Critically evaluate the prose style of Francis Bacon.

Bacon's prose style is renowned for being crisp, succinct, and to the point. He was a firm believer that language should be a reflection of thought. That being the case, clear thoughts should always be expressed in clear language.
As an empiricist, Bacon felt that the English language should, wherever possible, be grounded in experience. If it was not, then it was doomed to be bogged down in what he saw as the meaningless abstractions of scholastic philosophy, which, according to empiricists, tell us nothing about the world in which we live, the world of space, time, and objects studied by natural science. Bacon wanted to de-clutter the English language to make it easier for scientists such as himself to be able to talk about the empirical world in a meaningful way. And this is precisely what he did in his on written works, which are some of the finest examples of clear prose style in the English language.

Compare the Hellenistic period Venus de Milo (c. 125-100 BCE) and Praxiteles’ Late Classical Aphrodite

Praxiteles' Late Classical Venus of Knidos is widely considered among the first life-size nude sculptures of the female body. It is a sculpture (like many from antiquity) which survives only as a Roman copy. Successors of this sculptural type have been nicknamed "Venus Pudica" for her demure pose that covers her genitalia but reveals her modestly-proportioned breasts. The Venus of Knidos was sculpted by revered Athenian sculptor Praxiteles, who was experienced in rendering the male nude (e.g. Hermes with the infant Dionysus). The sculpture was intended as a cult statue for the Temple of Aphrodite at Knidos, located in modern southwestern Turkey.
The Venus de Milo (by Alexandros of Antioch, now displayed in the Louvre) was carved several hundred years later (in the second century BC). The statue was found in the vicinity of an ancient theater on the island of Milos. This Venus has a robe covering her lower half and genitalia. Her arms are missing, and she is thought to be depicted immediately before getting into the bath. This creates a moment of anticipation that the viewer can appreciate, as though he or she happens upon the unwitting goddess. Her gaze is also directly ahead, as contrasted to the Venus of Knidos, who looks to her side. This could be an assertive gaze, or, alternatively, it could mean that the goddess is taken by surprise.
It is important to remark that both statues are very progressive for their unapologetic and realistic display of the female nude. The venerated goddess is shown in both cases with ideal human proportions that remains as attractive now as in antiquity.

How did Aztec culture revolve around the year-long preparation of the human sacrifice?

Sacrifices of various kinds, including human sacrifice, were an integral part of Aztec culture. Though by no means the only ancient civilization to engage in the practice, the Aztecs have gained an especially fearsome reputation throughout history for their penchant for human sacrifice. Without in any way trying to minimize the moral degradation involved, it's important nonetheless to understand why the Aztecs carried out what to civilized people everywhere is an utterly abhorrent practice.
In Aztec culture, human sacrifice was seen as a way of repaying the gods for the sacrifices that they themselves had made in creating the world; it was an offering of thanks, an expression of gratitude for all that the gods had done and continued to do. The gods were all-powerful, but still needed to be nourished with a regular supply of sacrificial victims' flesh and blood in order to have the strength to carry out their vital functions such as making the sun rise.
According to the Aztec creation myth, the great gods Quetzalcóatl and Tezcatlipoca created the earth and the sky, all the mountains, streams and rivers, from the body parts of the giant reptile monster Cipactli. To appease Cipactli for the loss of her limbs, the gods promised her human hearts and blood by way of compensation. Again, one can see from this that Aztec human sacrifice rituals expressed the reciprocal relationship between gods and mortals.
There were many different kinds of human sacrifice in Aztec culture; some involving the ritual killing of children, whose tears were believed to herald the prospect of rain to fertilize crops; others involving warriors from rival tribes captured in battle. However, whoever the victims were, Aztec human sacrifice was primarily concerned with maintaining an appropriate balance between mortals and gods, in which the two worked together to ensure the harmony of the created order.

Why did Oberon feel compassion for Helena? What did he ask Puck to do to Demetrius?

In Act II, scene 1 of Shakespeare's comedy A Midsummer Night's Dream the fairy queen Oberon witnesses Demetrius's cruel rejection of Helena.
Demetrius once swore he loved Helena but has since transferred his affections to her friend Hermia, who has run away with her love Lysander. While Demetrius searches the woods, the realm of the fairies, for Hermia, Helena trails after him, basically begging him to love her back.
Oberon is invisible and witnesses the entirety of their fight. When his servant, the fairy Puck, returns from fetching the magic flower that Oberon sent him off to find, Oberon instructs him as follows:

Take thou some of it, and seek through this grove:A sweet Athenian lady is in loveWith a disdainful youth: anoint his eyes;But do it when the next thing he espiesMay be the lady: thou shalt know the manBy the Athenian garments he hath on.Effect it with some care, that he may proveMore fond on her than she upon her love:And look thou meet me ere the first cock crow.

Essentially, he is instructing Puck to cast a love spell on Demetrius to make him return Helena's affection. Oberon describes Helena as "sweet" and Demetrius as "disdainful," thus making it clear that Helena has won his sympathy. Note that the initial intention of this prank is not just to make Demetrius return Helena's love but actually to make him even "more fond" than she is of him, thus reversing the power structure of their relationship.

What is the significance of Carlson's Luger?

The killing of Candy's old dog is a good example of Steinbeck's naturalism. He wanted to demonstrate that there was a gun available. He wanted George to see it, know where it was kept, and how to fire it. The whole episode of Carlson shooting Candy's dog is intended to establish the existence of a German Luger in a "naturalistic" manner. George can't help seeing where Carlson keeps the Luger pistol and how he works the mechanism.
Carlson found a little cleaning rod in the bag and a can of oil. He laid them on his bed and then brought out the pistol, took out the magazine and snapped the loaded shell from the chamber. Then he fell to cleaning the barrel with the little rod.
A Luger is a distinctive-looking handgun. When George pulls it out of his jacket at the campsite, the reader will know that it belongs to Carlson and that George must have stolen it with the intention of shooting Lennie. When Carlson is talking Candy into letting him shoot the dog, he explains how he can do it painlessly with one shot at a certain point on the back of the head. George uses this knowledge to shoot Lennie in the same place. It seems as if George has acquired his knowledge of the location of the Luger, how to work it, and where to point it, all "naturally." But actually it was all carefully thought out by the author. In real life things usually seem to evolve "naturally" like this. If Carlson had volunteered to show the boys his Luger, explain how he got it and how it works, that would be un-natural. But a lesser writer probably would have handled the events in some such way.

What is one key development that separates reptiles from amphibians?

There is more than one key development that separates reptiles from amphibians, and I do not think it is possible to single out only one key difference. In general, the reptile characteristics that differentiate them from amphibians are characteristics that allow reptiles to be less dependent on living near an aquatic environment. One development that allows for this is the reptilian skin. It is thicker than amphibian skin, and it allows for much less water loss through the skin; therefore reptiles can survive and thrive in much more desiccated environments. Another key development is the development of the amniotic egg. The amniotic egg is specifically structured in a way that allows reptiles to reproduce without being dependent on the aquatic environment. In the amniotic egg, an embryo develops structures that help maintain it within a terrestrial environment. This includes a fluid filled sac, called the amnion, that surrounds the embryo. Other structures help with gas diffusion, waste removal, and food sources.
http://projects.ncsu.edu/project/bio181de/Lab/animal_diversity/reptiles.html

How do we know that the Warden and Mr. Sir were not expecting the two boys?

