering, and the crew is uneasy being under his watchful eye. In fact, he is a bit terrifying. Ishmael writes of him:

There was an infinity of firmest fortitude, a determinate, unsurrenderable willfulness, in the fixed and fearless, forward dedication of that glance.

Ishmael's first impressions of Captain Ahab are a mixture of shock and awe. Ahab is an imposing figure, to say the least. There's a real power and intensity about him, reflected in the permanently serious expression on his gloomy face. In addition, Ishmael notices that Ahab's face has a long white scar running down its full length. This testifies to a certain toughness about his whole character. No one quite knows how he got the scar, but judging by its length, it must have been caused by a very painful encounter indeed. The origins of Ahab's artificial limb is no mystery, though; he lost his leg to the great white whale himself, Moby Dick. And ever since that fateful day, Ahab has been obsessed with revenge, determined to hunt down and kill the creature who attacked him.

Can you explain what Beneatha means when she says that "there are two things we, as a people, have got to overcome, one is the Ku Klux Klan—and the other is Mrs. Johnson"?

Beneatha is referring to what Ms. Johnson is symbolic of, which is the attitude of some black folks to resent people of their race who attempt to better their class position. It is very clear that she—Ms. Johnson—is one who holds this opinion. She comes to the Younger house with a newspaper that expresses the condemnatory views of the people in Clybourne Park towards black families choosing to move in to a white neighborhood. The article explains how a black family in a white neighborhood was bombed out of their house. She leaves the newspaper on the table when she leaves the Younger's house as a warning.
Beneatha realizes that not only do the Youngers have to worry about the racist white people who want to keep black folks from being upwardly mobile, but they also have to worry about other people of their culture who believe that they shouldn't try to raise their status.

Why does Dee change her name?

When Dee arrives at her mother's humble country home with her boyfriend, Hakim-a-barber, Mrs. Johnson addresses her daughter by her name. Dee responds by correcting her mother and saying that she has changed her name to Wangero Leewanika Kemanjo. Dee proceeds to tell Mama that she changed her name because she could not bear to be named after people who oppressed her ancestors. Essentially, Dee changed her name to express solidarity with her African ancestors and publicly reject the name given to her ancestors by their former slave masters. However, Dee's act of changing her name is also a rejection of her direct family's heritage. Mama explains that she can trace Dee's name back to the Civil War and cherishes her daughter's name because it belonged to her loved ones. Dee's attempt at celebrating her African heritage misses the mark, as she unknowingly denies her real heritage. This is also emphasized by her perception of the family quilts.

Why does Ponyboy idealize the country while he and Johnny look at the stars in chapter 4 of The Outsiders?

In chapter 3, Pony and Johnny lament their difficult lives as Greasers in a big town and Pony begins to dream about a better, peaceful life in the country as he is looking at the stars. Pony dreams about living out in the country away from the excitement and noise of the big towns. In the country, Pony images what it would be like reading a book peacefully by himself and owning a yellow dog. He also dreams about Sodapop having Mickey Mouse back and Darry losing his hard scowl. Pony also dreams about living in the country with his parents. Pony imagines his mother baking him a cake and his father spending quality time with Darry. He also dreams about inviting Dally up to the country and living with Johnny on the farm. Overall, Pony dreams about living in the country because the pastoral setting is tranquil and idyllic. In the country, Pony would not feel threatened by any Socs or unfairly judged because he is a Greaser.

Who are the known authors of the psalms?

It has long been known that while King David of the Israelites wrote 74 of the Psalms (www.ifcj.org/site "Psalms of David"), 47 have no known author and 29 are attributed to other authors (there is some difference between sources in attributing 73 or 74 psalms to David):

David, Psalms 3-41, 51-66, 68-70, 86, 101, 103, 108-110, 122, 124,131, 138-145 (74)
Others:
Asaph / Sons of Asaph, Psalm 50 and 73-83 (12)
Sons of Korah, Psalms 42-49, 84-85, 87-88 (12)
Solomon, Psalms 72 and 127 (2)
Moses, Psalm 90 (1) Heman, Psalm 88 (1) Ethan, Psalm 89 (1)
Anonymous: (47)
Jewish scholars connected with Kehot Publication also ascribe some of the "anonymous" authorship to Adam, Seth and Abraham.
King David is honored as a Levite, successor of the prophet Samuel and spiritual devotion to the God of the Jewish religion. David not only studied the Scriptures that comprised the Torah but he honored God in psalms daily before daybreak. David's psalms speak of God's attribute, his power, his mercy and his justice, or offer prayers of praise or prayers expressing unlimited trust in God. David is attributed with having collected all the psalms, as some were written before his time by, it is said, Moses, Abraham, Shem and Adam. He added his own compositions to the collection. [See Chabad.org, King David and the Psalms.]
Asaph, or the sons of Asaph [different sources attribute Asaphite psalms in one of these two ways], is usually attributed as the author(s) of the twelve psalms listed above. It is not known, however, whether or not Asaph was only the transcriber of David's additional psalms rather than being the author of the Asaphite psalms. It is most likely that, while Asaph may have transcribed additional Davidic psalms--perhaps some of the anonymous ones--as David's trusted choirmaster, prophet, poet and singer, Asaph composed the 12 psalms in his own right.
Additional confusion over the psalms of Asaph relates to their possible status as part of the collection of Asaphite singers' hymns. Asaphites are identified as a choir of temple singers: they were sons of Asaph who were gifted with song and served as the temple choir. The theory is that any of the sons of Asaph may have composed the 12 psalms. Again, while the 12 psalms may have been in the Asaphite choral hymnal, it is most likely that, given Asaph's status with David, Asaph composed the 12 psalms.

The singers, the sons of Asaph, were also at their stations according to the command of David, Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun the king's seer (2 Chronicles 35:15, ESV)

Asaph was a Levite, the son of Berechiah, from the line of Gershon. As such he was a "seer," or prophet, and the cousin of Heman (Heman, a Korahite, the son of Joel). From the time of King David, Levites provided, along with other duties, the poets, singers and musicians responsible for hymns dedicated to God. Asaph was a skilled poet and singer upon whom David relied and was appointed chief temple musician and choirmaster.

Then David spoke to the chiefs of the Levites to appoint their relatives the singers, with instruments of music, harps, lyres, loud-sounding cymbals, to raise sounds of joy. So the Levites appointed Heman the son of Joel, and from his relatives, Asaph the son of Berechiah; and from the sons of Merari their relatives, Ethan the son of Kushaiah,... (1 Chronicles 15:16-17, www.bible.ca/archeology)

The Sons of Korah, Levites from the line of Kohath, were appointed by David at the same time indicated in the quote just above (1 Chron 15:16-17) as singers and musicians in the temple. As such, they shared the responsibility for composing hymns to God. This is also true of Ethan the Levite and son of Kushaiah. It is mere speculation, but perhaps Merari is one of the authors of the other 47 anonymous hymns in the Psalms.

To the choirmaster: according to The Gittith. A Psalm of the Sons of Korah. How lovely is your dwelling place,O Lord of hosts!My soul longs, yes, faintsfor the courts of the Lord;my heart and flesh sing for joyto the living God. (Psalm 84:1-2 ESV)

Moses, raised in the Egyptian Pharaoh's palace, was actually a Levite from the line of Kohath and, of course, the leader of exodus of the Israelites from the land of Egypt. Moses was exerted influence on the hymnal style through his psalm recorded in Psalm 90. Solomon was the son of King David and was the one who actually built the temple David had promised God. Solomon wrote Psalms 72 and 127. It was for Solomon's future temple that David initiated the reorganization of the duties of the Levites so that, among other changes, the temple would have singers and musicians. This reorganization was possible because the Ark of the Covenant would have a permanent home in the Holy of Holies chamber in the heart of the future Temple of Solomon.

What is Children's Literature? History, Themes, and Examples.

This is a very tricky subject, because like any other genre of literature, children's literature tends to be vast and fragmented. There are certain classics that are difficult to ignore: more recently the Harry Potter Series, or before that The Chronicles of Narnia, The Hobbit, or the works of Roald Dahl (not to mention the wide range of books and literature that would not be classified as fantasy). To borrow the imagery of Lewis Carrol, we're really falling down a rabbit hole here.
I'm not quite sure how much help anyone can be. We can go back into the nineteenth century and talk about how traditional folk tales were refashioned as children's stories, through the works of Charles Perrault and the Brothers Grimm (and those folk tales, for all that they we label them as children's literature, never lost that earlier sense of menace... consider what happened to Cinderella's step-sisters, just for one example).
And I suppose that would be the main thing I'd suggest keeping in mind: for all that we might dismiss children's literature as somehow "for children", it really is, in its own way, a lot more nuanced and thematically richer than we often give it credit for. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland is loaded with logic games and thought puzzles; Narnia is at its core a theological thought experiment masquerading as a fantasy world; fairy tales tend to be drawn directly from the fears and anxieties of the pre-modern world; and this is to say nothing about the darkness in a work like Coraline or the cruelty you can sometimes see present in the works of Hans Christian Andersen. But again, we can only deal with generalities here, as this topic can really support an entire book on its own merits.