At the end of chapter 44, the Warden ends up catching Stanely and Zero in the act of digging out a mysterious suitcase in one of the holes. At the beginning of chapter 45, the Warden shines her flashlight in the direction of the two boys as Mr. Pendanski and Mr. Sir arrive on the scene. Mr. Sir is walking barefoot and is only wearing his pajama bottoms. The Warden is also in her bedclothes but is wearing boots. The fact that both the Warden and Mr. Sir are not fully dressed in their normal, everyday attire indicates that they did not expect Stanley and Zero to show up in the middle of the night. Since the boys had not returned to camp for an extended period of time, both the Warden and Mr. Sir assumed that they had died of dehydration in the vast desert.
The Warden then proceeds to create an alibi and make sure Mr. Sir and Mr. Pendanski corroborate their stories before they speak with the Attorney General. One can infer that the Warden, Mr. Sir, and Mr. Pendanski would not have to create a new story regarding Stanley and Zero's whereabouts if they were expecting them to return.

Was the Civil War inevitable? Use specific evidence to support your argument.

Interesting question! History has shown that there are always two opposing sides to an argument, so the answer is a difficult one. Your response will center on your own conclusions about the inevitability of the Civil War. In my answer, I will present arguments for and against the inevitability of the Civil War.
If this is an essay question, my best advice is to begin by briefly outlining the causes of the war. Then, I would discuss questions about the inevitability of the war.
Yes, the war was inevitable:
1.) Many historians maintain that the Civil War (1861–1865) was about slavery. They argue that war was the only way to settle the discrepancy between two opposing social/labor systems. During the nineteenth century, the North was becoming more industrialized. In fact, the textile mills in New England formed the heart of the American industrial revolution.
Soon, Northern ingenuity and technology buoyed the rise of the oil, steel, and electricity industries. In contrast, the South held on to its agrarian economy and provided the raw materials that facilitated industrialization in the North. The South's economy was powered by slavery. Slaves were the backbone of the Southern economic machine.
The conflict that gave rise to the Civil War centered on the discrepancy between Northern and Southern conceptions of progress. The North equated industrial progress with capitalism. Meanwhile, the South considered its slave-based agrarian economy a form of capitalism as well. War, therefore, was inevitable, as these two conceptions of capitalism were diametrically opposed to each other. Neither the South nor the North saw any possibility of compromise.
2.) The riots and rebellions spearheaded by anti-abolitionists, such as John Brown, led to widespread panic and social destabilization. You can read all about John Brown's raids in Pottawatomie Creek and Harpers Ferry at the link below.
On October 16, 1859, Brown and his supporters raided the United States Army arsenal at Harpers Ferry. The group's plan was to begin a guerrilla war to push back against slavery. For his part, Brown hoped that his actions would inspire hundreds of thousands of slaves to rise up in defense of their cause.
Why did John Brown's actions strike such fear in America's leaders? The answer is that John Brown set an example for vigilante actions among the populace.
This discomfited both Northern and Southern legislators. For the Northerners, Brown's actions painted Northern capitalists and abolitionists as extremists. The Northerners feared that this could cost them future elections. Meanwhile, the Southerners feared that white abolitionists like Brown would inspire other whites to take up the anti-slavery mantle. They also feared that, if they gave their slaves freedom, these same slaves would turn on them. Here, you may decide to mention Nat Turner and his slave rebellions. So, both Northerners and Southerners feared the loss of their power.
For Brown, the cause was personal. The Southern legislators sidelined anyone who was an abolitionist. Abolitionists, in effect, had no voice in the South. So, the war could be seen as inevitable, because both Southern and Northern leaders were invested in quelling the actions of black and white abolitionists, such as John Brown and Nat Turner.
Of course, the above are only two arguments for the inevitability of the Civil War. Now, let's move on to arguments that the war was not inevitable.
No, the war was not inevitable:
1.) Other historians maintain that war was never inevitable and that much could have been done to prevent one. In fact, they present several reasons for their convictions. You can read about them from the link below.
For example, President Buchanan opted for a compromise. If his actions had been supported, war could have been averted. Although many saw President Buchanan's actions in calling for a convention as an act of political compromise, it must be mentioned that the president was no supporter of slavery. In fact, he was personally opposed to it. However, he supported above all else two fundamental principles: the preservation of the Union and state jurisdiction over domestic concerns.
In 1847, Buchanan argued for the extension of the Missouri Line (under the Missouri Compromise). He maintained that doing so would preserve both the Union and the right of individual states to decide the slavery question. Essentially, Buchanan opposed the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and he also opposed secession. Buchanan maintained that the Union could not sustain a civil war and prevail. If his voice had been heeded, there might have been no Civil War.
2.) Senator Stephen Douglas failed to become president of the United States. Because of John Brown's raids, Stephen Douglas (a Democrat) could not prevail against the Republican candidate, Abraham Lincoln. Had Douglas prevailed, a Democrat would have been in office, thus soothing the fears of Southern Democrats about the abolition of slavery. By extension, the Civil War could have been prevented. For more about this, please refer to the links below.
https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2011/spring/brown.html

https://www.historynet.com/was-war-inevitable.htm

What is an example of a thesis statement for A Vindication of the Rights of Woman?

While A Vindication of the Rights of Woman was considered a radical work for its eighteenth century time period, today it seems much less controversial. In it, Wollstonecraft is not arguing for female equality with men nor for the right of women to work outside the home. Primarily, she is arguing that women will be better helpmeets or helpers to their husbands and better mothers to their children, if they receive a more rational education and are taught to act like adults, not children.
Wollstonecraft contends that women of her period were taught to be childish and vain, and to catch a husband using flirtation, fashion, and pretty looks. She says this does not make for a good marriage. A better idea would be to educate women more on the same level as men are educated, with more emphasis on rationalism, character building, and good judgement so that they can enter into intelligent and helpful conversation with their husbands. She argues that this will also help them raise their children, especially their daughters, to be less silly and more helpful to their spouses.
A thesis statement therefore could be along the lines of the following:
Although considered radical at the time, Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman is, by modern standards, a conservative work because of its strong emphasis on woman's role within the home as helpmeet to her husband.

Write an explication for "Summer Twilight."