What are some challenges that LGBTQ youth face today? How could the human services field better address the issue of the LGBTQ negative attitude towards them in society?

Puberty and adolescence are an important part of all people’s lives. This is a time of significant growth and mental and physical development in which young people transition into adulthood. It is also a time when we learn and discover various things about the world, ourselves, and the environment that surrounds us. In other words, we try to define our identity, to learn who we are and who we want to become. Gender and sexual orientation can be two very meaningful aspects of a young person’s identity.
Understanding, exploring, and expressing these notions is vital for every teen’s character development; however, it is also a unique experience for everyone. Some may be unsure of their sexual or gender identity, while others may know from a very young age. Defining one’s sexual orientation and gender identity is something that is influenced by a lot of social, cultural, and personal factors. This is why the LGBTQ+ youth community often faces a plethora of challenges in their day-to-day lives.
A huge number of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth, and those questioning their orientation, experience a lot of emotional and even physical abuse in their communities, in their schools, and even in their homes, because of how people respond to their sexual orientation and/or gender identity. Those who are rejected and unaccepted by their families and close friends usually suffer the most, as acceptance and love from these groups are the first and most important elements for securing mental and physical health and well-being. This is also one of the first problems that LGBTQ+ youth may face: rejection by family and friends, and lack of support from their communities. Other challenges include discrimination, violence, harassment, abuse, victimization, social oppression, and bullying.
As a result, many youngsters suffer from anxiety, low self-esteem problems, depression, stress, and other mental problems which take a huge toll on their health. Thus, they try to find various means to end their struggles and sufferings, and many young people turn to drugs, alcohol, running away from home, and even suicide. According to recent studies, transgender and gender-nonconforming children and teens are three times more likely to develop mental conditions such as depression, anxiety, and attention deficit disorders, and eight times more likely to die by suicide suicide, than heterosexual youth. You can find more statistics concerning the various struggles that LGBTQ+ youth face here.
This is why it is of utmost importance for all social and human services to affirm and support LGBTQ+ youth and provide the best and safest environment to protect the rights and the general well-being of LGBTQ+ youth. Communities should promote love, acknowledgment, and acceptance, and focus on the needs and experiences of LGBTQ+ youth. For instance, all schools should have programs that protect all of their students, including LGBTQ+ students. They should be made a place where the students will feel safe instead of threatened and will have access to “safe spaces,” such as counselors’ offices, where the students can receive support from the school personnel.
Furthermore, all schools should make mental health care and suicide prevention more accessible to young people. Human and social service workers should focus on providing the best assistance to all federal, state, and local agencies in health, welfare, education, and justice, with the common goal of having strong and fully functional support systems for LGBTQ+ youth. You can find more strategies for providing the best help and support for LGBTQ+ youth here.

Discuss the relationship between sport and multiculturalism (as a speech topic). How does sport specifically bring together people from all cultures? Are there many examples of this truly happening?

A good example of how sport can bring together people of different cultures is the 1995 Rugby World Cup.
This world cup happened less than five years after Apartheid had come to an end, and the country of South Africa was still divided despite having recently become a democracy. The sport of rugby was seen by the public as belonging to white people, and not many black people watched the game.
In addition to the internal conflict catalyzed by Apartheid (that endured in its absence), South Africa had also been isolated from the outside world during the oppressive regime. The South African rugby team, the Springboks, had never played in a Rugby World Cup before 1995 due to anti-apartheid boycotts.
The president of South Africa at the time, Nelson Mandela, wanted to unite black people and white people in South Africa behind a common cause: supporting the national Rugby team. Both Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu adopted the term "Rainbow Nation" to describe South Africa, and Mandela often repeated the slogan "one team, one country." As Mandela said in an interview (linked below), "Sports are a language spoken by everybody."
This game is significant not only because it brought South Africans together but because it showed the progress the country was making on a world stage; everybody who watched the game could see that South Africa was becoming a more united country.
For further information about how Mandela and the Springboks captain, Pienaar, worked together to bring South Africans behind the national team, you can read the book Playing the Enemy by John Carlin (there's a review of the book linked below).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/international/3772591.stm

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/books/review/Keller-t.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Wh4MPGp68A

How could “The Story of an Hour” by Kate Chopin be described as realistic fiction?

Works of literary realism aim to represent reality in a truthful way. Realist writers often write about everyday people doing everyday things, going about their lives in a way that is meant to feel realistic and honest. They tend to stay away from romanticizing topics like, for example, marriage.
In this story, Chopin certainly avoids romanticizing Mrs. Mallard's marriage or her life as a married woman. A train accident is believed to have killed her husband, Brently Mallard, and rather than fall apart with grief, lamenting that her other half is now lost to her forever, Louise Mallard instead secretly rejoices in the freedom she now anticipates having as a widow.
Marriage is presented as a confining institution that results in compromises for the wife, which are uncomfortable at best and repressive at worst. Chopin does not attempt to sugarcoat Louise Mallard's feelings of joy. She feels some remorse because she knows that her husband loved her and she loved him too, at least sometimes; but her freedom and independence is worth more to her than that love ever was. Her response to his death is somewhat shocking and certainly not romanticized; it is presented realistically, even if that means our heroine is flawed and human.

Why is the closure of "Hands" ironic? How does the author prepare the reader for this irony?

The ending of Sherwood Anderson's "Hands," from his book Winesburg, Ohio, is ironic for a few reasons. Wing Biddlebaum, the main character, lives in fear due to a misunderstanding. As a younger man named Adolph Myers, he was a teacher in a small town. As he taught, he talked very expressively, and his hands "were a part of the schoolmaster's effort to carry a dream into the young minds. By the caress that was in his fingers he expressed himself." However, because "[a] half-witted boy of the school became enamored of the young master" and "imagined unspeakable things and in the morning went forth to tell his dreams as facts," accusations of molestation rose up, and Adolph was chased out of town and nearly hanged. He has resided in Winesburg for a long time, and he lives in constant fear that those who chased him out of the town will find him. Also, because he is not only innocent of the crime but also innocent in thought, he doesn't understand what he supposedly did wrong; he only knows it has something to do with his hands. At the end of the story, Anderson writes,

Lighting a lamp, Wing Biddlebaum washed the few dishes soiled by his simple meal and, setting up a folding cot by the screen door that led to the porch, prepared to undress for the night. A few stray white bread crumbs lay on the cleanly washed floor by the table; putting the lamp upon a low stool he began to pick up the crumbs, carrying them to his mouth one by one with unbelievable rapidity. In the dense blotch of light beneath the table, the kneeling figure looked like a priest engaged in some service of his church. The nervous expressive fingers, flashing in and out of the light, might well have been mistaken for the fingers of the devotee going swiftly through decade after decade of his rosary.

Once we understand Wing's history, the irony becomes apparent. He is wholly innocent of the accusations against him; he doesn't understand the accusations because he would never even think of doing the things he was accused of. He lives in fear of his hands and the effects of their actions, so much that he doesn't even sleep in a bedroom. Rather, he sleeps on a folding cot by the door, in case someone should try to enter or he should need to get out quickly, as he had to when he was accused and assaulted as a younger man. Furthermore, despite his innocence, Wing lives a penitent life for the sin he never committed. He constantly suffers because of his hands, though they have done nothing wrong. Anderson alludes to this in comparing him to a devotee constantly going through his rosary. His actions in picking up the crumbs illuminate how cautious and clean he is, but the vehicle with which he cleans—his hands—is the very thing that makes him feel careless and dirty.

What similarities exist between Shelley's Mont Blanc and Byron’s Manfred? Are there also differences worth mentioning?

Shelley's poem is a meditation upon the vastness of nature and the unknown it represents. Though Byron's Manfred is also set in the Alps, his theme is somewhat different from Shelley's in "Mont Blanc," despite points of contact between the ideas expressed by the two poets.
Byron's Manfred, like Goethe's Faust, is a man in search of the unattainable. Unlike Faust (in both Goethe's and Marlowe's versions), Manfred does not make a pact with the devil, Mephistopheles. Also, unlike Faust, Manfred does not appear to crave some "ultimate" experience that will give life the enjoyment he has lacked so far. Marlowe's Faust wants earthly rewards such as power and women. Goethe's character wishes for one thing that will make him say to "the moment," "Linger, you are so beautiful." Manfred, however, seeks "forgetfulness." His past is a torment to him, and he wishes to be relieved of it, to reach a state of oblivion. The "spirit world" he encounters, the Christianity to which the Abbot wishes him to return, and finally, the demonic figure at the close of the play are all rejected by him. His fate is an open question: the Abbot observes, at the final moment, that no one can know what has become of Manfred's soul upon his death.
Why does Byron set his "closet drama" in the Alps? Probably because the wilds of Central Europe were a meme of that time representing the mysterious, the unattainable, and the things which we all both desire and fear. In "Mont Blanc," Shelley similarly contemplates this highest peak of Europe and the surrounding immensity of forlorn nature—not so much wishing to merge himself with it and find oblivion as Byron does in Manfred, but as a means to understand himself and, by extension, to understand human thought, in the contemplation of the great mountain and of the "everlasting universe of things," as he describes it in the opening line. Much of the poem is, like Shelley's work as a whole, an indulgence in words for the sake of their own beauty:
Its subject mountains their unearthly formsPile around it, ice and rock; broad vales betweenOf frozen floods, unfathomable deeps,Blue as the overhanging heaven, that spreadAnd wind among the accumulated steeps.
It is really only at the close that Shelley reveals his ultimate theme: that the connection between man and this projection of the spirit world in the awesomeness of nature is what gives life its meaning:
The secret Strength of thingsWhich governs thought, and to the infinite domeOf Heaven is as a law, inhabits thee!And what were thou, and earth, and stars, and sea,If to the human mind's imaginingsSilence and solitude were vacancy?
Manfred, by contrast, though he communes with nature, finds no answer in it, no solution to the dreadful mental world he inhabits. In these two works, Manfred and "Mont Blanc," we see the Romantic obsession with the outside world, with nature, which paradoxically represents an inner world of the spirit that man wishes to attain. In both works, as well as in Byron's oeuvre and in Shelley's as a whole, there is a sense of man's incompleteness, of his striving for some unreachable goal that "this life" does not afford, though the manner in which each poem's speaker or protagonist seems to chase that goal is special to himself and unique.

What occurrence in the weather foreshadows doom for the Usher family The Fall of the House of Usher?

From the opening line, the weather is ominous and foreboding:

During the whole of a dull, dark, and soundless day in the autumn of the year, when the clouds hung oppressively low in the heavens, I had been passing alone . . .

The sense of gloominess in the weather invades the narrator's spirit, and he finds himself "unsufferable" as he approaches the House of Usher.
The weather comes into sharp focus as the fateful night at the end of the story unfolds. Roderick asks the narrator whether he has "seen it" and throws open a window, where a torrential storm is brewing outside. The narrator notes that it is "wildly singular in its terror and its beauty," much as Madeline Usher evolves over the story. The wind blows in "frequent and violent alterations," and the clouds hang heavily. There are no stars and no lightning.
This violent storm signals the violent end of the Usher twins, and therefore the House of Usher. This is just before Madeline seems to reappear from death and Roderick completely breaks with sanity. In the House of Usher, no light (or hope) remains. Their world is spinning out of control, teetering on the brink of imploding in on itself. The storm's intensity seems to be a precursor of the tension among the three characters as the plot reaches a climax.
After the narrator believes that he witnesses Madeline kill her brother (which could be the narrator's own inner storm, influenced by the troubled mind of his friend Roderick), he flees the scene as the storm is "still abroad in all its wrath."

The weather is gloomy as the narrator arrives at the House of Usher, but it is a wild, ghastly storm that foreshadows the doom of the Usher family. The narrator reads aloud to Roderick as the storm rages. The weather outside is dark, wild, and tempestuous. A whirlwind forms, and the wind keeps changing direction. Meanwhile, heavy clouds are blown this way and that, while the atmosphere glows with a strange, gaseous light, though no stars or moon can be seen.
Then, as the storm increases in violence and the window frames shake, noises indicate that Madeline is arriving from the crypt. She enters the room and falls down dead. At this point, the narrator races from the house. Bolts of lightning and a "blood red" moon reveal the house fissuring and collapsing into the tarn as the narrator flees the scene.

What are some facts about the Middle colonies?

The Middle Colonies included New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. These colonies were far more religiously and ethnically diverse than New England. For example, Quakers settled in Pennsylvania, along with German farmers, and the colonies were also home to Dutch and Scotch-Irish people. While the New England colonies practiced Puritanism, the Middle Colonies practiced a variety of religions and included Mennonites, Lutherans, Dutch Calvinists, and others. Pennsylvania and New York were known for their religious tolerance, and Jews also settled in New York.
Economically, the Middle Colonies were in many ways a combination of the New England colonies and the South. The Middle Colonies had some industry as New England did, such as shipbuilding, and they were also the "bread basket" of the colonies, as they grew crops such as rye and wheat. Ports like New York became prosperous from trade.

What role does creativity play in The Bat-Poet?

The Bat Poet is a children’s story with illustrations. It tells the story of a little bat who, instead of sleeping like the other bats in the barn, decides to venture out in the open once the sun comes up, despite being told:

"When you wake up in the daytime the light hurts your eyes—the thing to do is to close them and go right back to sleep."

This brave act of creativity and non-conformity leads him to meet a mockingbird who teaches him about poetry. The mockingbird becomes his mentor as he hones his poetry writing. Once he is happy with the poem he has written he goes back to his friends in the barn.
The story is about the importance of valuing and staying true to one’s own individuality. The Bat Poet’s individuality allowed him to further his creativity.

The Bat Poet is the story of brilliant bat who is also a poet. The bat shows individualism and creativity when he chooses to stay on the porch rather than head to the barn like his fellow bat friends. He misses the others but sticks to his own path. He finds great freedom in making his own decisions and begins to feel curious. Having never seen daylight, the bat stays awake during the day. This is the start of his lyrical career. He hears a bird singing and tries to mimic it. He doesn’t like the way he sounds but he enjoys the words that go into song. Here he begins to write poetry. The bird helps him workshop his poems to perfection. He provides insight on iambic pentameter and iambic trimeter. Content with his creation, the bat returns to his friends. Creativity is at the heart of the bat’s quest. He needed individuality and inspiration to reach his creative potential. Seeing daylight and meeting the bird brought out a skill set in him he didn’t know he had.

What hold does dinner have on Gene?

At Devon School one evening, the dinner bell rings. As soon as Gene hears it, he doesn't hesitate to answer its insistent call. But Finny has other ideas. He teases Gene for wanting to be on time for dinner before wrestling him to the floor. This little episode illustrates the differences in character between the two boys: Finny's very much a free spirit, whereas Gene's more of a conformist. After their good-natured rough-and-tumble, Gene and Finny realize that they're so late for dinner that they should just go straight to their rooms instead.
The next morning Mr. Prud'homme, the substitute teacher, comes by to give Finny and Gene a ticking off for missing dinner. But Mr. Prud'homme is soon won over by Finny's easygoing charm and winning personality, and so lets him off without a punishment.

What is the difference between Miss Marple and Inspector Craddok in A Murder is Announced?

There is a long tradition of British detective stories featuring gifted amateurs or "consulting detectives" whose successes are more spectacular than those of the police force. Sherlock Holmes runs rings around Inspector Lestrade, and Hercule Poirot does the same with Inspector Japp.
The relationship between Miss Marple, the amateur who has made an acute study of human nature, and Inspector Craddock, the professional who uses the superior resources at his disposal with intelligence and discretion, is more sophisticated. Her intuition complements his methodical approach. Craddock is no "Scotland Yard bungler" but a highly competent police officer who respects Miss Marple and views her sharp mind as one of the resources at his disposal. Miss Marple reciprocates Craddock's respect and realizes that the police force will have an advantage over even the most gifted amateur in some procedural matters.
Although the frail, upper-middle-class old lady and the professional policeman apparently have very little in common, their complementary talents make them excellent partners.

Inspector Craddock is a professional law enforcement official and Miss Marple is an amateur sleuth. Craddock is also the godson of one of Miss Marple's friends.
Inspector Dermot Craddock is a detective for Scotland Yard. In A Murder is Announced, he seeks the help of Miss Jane Marple to solve the case. Although Inspector Craddock appears to be a good detective, he uses conventional methods to solve cases. Miss Marple, on the other hand, uses her keen observation skills and her knowledge of human nature to solve crimes.
Miss Marple has no formal training. Most of what she knows she learned from watching other people throughout her life. It's common for her to notice something that reminds her of the past and use that connection to solve crimes. Inspector Craddock decides to work with her when he sees what happened and doesn't believe that it's a suicide or an accident. They work together to discover the truth.