"A Summer Evening" is an Italian sonnet written by Alfred Tennyson Turner, the brother of the more famous poet, Alfred, Lord Tennyson. An explication—that is, a line-by-line explanation of the poem's meaning—follows.
It is a pleasantly warm evening right at dusk (gloaming) in June (line 3).
An "infant moon," either an early waxing or late waning crescent moon, is visible in the sky.
Perhaps the light seems eerie, since the poet uses the word "fraught," which usually implies oncoming danger or at least anxiety.
The narrator of the poem walks in a deserted garden and hears his footsteps echoing.
The narrator listens carefully and believes he hears the dew—that is, water condensing from the air onto the surfaces of the ground. This, of course, is hyperbole, for such a process is silent.
The poet personifies the forest and imagines that the dew disturbs the sleep of the quiet woods.
The poet rethinks his previous assumption and wonders whether he is hearing the stir of insects instead. (Lines 7-8)
Many of the colors of the scene have now faded because the light is growing dim. (Lines 8-9)
Any birds that are flying are doing so in a calm fashion.
Even a hunting bat seems to be doing so stealthily, rather than quickly or powerfully.
The bat leaves its home and flies away noiselessly—as silently as a falling snowflake.
The bat dips and soars over the quiet thickets of trees.
The bat flies in a repetitive pattern.
The overall meaning of the poem, then, is that the poet is observing dusk fall over a quiet country scene. A mood of calm pervades the poem, despite some hints at anxiety (fraught, lonely, and bat). The poem is sufficiently ambiguous that one reader might feel relaxed after reading it, while another might feel vaguely on edge.
https://www.poetrynook.com/poem/summer-twilight

What lessons do the characters in "Good Country People" and "The Lesson" learn?

In the short story "Good Country People" by Flannery O'Connor, the characters, particularly Joy, are taught the lesson that their pride in their own knowledge has blinded them to the lessons that other people have to teach them. The visiting Bible salesman, Manly Pointer, is not really there to teach lessons from the Bible. He is there to earn money and to extract pleasure without any regard for the well-being of others. Because of her Ph.D., Joy thought that she was sophisticated and cynical and that he was ignorant and naive, but actually, she is the one who is naive. When Manley Pointer steals her prosthetic leg, he is symbolically stealing her artificial sense of security. It is unclear whether Joy actually learns the hard lesson that she is taught.
Similarly, in the short story "The Lesson" by Toni Cade Bambara, the protagonists inadvertently learn one lesson that is different from the lesson that was intended. At the beginning of the story, Sylvia, the protagonist, announces that “Back in the days when everyone was old and stupid or young and foolish and me and Sugar were the only ones just right." To be "just right" is not to be in need of lessons. But as it turns out, Sylvia needs to learn lessons just like everyone else. The lesson that she learns, however, is not the lesson that was intended by her would-be teacher, Miss Moore. The lesson that she learns is about injustice and the suffering caused by injustice.

How does Nick's narration influence the reader?

F. Scott Fitzgerald was undoubtedly a genius and wrote beautiful prose, and the use of Nick Carraway as the narrator is reminiscent of the way Hollywood employs music in soundtracks to make the audience feel the way they are supposed to feel about what iss happening on the screen.
Nick not only tells the readers what has happened but continually suggests how they should feel about what is happening. He does this mainly by expressing how he feels himself. This seems to be Fitzgerald's main reason for using Nick as a minor-character narrator.
If Fitzgerald had written the novel as a third-person anonymous narrator, he would have found it difficult or impossible to tell his readers how they should be feeling; and it seems doubtful that he would have been able to evoke the same feelings that Nick expresses as narrator. We might not feel any sympathy at all for Gatsby without Nick's sycophantic input. Nick is like a cheerleader pumping up the crowd. When Gatsby explains to Tom that he went to Oxford for five months after the war, Nick comments:
I wanted to get up and slap him on the back. I had one of those renewals of complete faith in him that I'd experienced before.
Without Nick rooting for Gatsby all the way through the book, the reader might form a different opinion. In truth, Gatsby is a mobster who uses his illegal wealth to break into the upper class. He uses people, including Nick, throughout the book. Gatsby may even be using Daisy as a means of achieving upward social mobility. He is trying to break up Tom and Daisy's family, however toxic it may be. Nick's narration helps the reader put these less attractive qualities into context and sympathize with Gatsby, despite his faults.

What is a biography of Ernst Theodor Wilhelm Hoffman?

Ernst Theodor Wilhelm Hoffman (often abbreviated E. T. A. Hoffman) was a painter, composer, and writer who lived from 1776–1822. Hoffman was born in Königsberg, Pressia, now called Kaliningrad, Russia. His father, Christoph Ludwig Hoffmann, was a lawyer, and his family through his mother, Lovisa Albertina Doerffer, contained more lawyers—so it's unsurprising that he spent much of his life working as a legal clerk.
His father and mother separated in 1788, and the young Hofman stayed with his mother, who lived with two aunts and an uncle: Johanna Sophie Doerffer, Charlotte Wilhelmine Doerffer, and Otto Wilhelm Doerffer.
Hoffman attended the Lutheran school Burgschule in Königsberg and quickly showed his artistic talents, especially in his piano playing. He was giving music lessons, but as time came for him to look for full employment, he moved to Glogau, where he worked as a legal clerk for his uncle Johann Ludwig Doerffer. In 1798, his uncle received a position in Berlin, and Hoffman moved there with him. As his first time living in a major city, this provided Hoffman the opportunity to begin more seriously pursuing his public artistic endeavors.
In 1800, he moved to the Prussian providential area of Poland, where he lived without family supervision and began to establish himself as what some considered morally lax. Caricatures he made of Prussian military officials eventually led to him being assigned to a position in Plock as something of an exile. During this period, he began writing in earnest, and in 1804 was able to obtain a position in Warsaw—which, like Berlin, gave him the opportunity to more seriously promote his art. Hoffman was familiar with Polish society by this point and was reasonably happy until the invasion of Warsaw by Napoleon led him and other Prussian bureaucrats to flee.
Between 1806 and 1813, Hoffman held a series of jobs, most of which were artistic ones because Napoleon's success eliminated the Prussian bureaucratic jobs he had previously held. He struggled to make ends meet and relied heavily on loans from friends during this period, but it was also during this period that he had his first major artistic success, the publication of Ritter Gluck. It was also in this period that he adapted the initial "A," short for Amadeus, in appreciation for Mozart.
By 1814, Napoleon was defeated, Hoffman was able to once again take a legal position in Berlin, and his art was continuing to be successful, with the Berlin Theater performing his opera Undine and his literary pieces starting to be sought after. Hofman wrote many masterpieces in this period, until his health began to decline in 1819, and he became the target of political repression. His political satire angered Prussian officials, but just as they began legal proceedings against him, he learned that his syphilis had become life-threatening, so they took no material action before his death in 1822.

Why is the death of Aeschere so important?

After Grendel's mother's attack on Heorot in which she kills Hrothgar's "rune-reader" and "shoulder-companion," Aeschere, Hrothgar greets Beowulf, who has yet to learn of the tragedy, with the angry comment, "Don't you ask about joy!" In the face of Aeschere's death at the hands of Grendel's mother, Hrothgar's celebratory tone of the previous night shifts to one almost of recrimination against Beowulf—even though no one could have expected an attack from yet another monster. From Hrothgar's perspective, he has lost not only a critical adviser but also perhaps his only skilled "rune-reader," the man who can cast and read those symbolic pieces of wood or bone that help guide Hrothgar and his people to success in peace and war. Beowulf, realizing the depths of Hrothgar's despair in losing his closest adviser and trusted warrior, becomes the counselor when he tells Hrothgar not "to sorrow, wise man," reminding him that Aeschere has already achieved fame in life. This is a moment when the roles between Hrothgar and Beowulf are, in a sense, reversed, and Beowulf takes the lead in their meeting. More important for Beowulf and his own fame, Beowulf recognizes that Aeschere's death requires an immediate—and successful—attack on Grendel's mother.

From what viewpoint does the poet observe nature in "I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud"?

William Wordsworth's "I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud" is a poem told in retrospect. The narrator describes a past experience of walking across hills and through valleys until eventually coming upon a "host, of golden daffodils" (4). The narrator recollects stopping to observe the slight, happy movements of the flowers in the breeze—comparing their number to that of the twinkling stars in the sky. Even the movement of the sea cannot match that of the daffodils.
The experience leaves the narrator in awe, as they state "I gazed—and gazed—but little thought / What wealth the show to me had brought" (17–18). This is one of the clearest indications that the narrator is reflecting upon the event. At the time it occurred, they didn't realize the "wealth" that the experience had provided them. Rather, they were simply captivated with the sheer number of moving daffodils.
However, the last stanza shows that a decent amount of time has elapsed since the events of the poem took place:

For oft, when on my couch I lie
In vacant or in pensive mood,
They flash upon that inward eye
Which is the bliss of solitude;
And then my heart with pleasure fills,
And dances with the daffodils. (19–24)

The narrator has since had time to process the event and understand its true value. Recalling the experience has become the means by which the narrator lifts their spirits to a level that matches that of the dancing daffodils of long ago. Therefore, nature is being viewed from two viewpoints: the initial viewpoint of the experience itself, as well as the recollection of the experience that the narrator returns to, time and time again.

The abandonment of Tzili ironically probably saved her life. Address this.

Aharon Appelfeld’s novel Tzili tells of the survival of a young girl, Tzili Kraus, during World War Two. A Jewish girl living with her family in a town in the Ukraine, Tzili apparently has mental disabilities. Fearing the Nazi invasion, her parents believe that her obvious difficulties would be so apparent that no one would see her as threatening or harm her. When they flee, they leave her behind. Hiding in a shed behind the house, she is spared when the soldiers invade and massacre the other townspeople. She escapes into the woods nearby and manages to forage until she meets other people. Although her life on the run is far from easy, she does survive, while the rest of her family is not heard from again.

Why was Coolidge considered a good president?

Calvin Coolidge was the thirtieth president of the United States. He was well known as a man of few words, which even for a politician in his day was a remarkable accomplishment. Coolidge lived and promoted basic principles of thrift, modesty, and humility. He was quite a contrast to President Harding, who was representative of the time over which he was president, the Roaring Twenties. Calvin Coolidge rejected the rampant materialism and the rejection of religious values. His primary goal was to restore the confidence, dignity, and respect for the office of the president, which were tarnished by the scandals of the Harding administration.
When evaluating presidents, several factors must be taken into consideration. Factors such as the circumstances they assumed the office, world events, national crises, and visionary leadership are a few. Ultimately if a president is good or bad is a matter of opinion and therefore is subjective. Polls of political scientists rank Coolidge twenty-eighth with Lincoln, Washington, and Franklin D. Roosevelt as the top three (American Political Science Association, 2019). Coolidge ranks twenty-seventh by the Presidential Historians Association survey in 2017. Other reviews of presidential scholars, historians, and political scientists have similar opinions of Coolidge. If you rank Coolidge by performance in the Stock Market, Coolidge ranks very high. Coolidge presided in an era of unprecedented economic growth. However, that ended quickly with the stock market crash.
In general, he is considered by most academics to be mediocre. Coolidge did have a favorable opinion as pro-business and as a conservative in dealing with issues of the federal budget. It is fair to say Coolidge represented an approach that many Americans were questioning during the economic boom of the twenties. From the perspective of the economy, staying out of foreign wars and managing the federal government, it is probably fair to say Coolidge was a good manager and an adequate president. Historians and political scientists tend to rank presidents on their domestic agenda and approach to issues such as income equality, civil rights, environment, and expansion of government. If a person uses this approach, then Coolidge was not considered a good president.
https://www.businessinsider.com/greatest-us-presidents-ranked-by-political-scientists-2018-2

https://www.kiplinger.com/slideshow/investing/T038-S001-the-best-and-worst-presidents-stock-market/index.html

https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/presidents/calvin-coolidge/

Abruptly the narrator switches mood from boredom and frustration to excitement. To what does she attribute this change? What new aspects of the wallpaper does she discuss?

In the famous Gothic short story "The Yellow Wallpaper" by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, a young woman has been taken to a colonial mansion for the summer by her husband, a physician named John. He has diagnosed her malady as "temporary nervous depression—a slight hysterical tendency" and prescribes medication and rest. For her convalescence, he chooses a former nursery with stark yellow wallpaper where she spends much of her time. She finds the color repellent and begins to imagine and envision a woman trapped behind the wallpaper.

The narrator is, at first, bored and frustrated because her husband is so condescending towards her. He won't let her do anything except rest, and he won't allow her to move to another room when she complains about the wallpaper because he feels it's wrong to give in to her moods.

The switch from boredom to excitement happens as the narrator becomes more aware of the woman she imagines trapped behind the wallpaper and begins to see her more clearly. She is concerned that someone else might detect the woman, and she is determined to learn more about her before that happens. Her husband thinks she is recovering, and she writes: "I had no intention of telling him that it was because of the wallpaper—he would make fun of me." She peels off the wallpaper with the intention of freeing the woman, until in the end, she becomes the woman that she thought she was setting free.

We can see then that the answer to both parts of your question, the narrator's mood and the new aspects of the wallpaper, are related. They both have to do with the fantasy woman that the narrator imagines she finds behind the wallpaper.

Discuss Harry Greener.

Vaudeville was the most popular form of entertainment in America for many years until the movies supplanted live entertainment. Since there was always a big demand for entertainment, there were many men and women of mediocre talents who were able to put together some kind of vaudeville act and make a living, mostly through what they called one-night stands. They loved the life and loved the limelight. They loved meeting and mingling with others in their own profession. If they couldn't do anything else, they could buy some trained dogs, or perhaps a couple of trained seals, and let the animals provide the entertainment. The acts were all so similar that the public was getting tired of tap dancers, singers, stand-up comics, acrobats, impressionists, and the few other familiar routines. The first motion pictures were not a serious threat to vaudeville because they were technically primitive and had no big stars. But by the time The Day of the Locust was published in 1939 vaudeville was breathing its last gasp, and thousands of people like Harry Greener were struggling to survive from hand to mouth, although they never gave up their love for the limelight and would stand up and give their impressions of Burt Williams and Harry Lauder, or sing their songs, or play their banjos, or tell their stale jokes at any opportunity. Only a few talented individuals managed to survive as entertainers. These included Jack Benny, Jimmy Durante, Bob Hope, George Burns and Gracie Allen, W. C. Fields, and Abbott and Costello. The others were pathetic souls because they were mostly middle-aged and untrained for anything other than whatever they did in vaudeville. These overspecialized entertainers were like strange fish left flopping on the strand by the outgoing tide. It was another example of the changes wrought by the Industrial Revolution. Machinery was once again replacing people. The fact that Harry Greener is dying in Nathanael West's novel is symbolic, because vaudeville is dying and leaving him nothing to live for. When movies first made their appearance, vaudevillians kidded themselves that pictures would never replace live performers because there was some sort of mystical interaction between live people and a live audience. But the movie moguls invented the star system on the theory that people would rather watch pictures of superstars than live mediocrities in person, especially because vaudeville had nothing new to offer, only the same stale jokes and dances and acrobatics and magic tricks.