Unlike the bumbling and sometimes conceited police inspectors who can act as foils to Christie's star sleuths, Inspector Craddock is portrayed as very competent. He is described as having "brains and imagination" and the self-discipline to move slowly and carefully, as well as an "open mind." Craddock is a good partner to work with Miss Marple.
Craddock has police know-how and authority, along with resources to go to places like Scotland to see Belle. However, what Miss Marple has is an easy manner over the lunch and tea table, which draws people into confiding in her. She also is quick to detect a simple slip of the tongue that even a seasoned detective might miss. For example, she notices that Dora, who knows that the woman posing as Letty is really her sister Charlotte (Lottie), sometimes mistakenly refers to Letty as Lottie, tipping off the clever Miss Marple.
Craddock has competence and police knowledge, but Miss Marple understands human nature and the power of a lunch or a cup of tea to draw people out.

Miss Jane Marple, a woman, is an amateur sleuth who solves many mysteries, including crimes, as a hobby. Miss Marple is older and retired. She is a close friend of Sir Henry, who is Craddock’s godfather. Miss Marple takes facts into consideration but is especially good at getting people to open up, discerning what people are keeping hidden, and drawing conclusions from their behavior.
Detective-Inspector Dermot Eric Craddock, a man, is a police detective for whom crime solving is a profession. Detective Craddock is younger; his age is not stated but probably under 40. One of the characters describes him as having “manly proportions and [a] handsome face.” He is methodical and attends to the facts. A good listener, he is open minded and does not leap to conclusions.
Miss Marple, who lives in St. Mary Mead, is visiting the town of Chipping Cleghorn. She had been a guest in the hotel where the dead man, Rudi Scherz, had worked. For this reason she and Inspector Craddock end up working together to solve the crime.
https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Detective_Novels_of_Agatha_Christie.html?id=RIBz9x6BPZkC

Who is the antagonist in the novel Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban?

The true antagonist in this novel is, as usual, Voldemort. However, for a long time it appears to be Sirius Black. Many around Harry are sure that Black, who has escaped from Azkaban prison, is a firm supporter of Voldemort. At first, the evidence seems to support this idea. For example, Arthur Weasley, a person Harry trusts, tells him that Sirius Black plans to murder Harry and that Black has a track record as a murderer. Harry also overhears teachers trading what turn out to be false stories about Black, such as that he betrayed Harry's parents, who had been his friends, to the treacherous Voldemort, and that he murdered Muggles.
In fact, it turns out that Sirius Black is Harry's closest living relative and wants very much to protect him from Voldemort. Voldemort has taken control of Akzaban prison and, therefore, has dementors under his control, which he plans to use to destroy Harry.

What quotes describe Ralph's lack of leadership?

Despite Ralph's best intentions and his maturity and integrity, his claim to being the leader of the island is challenged by Jack and his crew of boy-hunters. Here are a few quotes that support this notion and illustrate Ralph's lack of leadership skill.

Jack started to protest, but the clamor changed from the general wish for a chief to an election by acclaim of Ralph himself. None of the boys could have found good reason for this; what intelligence had been shown was traceable to Piggy while the most obvious leader was Jack (chapter 1).

In chapter 1, the narrator simply states that Jack possesses a natural flair for leadership that Ralph lacks. Ralph has asserted himself as leader, and though he does have important qualities that enable him to be a reliable chief, the fact remains that "the most obvious leader was Jack."
Later, in chapter 2, Ralph attempts to lead a meeting of the boys, but the narrator points out to the reader that being in a position of leadership does not come naturally to Ralph. He finds the experience destabilizing and uncomfortable, and he lacks confidence in his own ability to lead. According to the quotes below, Ralph is easily distracted and loses focus when he attempts to lead, and surely his uncertainty is observable by the others, which compromises his leadership role even more.




Ralph lifted the cream and pink shell to his knees and a sudden breeze scattered light over the platform. He was uncertain whether to stand up or remain sitting (chapter 2).





The passionate noise of agreement from the assembly hit him like a wave and he lost his thread (chapter 2).

In chapter 4, the boys in charge of the fire abandon their post at the wrong time. A ship passes by the island just as the smoke from the fire disappears, which means that an opportunity to be discovered and rescued has passed. Ralph's frustration with Jack, who has led the other boys away on a hunting mission, is intense, and at first, Jack is too ashamed of himself to do anything but avoid eye contact; eventually, however, he apologizes in front of everyone witnessing the confrontation:




The buzz from the hunters was one of admiration at this handsome behavior. Clearly they were of the opinion that Jack had done the decent thing, had put himself in the right by his generous apology and Ralph, obscurely, in the wrong (chapter 4).










Thanks to Jack's natural leadership skill, his apology is given more weight than perhaps it deserves. Ralph's tendency to get flustered interferes with the gravity of this situation, distracting the other boys from the fact of Jack's irresponsibility.
The possession of leadership skills does not guarantee that the leader will lead others to positive action; in fact, the opposite holds true in The Lord of the Flies. Though Ralph is better able to hold on to his civilized nature than Jack, the boys are drawn to Jack's character, and they follow him when they descend into the darkness of their own primal desires.

What is Puritan clothing like?

I think we have a picture of Puritans dressed in formal dark clothing, white starched shirts, tall hats, and silver buckle shoes. All of the females with bonnets and long dresses. Very prim, proper, and precise!
Like most dress of the time, except for special days where formal attire was fashionable, the Puritan clothing was consistent with other colonists. Puritan clothing was mostly made of heavy wool. Linen would have been popular, but linen was not always practical in terms of durability tested by the stress of agriculture work. Puritan clothing would have been dyed dark colors like brown, black, or deep gray. Color choice was the result of their Puritan religious beliefs and the fact that color dyes were very expensive.
The Puritans wanted to separate their religious belief from the Church of England and the British in general. Puritans thought the church had become too liberal, enamored with ceremonies, elaborate robes, and ceremonial clothing. They believed English clothing worn by females accentuating the neckline and elaborately decorated was immodest.
Puritan females would dress simply. Their clothing would have three layers; a long heavy undergarment followed by a petticoat and an extended high neck button woolen skirt. Puritan women might wear a jacket over their skirt, and they always wore an apron with pockets. The apron was very practical for carrying tools or other items used in their daily work. The shoes were heavy ankle high leather and would be tied or buckled. Females always wore bonnets covering their head. The bonnet was both religious and practical. Religious in the Puritans believed a woman's head should always be covered in public. Practical in that the bonnet gave protection from the sun. Puritan females would have a cape or a long woolen coat when the weather was cool.
Puritan men were equally conservative and practical in their clothing. Their shirts would be very long and made of linen. Over the shirts, Puritan men would wear a vest made of heavy wool or leather. The pants would be knee length made from heavy wool. Sometimes they wore leather belts or suspenders. Puritan socks were long heavy wool socks. Men's shoes were very practical made of leather in either an ankle high or a high calf boot. Woolen coats or heavy capes were the Puritan male's choice for outerwear. Puritan men wore a variety of wide-brimmed hats much different from how we sometimes picture the hats worn by them. Hats were worn as protection from the sun, rain, or element. They needed to be functional, not stylish!
Puritan clothing exemplified the Puritan belief in living a simple modest lifestyle.
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/sumptuary-laws-puritan-fashion-colonies-modesty

What, specifically, is Brent’s punishment for his crime as set forth by the parents of the victim?

Mrs. Zamora, Lea's mother, doesn't believe in retribution—not even against Brent, the young man responsible for killing her daughter. Lea's mom grew up in the Philippines during the civil war and saw firsthand the immense damage that revenge can do. However, she does think that Brent should still be punished in some way, just not by conventional methods. Instead, Mrs. Zamora devises a novel punishment that will hopefully make Brent face up to his responsibilities while also doing justice to Lea's memory.
Mrs. Zamora can never bring Lea back; but she can still keep her spirit alive, and the way she wants to do this is by getting Brent to make four whirligigs of a girl who looks like Lea and placing them in Washington state, Florida, Maine, and California: the four corners of the United States. That way, people will still be able to receive joy from Lea—that's what she would've wanted.

What did Lewis and Clark do with the first prairie dog they found?