What is the analysis of The Fault in Our Stars?

The Fault in Our Stars is John Green's sixth novel. The novel tells the story of Hazel Grace Lancaster, a terminally ill teenager who has thyroid cancer. Hazel is consistently struggling with an existential crisis that has resulted from her childhood illness. She is generally pessimistic and sarcastic, leading her mom to prompt her to attend a cancer support group. Hazel is against the idea at first, but that is where she meets Augustus Waters—her future boyfriend.
Hazel and Augustus eventually fall in love, and much of the plot revolves around their quest to meet the author of Hazel’s favorite novel, Peter Van Houten. The book An Imperial Affliction ends without a conclusion or closure, but according to Hazel, it is the most realistic treatment of cancer she has seen in a novel. The pair eventually go to Amsterdam to talk about the book with Van Houten, but he ends up being a terrible drunk. Hazel and Augustus spend the time together instead, and Hazel realizes she loves Gus.
Hazel is still dealing with her cancer in the novel, and as a result, she considers herself “a grenade”—something that will eventually explode and hurt those who love her. When Augustus reveals that his cancer, supposedly taken care of when his leg was amputated, has returned and spread, Hazel realizes that he is the grenade. Hazel has to live with Gus and deal with his death up close. After his funeral, she reads the obituary that he wrote for her and affirms to herself that she is happy with the choices she has made.
Ultimately, The Fault in Our Stars deals with the idea of choice. In the face of non-choice, death by cancer, the book focuses on the ability of people to make choices in the face of oblivion and death. Augustus touches on this concept in his letter to Van Houten about Hazel’s obituary:

You don’t get to choose if you get hurt in this world, old man, but you do have some say in who hurts you. I like my choices. I hope she likes hers. (Chapter 25)

Hazel realizes that she does like her choice and that it is something that she is going to live with, because her love for Augustus is worth the eventual pain she will feel from his death. The novel is saying that love, a choice we make, is ultimately worth the pain and suffering we experience from dealing with death and oblivion. That sentiment is similar to what Augustus first expresses in Chapter 10 of the novel:

I'm in love with you, and I know that love is just a shout into the void, and that oblivion is inevitable, and that we're all doomed and that there will come a day when all our labor has been returned to dust, and I know the sun will swallow the only earth we'll ever have, and I am in love with you.

The final statement of the novel that goes along with Augustus confessing his love, despite the hurt that might happen, is that even in the face of death, we keep on living while we can. While the characters in the book are facing a tangible death, everyone ultimately faces death existentially, and we make choices to live and love, despite what might eventually happen to us. At the end of the novel, Hazel is still alive, and despite the hurt and the “scar” that Augustus left, she is happy with the choice she made to love Augustus.

How can the tensions between Christianity and paganism be seen in Beowulf?

The last paragraph of Chapter II articulates the Beowulf poet's—who most likely was a monk in an English monastery—emphasis on the value of the new religion, Christianity, in a world in which some are still drawn to pagan beliefs. The poet clearly states that those who do not embrace Christianity are destined to burn in Hell and that salvation is found with God. The tension between Christianity and pagan beliefs is evident throughout the poem and reflects the poet's constant awareness that he is interpreting an essentially pagan world to a Christian audience.
https://www.owleyes.org/text/beowulf/read/ii

What did Crispin see in the forest the night after his mother's burial?

Crispin sees a stranger with grey hair talking to Richard Aycliffe, the steward.
According to the text, Crispin sees the stranger hand a document to Richard Aycliffe. The conversation, however, is confusing to Crispin.
When Richard Aycliffe is handed the document, he exclaims after reading the contents. Next, he asks when the event spoken about in the document will occur.
The stranger answers that he is hopeful the event will happen soon. To this, Aycliffe asks whether he should act immediately. The stranger's answer suggests that there is a great danger in delaying. He reminds Aycliffe that he is kin to one of the individuals mentioned in the document.
The contents of the document are revealed at the end of the novel, when Crispin confronts Aycliffe. Accordingly, Lord Furnival's death would have precipitated a power struggle for the highest position in the Furnival empire. Even as a illegitimate son, Crispin was still seen as a threat to all the power players angling for Lord Furnival's position. Aycliffe himself felt threatened by Crispin. This is why he declared the young boy a wolf's head, in effect putting a death sentence on him.

Why did the workers in "Twenty-Six Men and a Girl" respect Tanya?

The twenty-six workers loved and respected Tanya mainly because they had nobody else to love and respect. It may seem selfish, but the workers didn’t really like Tanya for her personality or her individuality; they basically idolized her and adored the mental image of Tanya that they created in their minds.

And besides—though our life of penal labor had made us dull beasts, oxen, we were still men, and, like all men, could not live without worshipping something or other.

They were so happy and cheerful when she visited them every morning, and they thought of her as a symbol of everything good and pure in this world. They admired her and respected her deeply, even though they often made crude jokes about other women. Essentially, the workers worshiped Tanya and stopped only when the new baker managed to seduce her. After that, they insulted her, as they believed that she was no longer pure. However, Tanya proudly stood up for herself and decided to leave them, intending to never come back. Thus, the workers lost the one person that made them feel happy in their sad lives.

You are a newborn baby, whose parents are both eighteen years old and earn £15,000 a year in total. You live in a rough part of the city and your parents can just about scrape enough money together to feed themselves and you and keep your home. You have the potential to be a world-class scientist and solve the global warming crisis, however your parents will be unable to afford to send you to private school, you will need to rely on the government to help you reach your potential. Is the society fair or unfair? Write in three paragraphs.