Clark described in his journals the first encounter he and Lewis had with prairie dogs. He knew they were prairie dogs—or rather, he described them as an animal called "prairie dogs" by the French. Clark and Lewis were astounded by the village the prairie dogs had created. Clark wrote that they dug over six feet down through clay before they were able to find the lodges; they then began putting barrels of water down into the prairie dogs' burrow, with the intention of driving them out. This was not immediate‚a lot of water went down there before any prairie dogs emerged. Eventually, they were able to force out one prairie dog, which Clark described as being rather like a squirrel.
Clark says that they captured this prairie dog but had also previously killed one with the use of a rattlesnake. The captured prairie dog went on to be kept as a pet by the Corps of Discovery and was eventually delivered to President Jefferson.

How can this novel be read as commentary on modern American life?

"The Secret Life of Walter Mitty" can be read not only as a study of a single eccentric character, but also as a commentary on modern life in America. Life for many Americans has become monotonous and meaningless, in spite of the fact that they enjoy such a high standard of living. Thoreau said many years ago that most men lead lives of quiet desperation. If that was true in Thoreau's time, how much more so is it true today? Thoreau's friend Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "Things are in the saddle and ride mankind." If that was true in the days when horses provided most transportation and lighting was provided by lamps and candles, how much more so is it true today? Mitty is typical of many American men. He goes from home to office and back to home five days a week, probably doing work that feels unfulfilling and meaningless. On Saturdays he mows the lawn, washes the car, and goes shopping for all the products that have become necessities. George Simenon, a great French writer, wrote about American life during the years he was living in this country, including in Connecticut, Walter Mitty's bailiwick:
He had followed the parkway as far as New York, and all the way, there had been a constant stream of cars, two and sometimes three lanes of them in both directions--a movement so implacable it looked like a headlong flight. Their brows furrowed, their muscles tensed, the drivers, often with whole families in the back seats, charged straight ahead as if their lives were in jeopardy, some of them not knowing where they were heading, or heading nowhere in particular, just desperately filling the empty hours with noise and speed.
John Updike, who lived in the same middle-class suburbia as Walter Mitty, wrote:
Most of American life consists of driving somewhere and then returning home, wondering why the hell you went.
The most comprehensive picture of this upper-middle-class American Siberia is presented in the many stories of John Cheever, including "The Country Husband,""The Swimmer," and "The Sorrows of Gin." Gin or whiskey was the universal antidote for boredom and loveless marriages among the affluent middle-class types who had fled from Manhattan to the neighboring states and had brought all their troubles with them.
Walter Mitty in 1939 was like a pioneer. The real exodus from New York did not start until after World War II ended in 1945. The exodus accelerated with the advent of the Cold War. People who could afford to move to the country thought it might be better not to be living in such a prime target area for atomic missiles as Manhattan.

How does Gibbon define "good" or "bad" emperors in his book, and what do his portrayals of various emperors suggests about his views on government and politics?

I am going to assume that you are referring to Edward Gibbon and his 1776 work, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.
Gibbon’s definition of a good emperor comes through most clearly in his discussion of what is referred to as the “Age of the Five Good Emperors.” This encompasses the period from 96–180 CE and includes the reigns of Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurelius. Gibbon describes this period in chapter 1 of his work in the following way:

In the second century of the Christian Aera, the empire of Rome comprehended the fairest part of the earth, and the most civilized portion of mankind. The frontiers of that extensive monarchy were guarded by ancient renown and disciplined valor. The gentle but powerful influence of laws and manners had gradually cemented the union of the provinces. Their peaceful inhabitants enjoyed and abused the advantages of wealth and luxury. The image of a free constitution was preserved with decent reverence: the Roman senate appeared to possess the sovereign authority, and devolved on the emperors all the executive powers of government. During a happy period of more than fourscore years, the public administration was conducted by the virtue and abilities of Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, and the two Antonines.

This description is very suggestive of his views on government and politics. Notice what he focuses on: the status of Rome’s frontiers and military, law and order within the empire, the power of the Senate and its relationship with the emperor in power, and the state of the bureaucracy. In Gibbon’s view, the five “good” emperors did well in all of these arenas. During their reigns, the empire’s borders and military were secure and well maintained (sometimes even extended), the bureaucracy functioned well, trade and agriculture flourished, and the government took care of its subjects through things like public works.
Nerva, for example, was known for consulting the Senate and halting various persecutions, including returning confiscated property. Trajan was a distinguished military commander whose victories extended Rome’s borders. He also maintained the bureaucracy and engaged in public building. Hadrian did the same, building the famous Hadrian’s Wall to secure Rome’s northern frontier. Antoninus Pius was known for maintaining Roman tradition and keeping the peace. Marcus Aurelius successfully waged war against and defeated the Germans and the Parthians, and further expanded and secured Rome’s borders. So, all of these emperors had some elements of Gibbon’s ideal of a good emperor. Gibbon devotes his first three chapters to what he sees as this golden age of good emperors.
Gibbon also claims that the age of the good emperors ended with Marcus Aurelius’s death and that Rome then began to decline and fall. This is mostly because it began to be ruled by bad emperors, to whom he devotes the rest of the chapters of his work (starting with chapter 4). He begins by eviscerating Marcus Aurelius’s son, Commodus, one example of a bad emperor. He writes that

The monstrous vices of the son have cast a shade on the purity of the father’s virtues. It has been objected to Marcus, that he sacrificed the happiness of millions to a fond partiality for a worthless boy; and that he chose a successor in his own family, rather than in the republic...but these motives will not account for the unprovoked cruelties of Commodus, who had nothing to wish and everything to enjoy. The beloved son of Marcus succeeded to his father, amidst the acclamations of the senate and armies . . . Nature had formed him of a weak rather than a wicked disposition. His simplicity and timidity rendered him the slave of his attendants, who gradually corrupted his mind. His cruelty, which at first obeyed the dictates of others, degenerated into habit, and at length became the ruling passion of his soul.

As you can see, Gibbon makes it a point to note that Commodus was chosen by Marcus Aurelius as his successor because he was his son, not because he was qualified. In other words, he was not really worthy or deserving of the title, and he proved this during his reign by being cruel, weak, and selfish and not caring about the republic. We get a hint of Gibbon’s own thoughts on dynastic politics and government, because he implies that emperors should be chosen for the good of the republic and with the approval of the Senate, based on their merit rather than their parentage. I would recommend checking out chapter 4 and those following it for more examples of "bad emperors."
https://books.google.com/books?id=FXllDwAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PP1

Can a story have more than one climax?

Yes, a story can have more than one climax, though normally it only has one. The climax is the high point of tension in a story, the turning point.
We could argue that "The Gift of the Magi" has two turning points. Each character makes a significant sacrifice to buy an expensive Christmas gift for the other. Della sells her most prized possession, her long, beautiful hair, to buy a watch chain for her husband, Jim. Jim sells his beloved watch to buy a comb and brush set for Della. The two climaxes comes as each spouse realizes the gift they bought for the other is useless because they have each sold the object that would have made it valuable. In either case, there could have been a bad reaction: hostility, anger, disappointment, reproach. At both moments, we are at a place of high tension, wondering how each spouse will respond to the surprising situation. The fact that both act with love relieves the tensions and allows for the falling action and resolution.

Yes, there can be more than one climax in a story, whether it's within a short story or a novel. A couple of works that famously have more than one climax are A Song of Ice and Fire and The Wheel of Time.
In The Gift of the Magi, there are two climaxes or plot twists in the story. The first one is the revelation that the wife had cut off her hair in order to by a fob for her husband's watch, only to find out the husband bought her a comb. The second climax is the revelation that the husband had sold his watch in order to buy the comb, therefore the presents they bought for each other are useless.
However, their love becomes deeper after seeing that they both sacrificed something for each other. In this regard, the two plot twists or climaxes are intertwined, and both are essential in order to deliver the hard-punching ending to the story.

Besides the loss of his family possessions, what else did Pi lose When the Tsimtsum sank in Life of Pi? What did he gain?

When the Japanese cargo ship Tsimtsum sank, Pi Patel lost much, but he gained a little, too. Besides his family's possessions, including most of the zoo animals they were transporting to Canada, Pi lost his mother, his father, and his older brother, Ravi. This was certainly the most grievous loss that he experienced. In addition, he lost the unvarnished optimism of youth. At only sixteen years of age, Pi had known difficulties in life—including the teasing he endured at school because of his name and the sorrow of having to leave his friends when his family decided to move to Canada—but he had never known tragedy. Once a person has lived through a great loss, their innocent joie de vivre dissipates. He lost his future as it had been envisioned by him and his parents. One might even say he lost his boyhood since his experience required him to grow up fast.
Alone at sea, adrift on a lifeboat with a 450-pound Bengal tiger, what could he have to gain? The fascinating part of the book is that it shows that Pi did benefit from the sinking of the ship despite his massive losses. He gained resilience as he sprang back again and again from life-threatening peril and emotional despair. He gained self-confidence as he learned to rise to an overwhelming challenge and even become master—to some degree—of a ferocious, carnivorous beast. He gained greater faith in God as he put his trust in the Creator during his long, lonely voyage. He gained a new identity since no one could endure such an ordeal without changing radically because of it. And he gained an incredible story to tell—two of them, in fact—in case people chose to disbelieve one or the other.
Pi's physical and emotional losses from the shipwreck were severe, but he achieved some intangible gains in their stead.

What is the theme of the chapter "My Friend in God" from The Cloud of Unknowing?

This chapter centers around the theme that the Lord has made a special journey that each of us follows in order to grow closer to him.
This journey follows four phases of development, each deepening our relationship with the Lord. The author defines these stages as the Common, the Special, the Singular, and the Perfect.
In the Common phase, humans go about their everyday existence in the daily rituals that are common to all humans. His focus is more on the mortal world than on his own spirituality.
The Special phase involves God's awakening of desire in an individual. This desire leads a man to long for a closer relationship with God. This longing inevitably brings him more into contact with other seekers of God, and the interaction between these desires and individuals helps a person transform inwardly into a more devout follower of God.
The next phase, the Singular, involves a still-growing righteousness—one where an individual learns to trust most in the core of truths that God has worked to instill in him. He sees life and people more through the spiritual goals that he knows God has laid out for him and focuses less on the transitory aspects of life in the mortal world.
Finally, he ascends to the Perfect phase, where he is a perfect servant of God. This phase may start in the mortal world, but its perfection shall be carried on into the eternity that God promises his followers.

What Native American group lived in Maryland?

The indigenous people living in the area that would become the colony of Maryland when European settlement began in the 17th century were members of dozens of tribes, within a larger general grouping by language of Algonquian-speaking peoples. In the southern area of the territory, including the Eastern Shore, the largest tribe was the Piscataway. They are often considered with, or within, the Nanticoke, who lived in the northern part of the territory and modern Delaware; they in turn were closely related to the Lenni Lenape of modern Delaware and Pennsylvania. Peoples living on both sides of the Chesapeake Bay were united into the Powhatan Confederacy based in Virginia. Susquehannock people also lived in or claimed territory that included part of Northern Maryland, Northern Virginia, Pennsylvania, and New York.
https://www.chesapeakebay.net/discover/history/archaeology_and_native_americans

What thoughts are going through Lennie’s mind as he waits for George?

Scared and confused after killing Curley's wife, Lennie starts experiencing delusions. As he waits for George, he falls into a deep sleep, where he has a very strange dream. In the dream, his Aunt Clara appears, scolding Lennie for doing bad things and always getting George into trouble of one kind or another. Though Lennie didn't actually mean to kill Curley's wife, he knows that he's done something terribly wrong, and the appearance of Aunt Clara in his dream is an unwelcome reminder of this.
Lennie also dreams about a human-sized rabbit telling him off. Lennie may be mentally challenged, but in his very deepest subconscious, he knows that killing Curley's wife has pretty much wrecked his hopes and dreams of working his own ranch with George and taking care of the rabbits. And that's what this particular dream tells him.

What was Abraham Lincoln's goal for reconstruction? How did the Radical Republican view differ from Lincolns? What were the main goals of the Radical Republicans plan for Reconstruction? Was Reconstruction a success? Why or why not?

The difference between the reconstruction goals and policies of Abraham Lincoln and those of the Radical Republicans pertained to an important question: Were the eleven southern states which comprised the Confederacy ever out of the Union?
Lincoln answered this question in the negative. He maintained that the Union was indissoluble and that these states, despite their ordinances of secession and armed resistance to federal control, continued to possess all of their rights, powers, and privileges as states. His lenient reconstruction plan and ultimate policy prioritized this concept and required that only a fraction of the southern population (ten percent of the population in each state which had voted in the 1860 presidential election) take a loyalty oath to the United States. Lincoln maintained that such a limited requirement would implement his policy of aligning these eleven states into their "proper relation" with the rest of the nation.
The Radical Republicans contended that the eleven southern states had, in fact, left the Union. Therefore, they had forfeited all of their rights, powers, and privileges as states. Radical Republican Charles Sumner characterized this position when he stated that these states had "committed suicide." In order for the southern states to reenter the Union, Radical Republicans, through Congressional Reconstruction, subjected them to military occupation and control until they ratified the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The Radical Republicans also attempted to politically empower African Americans through “Black Republicanism.” This effort involved Republican support and assistance in the election of African Americans to positions in southern state legislatures and even the United States Senate.
Historians continually debate the “success” of these reconstruction efforts. Lincoln’s assassination prevented the implementation of his more lenient reconstruction plan. Regarding the success of Radical Reconstruction, all of the eleven southern states ratified the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments by 1876 and were readmitted into the Union. Black Republicanism, however, proved to be short-lived. Southern white resistance (to the point of violence) insured its ultimate failure. This resistance also prevented African Americans from fully exercising their citizenship and voting rights for generations. Yet the efforts to empower African Americans through Radical Republican Reconstruction provides an historical antecedent to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Many historians contend that this constitutes Reconstruction’s greatest success.

Lincoln's broad goals for reconstructing the South after the Civil War were laid out in the Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction of 1863. Lincoln began planning Reconstruction after the battles of Gettysburg and Vicksburg because it was clear at that point that the South would lose the war.
In the Proclamation, Lincoln wanted to make reunifying the war-torn country as easy as possible. He therefore emphasized forgiving the Southern rebels. For example, he called for allowing the Southern states back into the union if only ten percent of the voters on its 1860 voter rolls took an Oath of Allegiance to the United States.
The Proclamation also called for granting amnesty to all but the highest military and government officials in the South. Rank and file soldiers and officers did not have to worry about being prosecuted for treason. Furthermore, the Proclamation guaranteed Southerners property rights, except that the slaves were freed, in order to reassure large landowners that they could keep their holdings. Lincoln also wanted the states to handle their own reconstruction rather than having it imposed by Washington.
The Radical Republicans, on the other hand, wanted to break the power of the big landowners who had started the war. They wanted to redistribute land and ensure that freed slaves had full civil rights, meaning that they would be treated as full citizens under the law. Some Southern states, in contrast, wanted to deny blacks such rights as property ownership and the vote. The Radical Republicans also passed legislation, that Lincoln never signed, requiring fifty percent of Southern voters to pledge an oath of allegiance to the United States.
The Radical Republicans established the Freedmen's Bureau to distribute forty acres of land to both poor whites and freed slaves, stating that these people could buy the land in a few years as long as they pledged loyalty to the United States. The Freedmen's Bureau also extended economic aid to blacks and built black schools.
If the goal of Reconstruction was to bring the rebelling Southern states back into the Union on an equal footing with the other states, Reconstruction was a success. However, many historians see it as a failure, because it allowed legal racism to flourish for a century in the South.
After Lincoln was assassinated, Andrew Johnson became president, and this set back the goals of Reconstruction from the Radical Republican point of view. Johnson believed fervently in state's rights, and he blocked the Radical Republican goal to redistribute property in the South in way that would have broken the monopoly of power the wealthy white planters still possessed. He allowed the states, on the whole, to make their own decisions about Reconstruction.
This worked out very poorly. Most of the whites in power wanted to keep life as much as possible like it had been before the Civil War. Johnson also undermined change when he insisted all the land that had been set aside for the Freedmen's Bureau be returned to its owners. By 1872, Congress disbanded the Freedmen's Bureau.
Two positive steps, however, came out of Reconstruction. First, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which guaranteed citizenship rights to all blacks, although it not give these rights to Native Americans, who had to wait to 1924. Blacks were also granted the right to own property and sign contracts. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution outlawed all slavery, except for allowing people in prison to work without pay.
Left to their own devices, however, the Southern states imposed a segregated social order based on the concept of keeping the races apart, promising they would be "separate but equal." In reality, the two races were kept separate but unequal. Furthermore, the South essentially re-enslaved many blacks through long prison sentences.
It would take a century for blacks in the South to gain the full civil rights they could have been granted in the late 1860s had Congress been able to impose a fuller Reconstruction on the South. For example, many blacks had inadequate educational opportunities and were unable to vote until the 1950s and 1960s. In terms of creating an equal society in the South, Reconstruction failed. In evaluating whether Reconstruction failed, you will need to evaluate how important you find reuniting all the states into one country versus the importance of establishing equal racial rights in the Southern states.