This question reaches to the heart of a broader question about how societies are best organized. In particular, it raises issues about equality and, as the question indicates, fairness. Most would probably agree that it is unfair that a person with such talents will be unable to fulfill them because of the circumstances of their birth. After all, they had no control over their situation, and some would argue that even with a great deal of hard work, they still were unlikely to fulfill their potential. We might find unfairness and inequity in other aspects of the society described by the question as well. For example, why does this person have to attend private school in order to achieve their potential? If public school, accessible to all and funded by the state, is unable to allow students to maximize their talents, then clearly equality of opportunity does not exist in this society.
But at the same time, we have to acknowledge that the government described in the question provides support for students in this situation. The hypothetical student will, according to the question, "need to rely on the government" for help in reaching their potential. Some societies do not provide this basic support (though it is unclear what kind of help the government provides.) So this society seems to at least have a "safety net" to ensure that at least some talented people can fulfill their potential regardless of their socioeconomic circumstances. It also has to be acknowledged that some conservatives and libertarian-minded individuals would argue that government support for individuals like this is unfair inasmuch as it redistributes money from people who (they argue) earned it through their own labor to those who did not. So the concept of "fairness" cannot be taken for granted.
One measure of fairness that is at the heart of modern liberalism is that articulated by philosopher John Rawls, whose theory of justice essentially argued that a just society would be one that a person would want to be a part of without knowing what their social situation would be. In other words, the society would, as a fundamental principle, provide for its least fortunate members. This society seems to aspire toward this standard, as evidenced by the availability of help from the state, but it clearly falls short of it. In this hypothetical society, an individual's ability to fulfill their potential still depends on their circumstances rather than on their talents alone.
http://bostonreview.net/forum/economics-after-neoliberalism/corey-robin-uninstalling-hayek

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rawls/

How is "The Forsaken Merman" suitable as a title?

"The Forsaken Merman" by Mathew Arnold tells the story of a male mermaid, a merman, whose wife abandons him and their children. At the beginning of the poem, he asks their children to call her back, but she is too focused on reciting the Bible in the church to hear them. The merman takes their children closer to the church, to the graveyard, but the priest closes the church door.
It seems that his wife has chosen God and life on the land over her family and life in the sea. However, her choice does not seem to have been a simple one. There is a suggestion she is at least part human. As the narrator states, she tells him,

I must go, to my kinsfolk pray
In the little grey church on the shore to-day.

She goes for the day and never comes back. When they see her in the church, the narrator comments on how she has a "sorrow-clouded eye."

The poem ends with the narrator saying,


She left lonely for ever
The kings of the sea.

Does Alaska kill herself or is it truly an accident?

This question is not actually answered in Looking for Alaska; it is left up to the reader to decide. However, there are ideas spread throughout the novel that can lead the reader to make up their own mind on whether Alaska's death was suicide or simply an accident.
For example, Alaska had started to make plans for her future again, so she still had hopes and dreams she wanted to fulfill. Also, she was determined to reach her mother's grave that night. These two facts alone show us that Alaska almost certainly did not get in her car planning on killing herself. We know she was distracted, thinking deeply about things; she was depressed, and possibly crying; and she was also drunk. Any of these things could lead to an accidental car crash.
On the other hand, Alaska was an incredibly impulsive person. Being overwhelmed as she was with sadness and guilt, it is easy to imagine her seeing the car ahead and just letting her own vehicle veer toward it without really thinking about it too much.
Based on these facts, it seems reasonable to conclude that Alaska's death was probably intentional, but likely the impulse of an emotional moment.

How does the play portray unequal gender hierarchies between Nora and Helmer through language? How is Nora depicted through her dialogues?

We see the gender hierarchies almost immediately in the way Torvald speaks to Nora. He asks, "Is that my lark twittering there?" and "Is it the squirrel frisking around?" from the next room. First, he calls her diminutive pet names like lark and squirrel, and these sounds like names a parent might call a child, certainly not one equal partner to another. They seem to indicate the way Torvald thinks of her, like a child. Further, he asks if it is his lark, subtly implying his sense of ownership of his wife as well. A bit later, he calls her "my little spendthrift," indicating the same sense of ownership with the word my as well as diminishing her with the adjective little. It is clear that Torvald thinks of her as less than he, and this value is certainly informed by her gender.
Nora is, at least in the beginning, depicted in a childlike way through her dialogue (and stage direction). For example, when she is trying to tell him that she just wants money from him for Christmas, she "Play[s] with his coat-buttons, without looking him in the face," and says,

If you really want to give me something, you might, you know -- you might --

She acts rather childishly, kind of coyly and flirtatiously, overtly manipulating him the way a child might. A woman wishing to present herself as an equal would likely not ask for something in this way. Torvald says, "Well? Out with it!" and Nora "quickly" makes her request. Again, he seems like the authority while she seems to have none at all.

Discuss the style of writing in "Dream Children" by Charles Lamb.

"Dream Children" by Charles Lamb is an autobiographical reflection on loss, regret, and the nature of childhood. The tone is nostalgic and, at first, light-hearted. Lamb recalls his grandmother, "who lived in a great house in Norfolk"—his "little ones" gather around him to hear his stories.
Towards the end of the essay, however, the tone becomes more serious and tragic as Lamb recounts the death of his brother and great-grandmother. As he describes the death of the latter, his daughter's "little right foot play[s] an involuntary movement, till upon [his] looking grave it desisted." He tells her about the "cruel disease, called a cancer" which took his grandmother from him.
The tone of the essay is also rather informal and conversational. Lamb will often digress, as if losing himself in the memories. When recalling the house that his grandmother lived in, for example, he points out that the house was "a hundred times bigger than that in which they and papa lived." Lamb inserts parenthetical, tangential information like this throughout the essay that stylistically gives the impression that one is listening to a spontaneous, informal reflection.

Based on the text of The Pearl, how was the pearl valued?

In chapter four, John Steinbeck tells us about the pearl buyers. We learn that the pearl buyers used to be individuals who bid against each other, therefore sometimes driving the price up too much and overpaying for a pearl. Now, they take advantage of the villagers by all working for the same man and therefore controlling the price they will pay for a pearl.

Now there was only one pearl buyer with many hands, and the men who sat in their offices and waited for Kino knew what price they would offer, how high they would bid, and what method each one would use.

Kino believes the pearl he found has a very high value. He takes it to a pearl buyer, who has already been instructed to undervalue it.

"I can give you, say, a thousand pesos."
Kino's face grew dark and dangerous. "It is worth fifty thousand," he said. "You know it. You want to cheat me."

This leads Kino to journey to the capital in an attempt to get a fair value for the pearl, a journey that ultimately results in the death of his child. In that sense, the "evil" pearl was worth much more than a monetary value.

In chapter 5 of Touching Spirit Bear, when Cole tries to escape and fails, what does he try to find?

Cole's so desperate to escape the island that he doesn't take the tide into account. He ends up swimming against the tide, and the more the struggles, the less progress he makes. Suddenly, Cole realizes his mistake and swims back to the shore, scared stiff that he might end up with cramp in his legs and drown.
After finally managing to drag himself ashore, an exhausted Cole falls into a disturbed, fitful sleep. When he wakes up, he's astonished to see a large white bear standing on the shore, staring at him. Cole's angry that the bear doesn't appear to be scared of him. He throws a rock at the bear, but it's too far away for him to hit. Cole bends down to pick up a knife from the ashes, but by the time he turns around, the bear has vanished. Frustrated as well as angry, Cole vows that he will teach the bear to be afraid of him.

A race car speeds up as it enters a wide horizontal curve, going from 72 km/h to 108km/h in the 10s that it takes to round the curve. The radius of the curve is 400m. While in the curve, the car's speed is increasing at a constant rate. What is the car's tangential acceleration? At 108 km/h, find the centripetal acceleration and the total acceleration.