Why do Sam’s friends think she was quiet and didn’t want to go to the party?

In Lauren Oliver’s young adult novel Before I Fall, Sam is living the same day over and over: February 12th. The first day, she wakes up as normal. She goes to school with her other popular friends, teases the kids that aren’t as cool as her, goes to a party, and fights with her boyfriend. On the ride home, the girls get into a car crash and die. But the next morning, Sam wakes up and realizes that it is once again February 12th. The day repeats: school, party, accident, and then death.
Sam’s not sure why she's reliving the same day but believes it is an opportunity to save both herself and her friends. She thinks that if she is able to prevent them from going to the party, there won’t be a car accident and they will all be okay. However, her plan doesn’t work out. While she convinces them not to go to the party and have a sleepover instead, there is still death: the girl they always bully, Juliet Sykes, has committed suicide.
Sam, of course, doesn’t explain to her friends that she’s reliving the same day over and over. Her friends think that Sam is just trying to avoid her boyfriend, Rob. They all knew the couple had plans to sleep together at the Valentine’s Day party, so they believe that Sam just isn’t ready and is trying to avoid him.

Imagine you are having a conversation with a friend who makes one of two comments: "I just don't understand why women stay in an abusive relationship" OR "I don't understand why someone would not report being sexually assaulted/raped." Select one scenario and discuss how you would explain the victim/survivor experience to help your friend better understand. This may include a discussion of the symptoms of trauma, the criminal justice system, child welfare involvement, lack of social support, beliefs/stereotypes, etc.

The issues involved in domestic abuse encompasses many different situations and includes physical, psychological, social, and financial aspects. Further, the decision to stay in a situation of abuse may include factors such as co-residence or emotional connections, often through a child. The absence or weakness of a support network may contribute to the person’s inability to find a viable alternative.
Identifying abuse can be challenging, especially if physical violence is not involved. One partner’s extreme control over the other is a form of abuse. This can include such things as demanding an account of the partner’s time or restricting friendships and associations. Threats of violence, especially if repeated, can be as emotionally damaging as physical violence and often prevent or delay a partner’s leaving.
An abuser may irregularly exhibit the signs of abuse, often with long intervals between the most extreme behaviors. The externalization of blame is a common feature, so that the abused person is encouraged to accept responsibility for the abuser’s behavior. Passive behavior that does not incite abuse is often encouraged or demanded.
Control of the couple’s finances, including restricting the partner’s access to financial support, is one common characteristic. Closely related are attitudes about work, such as conservative beliefs about women holding jobs, that also limit the abused partner’s ability to support themselves and/or their children. Financial considerations constitute a powerful obstacle to leaving a relationship.
An abuser’s efforts to control their partner’s behavior frequently includes isolating them from friends and family. If the abused person has few or no close personal ties, they often feel that they have nowhere else to go. Similarly, the abused partner is often unaware of how to contact appropriate resources, including shelters and safe houses for temporary accommodations. This may lead to resignation or hopelessness that discourages them from leaving.
Among the resources available are those prepared by the Office of Women’s Health of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and numerous nonprofit organizations. For example, the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence runs the National Domestic Violence Hotline.
https://womenscommunity.org/understanding-abuse/why-dont-i-leave/

https://www.womenshealth.gov/relationships-and-safety/domestic-violence/signs-domestic-violence

Why did Rose get angry at Will when he read the letters?

In Medicine River, the trunk of letters that Will's mother Rose keeps in their home is not merely a historical archive about her relationship with her husband, Bob. It is also a repository of historical trauma that she wants, at first, to keep sealed off. When she beats Will after she discovers he has been reading the letters, he struggles to understand her anger, believing that it is only natural to want to recover one's missing family history. At the end of the novel after contextual information emerges about their interracial marriage and family opposition, Will realizes that Rose wanted to protect him from internalizing the narrative of his father's loss, especially the fact that he died in a car accident.

What is the man vs. man conflict in the Bronze Bow?

A significant conflict develops between Daniel and Rosh. Though both are devoted to the cause of liberating Judea from the Romans, the two young men have completely different value systems. Rosh is something of a fanatic; for him, the end justifies the means. He's prepared to use the most ruthless methods to achieve his political goals, even if it means stealing from his own people.
For Daniel, such an approach is simply wrong; it defeats the whole purpose of what they're doing. The zealots are supposed to be fighting to liberate the Jewish people from Roman occupation. Yet in stealing from his own people, Rosh is treating them no better than the Romans treat them with their punitive taxation. Also, Daniel fights because he has to; Rosh, on the other hand, fights because he wants to. He actually enjoys leading the life of an outlaw with all the violence it entails. It is this difference in attitude toward physical force that ultimately sets Daniel on the path to following the way of Christ.

Who is the loneliest character in Of Mice and Men? Answer in a ACE-IT paragraph (assertion, context & citation, explication, interpretation, and conclusion).

This isn't a question with a cut-and-dry answer. I would say you could make a good argument in favor of several characters—Crooks springs first to mind, but one could also argue that Candy is a very lonely character, given his advanced age, which sets him apart from the rest of the workers. You could also argue that Curley's wife, despite the fact that she flirts with other men (particularly Slim), is the loneliest character, as the sole woman and someone who is ignored by her husband, the person who is supposed to care about her most. The most important thing, when you're asked to write an ACE-IT paragraph like this, is to choose your argument and stick with it, giving the best evidence you can for it.
As an example, let's say we're going to argue that Crooks is the loneliest character. That's your assertion.
Next, we need to give some context and citation. That means we need to explain who Crooks is and use some quotations from the book to demonstrate that he's lonely. Crooks is described as "the Negro stable buck," the only black worker in the story. On Saturday night, Lennie finds him sitting alone in his room. Crooks tells Lennie that he "ain't wanted" in the bunkhouse with the other men, and explains why: "I can't play because I'm black. They say I stink. Well, I tell you, you all of you stink to me."
Explication and interpretation is the part where you explain how the quotations you've chosen indicate that Crooks is lonely—or rather, how your citations support your assertion. In this case, we can argue that Crooks is forced to keep to himself; he can't have any friends among his supposed peers, because they have unfairly rejected him based on the color of his skin. In turn, Crooks has dealt with this by deciding he doesn't want to be around them anyway—they all "stink" to him. Furthermore, because he's a "cripple," this isn't a situation he can easily find his way out of. He's stuck in it; he's a "permanent" resident in a place where he isn't wanted. Because he sees no escape route, his loneliness is intensified.
In your conclusion, then, you draw together the ideas you have already put forward and summarize what you are saying. You may wish to acknowledge early in your paragraph that Crooks is not the only candidate for the position of "loneliest" character. If so, you could reiterate that here, but also reiterate the key reasons why he is lonelier than the others—for example, although Curley's wife is the only woman, she is white and therefore able to fraternize, even if she can't spend time with the person she really cares about. Crooks, on the other hand, is racially isolated and has nobody to turn to. His loneliness, moreover, is something he seemingly cannot escape from, and its ongoing status means that he becomes more and more lonely as time passes.

Why does the poet call the talent useless in "On His Blindness"?

That reference is found in these lines:

When I consider how my light is spentEre half my days in this dark world and wide,And that one talent which is death to hideLodg'd with me useless . . .

At this point in his career, Milton had gone blind. The word "talent" here is a Biblical allusion to the Parable of the Talents, in which one man is punished by God for hiding his talents away and not using them for the Lord's work.
Milton sees his blindness as burying the gift of poetry within his soul. He feels that God has gifted him with this ability of creating poetry to use for His work, and Milton longs to use his talents for God's purposes, saying that his "soul [is] more bent/ To serve therewith [his] maker." In this moment in his blindness, Milton (presumably speaking as himself in this poem) considers his God-given talents "useless" if he does not have the vision he feels he needs to complete the work, yet he presses forward so that he can present a "true account" of his efforts to God when his time comes.

What is biology?

Biology is branch of science which deals the study of life structure, function, growth, origin, evolution and distribution of living organisms. There are different branches of biology like biochemistry, Botany, zoology etc.

Biology is defined as either the science of life or the study of living things. There are many disciplines which fall under the umbrella of biology. To name a few, these include botany (the study of plants), zoology (the study of animals), cellular biology (the study of cells and how they work together to become living organisms), and ecology (the study of how living creatures survive in their environment).
To give you more insight into biology, I'll give you a few examples of what you could end up studying as part of a biology course. First, you could be asked to examine an amoeba as an example of a unicellular organism. Secondly, you could be asked to look at a rock pool and examine how the creatures that live in it cohabit. Thirdly, you could be asked to consider the concept of symbiosis (how one animal will use another animal to its benefit while giving a reciprocal benefit). Fourthly, you could be asked to look at a particular plant and examine how it is well-suited to its environment.
I could carry on writing examples all day, but the most important thing to understand about biology is that it encompasses any study of living things—human, animal, or plant.
https://www.livescience.com/44549-what-is-biology.html

What is John Calvin's theology?