First, let us calculate the tangential acceleration of the car. This acceleration is responsible for the increase in speed. Since the tangential acceleration is constant, all we have to do is divide the change in the speed by the change in time:(1) a_t=(v_f - v_i)/(Delta t) But first, let's change our speed to the right units. We want to go from kilometers per hour to meters per second. To do this, we divide by 3.6 . Now, the final speed v_f is 30m//s and the initial speed v_i is 20m//s .Now, using the definition (1), the tangential acceleration is, in m/s²:a_t= (30-20)/(10)=1 m//s^2 This answers the first question.
Now, to calculate the centripetal acceleration at a given speed, we use the following formula:(2) a_c=v^2/r
Plugging in v=108km//h=30m//s and r=400m , we find that the centripetal acceleration when the car is going at 108km/h is equal to:a_c=(30)^2/400=2.25m//s^2
To calculate the total acceleration a when the car is at 108km/h, we have to add the centripetal acceleration to the tangential acceleration. We use the facts that both accelerations are vectors and that the tangential acceleration vector is perpendicular to the centripetal acceleration vector (the latter points to the center of the curve). So, to add them, we use the Pythagorean theorem:(3) a^2=a_c^2+a_t^2=2.25^2+1^2=6.0625
Taking the square root, we find that:a=2.462m//s^2
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/rotq.html

What part of the canoe is destroyed first during the storm in chapter 2?

It is the season of storms, and Mafatu is well aware of this as he starts his journey to the foreign lands, away from Hikueru, to face his fears. In this journey, he is accompanied by his two pets, Uri, the dog, and Kivi, the albatross. The dog stays with him in the canoe, while the albatross flies in the skies and plays a crucial part in guiding them through the wild waters. When the storm strikes, it first destroys the sail of the canoe, “splitting it with a roar.” Afterward, it breaks the mast just before Mafatu can “cut it clear.” Using the paddle, Mafatu then struggles to keep his canoe afloat against the wild heaving waters but somewhat loses the struggle after a particularly enormous and turbulent wave strikes them, wrenching his paddle from his hands and washing away his fish spear, drinking nuts, knife, and fiber tapa. The boy and his dog thus remain without food or drink, on the drifting canoe, and are lucky to reach the shores of an island, after a lot of suffering.

What happens during the interaction between Macbeth and the Doctor?

MACBETH How does your patient, doctor?

DOCTOR Not so sick, my lord, As she is troubled with thick-coming fancies That keep her from her rest.


MACBETH Cure her of that. Canst thou not minister to a mind diseased, Pluck from the memory a rooted sorrow, Raze out the written troubles of the brain, And with some sweet oblivious antidote Cleanse the stuffed bosom of that perilous stuff Which weighs upon the heart?

DOCTOR Therein the patient Must minister to himself.

MACBETH Throw physic to the dogs. I’ll none of it.
Macbeth knows quite well what is the matter with his wife because the same thing is the matter with him. They are both plagued by guilt, remorse, pity, sorrow, and the resulting insomnia. If she can’t sleep, he can’t sleep either. Macbeth is being slightly sarcastic with the doctor, and the doctor knows it. Macbeth is implying that the doctor doesn’t really know medicine. This is true enough. Doctors in those dark days knew little about causes and cures. They had to do a lot of pretending. This doctor has at least had experience with all kinds of people. He understands that Macbeth is talking on several different levels of meaning. Macbeth is expressing concern about his wife, but he is really concerned about himself. The doctor’s reply is intentionally ambiguous. He does not say the patient must minister to herself but that the patient must minister to himself, letting Macbeth take it either way he wants—that the doctor is advising him to heal himself or that people in general must heal themselves when they are afflicted with “a mind diseased” and not with a physiological ailment.
Macbeth counters the doctor’s sage advice by expressing the contempt for medicine implicit throughout his long question. He says, “throw physic to the dogs.” This is his way of telling the doctor that his wife may be plagued by guilt and remorse, but he has no such problems himself. In other words, he is lying when he says he was only asking about his wife and not about himself.
All of us, if we live long enough, will be troubled with painful memories, although hopefully not as terrible as those of Macbeth and his wife. Looking back over our past, we are sure to regret some of the actions we took and others we failed to take. Somerset Maugham wrote,
What makes old age hard to bear is not the failing of one’s faculties, mental and physical, but the burden of one’s memories.
No one can pluck from our memory a single rooted sorrow. We have to live with them. Shakespeare expresses a similar idea in "Sonnet 30."
When to the sessions of sweet silent thought I summon up remembrance of things past, I sigh the lack of many a thing I sought, And with old woes new wail my dear time’s waste: Then can I drown an eye, unused to flow, For precious friends hid in death’s dateless night, And weep afresh love’s long since cancelled woe, And moan the expense of many a vanished sight. Then can I grieve at grievances foregone, And heavily from woe to woe tell o’er The sad account of fore-bemoaned moan, Which I new pay as if not paid before. But if the while I think on thee, dear friend, All losses are restored, and sorrows end.
The sonnet ends on an up-note, but this does not mean all his losses are permanently restored or all his sorrows permanently end. The poet is suggesting that we think about something else, which is pretty much what we do anyway. In fact, that seems to be what Macbeth is doing and has been doing ever since he murdered King Duncan. Perhaps all Macbeth’s acts of tyranny have been his way of keeping his mind off his guilt, remorse, and shame.

What did Henry Knox mean that the "desperate and unprincipled men" were "such a threat to every man of principle and property in New England" and how does he support this belief?

Your question seems to relate to a letter Henry Knox sent George Washington on October 23, 1786. In it, he refers to "a body of 12 or 15,000 desperate & unprincipled men" who have thrown the state of Massachusetts into disorder.
We should note, first of all, that Knox claims to be an eyewitness to these events. When writing to Washington, he states that he had traveled to Massachusetts, as far as Boston. In his correspondence, he is not relying on the reports of others, but on a subject that he has experienced first hand.
Knox begins by calling attention to the fundamental weakness of the Federal Government, as it was designed under the Articles of Confederation. This is important, because he argues that the people who have entered into rebellion have exploited the government's weakness for their own interests. Knox calls this

faction and licentiousness [and states that] the fine theoretical government of Massachusetts has given way, and [seen] its laws arrested and trampled under foot.

So, clearly he views this situation as deeply destructive for public law and order. To those who might defend the rebels by suggesting that they are reacting against unfair laws or policies, he stresses that these people in fact have either never paid taxes or have but paid very little. Rather, Knox claims a more radical motivation is at play: that they are ultimately attempting

to annihilate all debts public and private and have agrarian Laws which are easily effected by the means of unfunded paper money.

In his language, he stresses how destructive this situation has been. He refers to "a formidable rebellion against reason, the principles of all government, and the very name of liberty" as well as "the violence of lawless men."
In his words and rhetoric, he stresses the trauma this experience has caused to the politics of Massachusetts.
(A side note: this letter forms only part of a larger correspondence, and discussion on the matter continues in subsequent letters. This matter discussed is relating to Shays' Rebellion.)
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/04-04-02-0274

What device did Mama use to keep Jumper away from the corn in chapter 12 of Old Yeller?