Calvin's theology is very complex and we can't begin to do justice to it here. Nevertheless, we can still identify a number of key ideas. Perhaps the most important of these is double predestination. This is the belief that God has determined in advance which people are going to heaven or hell. Traditional Calvinist theology holds that even before someone's been born, even before they've had a chance to do anything good or bad in their lives, God has already decided whether they're going to heaven or hell. One can be the most God-fearing Christian or the most incorrigible sinner; ultimately, it makes no difference as to your soul's ultimate destination. Only God can make that decision, and he made it before he created a single soul.
Another important idea in Calvin's theology is the utter depravity of humankind. This means that man, ever since Adam and Eve disobeyed God by eating of the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden, has been mired in sin. According to Calvin, people are not innately good; on the contrary, they are selfish creatures, always out for what they can get. Calvin doesn't deny that human beings can often show signs of goodness, but what he emphatically does deny is that such goodness is an intrinsic part of sinful human nature. Whatever goodness we possess comes purely and solely from God through the freely given gift of divine grace.

Gordon Moore predicted the dramatic increase in transistors per chip in 1965, and his prediction has held for decades. Some industry analysts insist that Moore’s Law has been a predictor of chip design, but others say it is a motivator for designers of new chips. In your opinion, who is correct?

An argument can be made for both sides of this question—and your answer should come down to which argument you most agree with.
Moore's law, as it is now referred to, was first predicted in an internal paper for Electronics journal in 1965 by engineer Gordon Moore. Under this "law," Moore predicted that the number of transistors per silicon chip will double every year. The law was adjusted to predict chips doubling every two years in 1975, reflecting slower development trends and the need for increasingly sophisticated technology. Given its accuracy, researchers and developers have used Moore's law to predict industry changes and set technological targets.
Obviously, there is a physical limit to this law—and if it were to continue its predictions, by 2025 transistors would be nearly the size of an atom. Since 1965, technological advances have supported Moore's law—transistor size has continued to decrease with the development of a host of engineering breakthroughs, including CMOS, silicon straining, VLSI, immersion lithography, high-k dielectrics, and transistor process technology (these transistors are now tens of nanometers in size). However, should development continue at this pace, it will be less than a decade until engineers may need to move into quantum chip computing (a breakthrough that seems unlikely given the laws of physics).
One could argue that Moore's law is a "self-fulfilling prophecy"—that no matter whether Moore simply predicted the pace at which technology would develop or whether chip designers purposefully strove to meet his predicted rate of development, the trend and timing is the same. It is up to you to weigh the evidence and decide if you agree that Moore's law is observational in nature or if it provides a timeline and motivation for engineers to set development targets.

Discuss the race issues in Junior's story.

One cannot discuss the themes of The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian without discussing race and racism. When Junior attends Reardan, he encounters a lot of racism. Not only does he deal with microaggressions and racist comments from his white classmates and the father of Penelope, the girl he likes, he also notes that Reardan's school mascot is an Indian. Furthermore, on a systemic level, racism and the attempted genocide of the Native peoples of North America are direct reasons for the way Junior and his family live: on a reservation, stricken by poverty and alcoholism. These are remnants of the systemic violence against a entire population.

Regarding the book To Kill a Mockingbird, What does this mean "But by the end of August our repertoire was vapid from couples reproductions" and how does it affect the action in Chapter l?

It’s Chapter 1 of To Kill a Mockingbird, and Dill has just arrived to spend his summer holidays in Maycomb. One of the things that makes Dill such a fun boy to hang out with is that he’s always coming up with exciting new ways to pass the time, and the Finch children certainly have a lot of spare time on their hands. Mainly they spend it acting out scenes from stories such as Tarzan by Edgar Rice Burroughs. Dill’s pretty useful to have around for these performances; he plays the part of an ape very well.
But as the school holidays draw to a close, things start to get pretty boring for the children. They’ve acted out the same old stories over and over again, to the point where there’s really nothing more they can add to them. Just think of all the old ideas recycled by the movies and TV. If you don’t present a new angle, if you don’t try something different, then those ideas will soon become pretty stale. That’s the problem that the children have. As the end of August approaches, they’ve found that they can no longer make the old stories fresh and exciting. They need to find a new way to pass what little time they have left of the school holidays.
It’s Dill who rides to the rescue by coming up with the Boo Radley game. Boo’s always been an object of fascination for the Finch children. But at the same time, Scout and Jem are quite scared of Maycomb’s resident boogie-man. They’ve heard all the stories about this strange individual, and so they’re reluctant to venture too close to the Radley residence. But with Dill alongside them, they get the courage to participate in his crazy idea of getting Boo to come outside.
The Boo Radley game is important for the action of Chapter 1 as it shows the Finch children engaging more closely with the world around them. The focus of their games is no longer fantasy, but reality. The relationship between Boo and the Finch children will come to be an important one as the story progresses. As the relationship develops, we’ll come to learn much more about both Boo and the Finch children. And we can say that Dill, in coming up with the Boo Radley game, is the catalyst for so much of what happens.

If I use love as a theme in my proposal for a literary analysis of the novel If Beale Street Could Talk, what references or ideas can I use?

Various forms of love are demonstrated in If Beale Street Could Talk, so there are many ways in which you could approach thematic analysis. Just to clarify, to simply propose love as a theme is general and would not allow for effective argumentation. Rather, keep specificity in mind. You could discuss how one or more relationships demonstrate the novel’s bigger picture, develop certain characters, or convey certain life lessons. Some questions to generate analysis are listed below.
The nature of parental love represented by Sharon and Joseph Rivers for Tish: How do Sharon and Joseph treat Tish when they learn she is pregnant? How is their acceptance of her situation as an unmarried pregnant woman at odds with societal ideals of the 1970s?
The romantic love between Tish and Fonny: How does this dynamic change throughout the novel? What are the effects of Fonny’s false rape accusations on their relationship? How does this conflict develop their characters?
Love as a theme can be expanded upon in relation to the novel’s backdrop of white racism. How does prejudice put pressure on the relationships in the novel? What about black intimacy, specifically, does Baldwin convey through the novel’s Harlem setting?
Who better to learn about the novel's theme of love from than Baldwin himself? For instance, The Atlantic details Baldwin's perspectives on love and racism in a recent article attached below. Referring to outside sources, given they are authoritative, is always a great idea to gain perspective. Hope this helps!
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2019/01/james-baldwin-idea-of-love-fire-next-time-if-beale-street-could-talk/579829/

In what ways did the French help during the American Revolution?

The French were the greatest ally of the American colonists. France was intrigued at the prospect of helping the Americans, as it would be a way to get back at Britain after France's loss in the French and Indian War.
Marquis de Lafayette was a French aristocrat who served on Washington's staff. France joined the war officially in 1777 after the American victory at Saratoga. France threatened British possessions all over the world and diverted valuable assets away from the colonial war. French troops also served on American soil. The greatest French contribution was the French navy, keeping the British navy at bay during the siege of Yorktown, where Washington would capture Cornwallis's army. While this 1781 battle is largely considered the end of the war, the war would actually drag on another two years. Washington hoped that the French would assist him in retaking New York City, but the French commander moved to harass British possessions in the Caribbean, thus proving that even at this late date, the sugar islands of the Caribbean were still considered the prize of the New World.
France also gave the American colonial government significant financial help at a time when the French treasury was suffering from grave inefficiencies of its own. This was key when the Continental Congress could only ask the states for money. France's joining the war on the American side led the Spanish and the Dutch to do the same, as France was still the major superpower on the European continent.

What political party did WIlliam McKinley belong to?

William McKinley was the twenty-fifth president of the United States, and he was a member of the Republican Party. During the election, the country was still in the midst of an economic depression, and public opinion was split over whether the gold standard or free silver would better the economy. McKinley ran on a platform favoring the gold standard and secured the victory over William Jennings Bryan.
As president, McKinley led the nation to victory in the Spanish-American War, which gave the United States possession of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. He also strengthened American industry by raising protective tariffs through the Dingley Tariff Act. McKinley also maintained the gold standard, and throughout his presidency, the economy experienced rapid growth. He was elected for a second term, but he was assassinated only six months into it.