There is a terrible drought and Jumper, the family's mule, does not want to eat the dried-up grass. He repeatedly jumps the fence that corrals him, and he eats the corn that has not yet been gathered. The family cannot let this go on because they need corn to make bread for the winter. The mother finds a clever way to keep Jumper from eating the corn by tying a "drag" to him. Specifically, she attaches a heavy piece of wood to his right forefoot with a rope. The wood is heavy, but with effort, Jumper can still move enough to get his necessary food and drink. The wood is too heavy, however, for him to be able to jump the fence; therefore, the corn is saved.

Describe the effect of the gunfire that was directed towards the charging British cavalry in "The Charge of the Light Brigade"?

In Tennyson's poem "The Charge of the Light Brigade," the gunfire that was directed toward the charging British cavalry is described as killing most of them.
We learn that there are six hundred British soldiers in the Light Brigade. Someone has blundered and ordered them to charge against the wrong artillery. They nevertheless attack bravely on horseback with their sabres out.
The gunfire is described as coming at them from cannons that are to the right of them, the left of them, and in front of them. In other words, they are being fired on with cannonballs from all sides. The enemy fire is also describes as hellish, and its effect is to "shatter and sunder" them.
Tennyson puts the best possible face on a military defeat that cost many lives, describing the men of the Light Brigade as fighting valiantly against great odds.

How does the United States Military compare to those of other countries?

The US Military is largely believed to be the most powerful military in the world. The next three top militaries (Russia, China, and India) all have more active duty personnel than the US Army. Russia and China also have more tanks than the United States, though China's difference is relatively small. The United States, by contrast, has substantially more aircraft and aircraft carriers than every other nation. It is second to North Korea in submarines, though not by much.
These raw numbers also obscure technological advancement in weapons systems. This is an area that the United States leads in, largely because of the US Military budget, which is larger than the combined budgets of the militaries ranked 2–19. The US Military spends a significant amount of money on research and development in addition to purchasing and maintaining equipment.

What is the summary of chapter 6 in The Vendor of Sweets?

In The Vendor of Sweets, author R. K. Narayan brings readers back to the community of Malgudi to examine themes of tradition, modernization, and family in post-independence India.
Jagan, a former follower of Gandhi’s Satyagraha movement, operates a successful sweetmeats shop. He lives by a philosophy of “simple living and high thinking,” spins his own cloth, eats a plain diet, and studies the Bhagavad Gita. But despite his idealism, Jagan hangs on to a worldly life of business and status while experiencing ongoing conflict with his son, Mali.
Distraught by the death of his wife Ambika, Jagan overcompensates by spoiling Mali, but over the years, father and son become emotionally estranged. The main way Jagan knows about Mali’s life is through a manipulative cousin who acts as a “man-about-town” and go-between. Mali then turns away from Indian tradition by moving to the United States to study creative writing. At first, Jagan romanticizes Mali’s goal by comparing him to the classical poet Kalidasa (at the cousin’s suggestion). But when Mali returns to Malgudi with Grace, his Korean-American wife, and a plan for a new business, Jagan finds his traditional beliefs and ways are now openly challenged.
Chapter 6 brings the conflict between father and son to a turning point. During a conversation at the shop, the cousin mentions that Mali has a “scheme” involving a “story-writing machine,” news which surprises Jagan. At home, Jagan arranges with Grace to speak with his son. Mali shows Jagan his invention and demands financial support to open a manufacturing business that will bring India into the modern era. Jagan is offended by Mali’s criticism of India’s literary status and defends the legacy of the country’s epics, noting they were composed orally. Symbolizing the opposing values of the charka, the Indian spinning wheel and Americanized machine, father and son hold their positions and won’t budge.
Jagan protests to the cousin that he doesn’t have the money. He falls back on his Satyagrahi identity and adopts prayer and “a sort of non-violent non-cooperation” method to cope, but Mali and Grace continue to pressure him. Jagan is disappointed to learn that the printer Nataraj is willing to print Mali’s business prospectus but not his book on natural cures and is then displeased when Mali buys a car. Jagan suggests to Mali that he take over the sweetmeats shop if he needs money, an idea which Mali rejects. In a closing conversation with the cousin, Jagan resolves to make changes at the shop and no longer wants the cousin to speak to Mali on his behalf.
The events of chapter 6 set the stage for Jagan’s epiphany and character development in the second half of the story, in which he understands he’s entering a new janma, a spiritual rebirth leading to the next stage of his life.

Was Mao Zedong a tyrant or visionary?

On the whole, you'd have to say he was both. Mao was indeed a visionary, a man with a radical vision of what he wanted China to be. For centuries, China had been routinely exploited and taken advantage of by a succession of imperial powers, most recently Japan. Mao wanted to put a stop to all this; he wanted China to take its place among the international community as a strong, independent, communist state which would no longer be pushed around.
Unfortunately, the implementation of Mao's radical vision involved human suffering on a huge scale. The People's Republic of China, established by Mao, was and is a one-party state. Right from the start, anyone deemed to be an enemy of the regime was in danger of being tortured, imprisoned, or executed. Mao encouraged class warfare in the Chinese countryside, with poorer peasants being pitted against their landlords. As well as leading to mass killings, this campaign resulted in the disruption of the harvest, causing the first of many avoidable famines under Mao's regime.
Although Mao briefly encouraged people to speak out and criticize the Communist regime during the so-called Hundred Flowers campaign, his tyrannical instincts never really left him, and repression soon returned with greater force than ever. Mao's tyranny reached its nadir during the Cultural Revolution when Mao and his acolytes incited open rebellion against the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party in order to regain some of the power and influence he'd lost as a result of the disastrous Great Leap Forward, a failed effort at mass industrialization. During the Cultural Revolution, China was plunged into total chaos and anarchy. Tens of millions died. But amid all the turmoil, Mao's tyranny grew stronger and stronger as he unleashed the revolutionary energies of China's youth, the very same revolutionary energy with which he established his Communist dictatorship.

How can I support the argument that Hamlet's scathing portrayal of Ophelia is an accurate judgment of her behavior?

The "get thee to a nunnery" speech could only be an accurate interpretation of Ophelia's behavior in a very unusual interpretation of the play. Hamlet claims that Ophelia, like all women, is sexually licentious and effectively a prostitute. He argues that she cannot be honest because she is too attractive, and if honesty and beauty have "discourse," beauty will turn honesty into a "bawd"—that is, a pimp. In order to contend that Ophelia is truly promiscuous, one would have to make some unusual performance choices, such as showing clearly that she has had sex not only with Hamlet but with other men as well. Perhaps Ophelia could "amble" or wear makeup without fundamentally altering her character, but to make her sexually promiscuous, as Hamlet claims, one would have to change a lot of things about the play.

Which approach do you think does the best job of accounting for psychopathology: neurobiological, psychodynamic, cognitive-behavioral, phenomenological, or sociocultural? Explain your choice using examples from several different categories of psychological disorder. Might different disorders have different kinds of causes—some neurobiological, some cognitive-behavioral, and so on? Are the different approaches theoretically incompatible? Why or why not?

Among the various theoretical approaches to explaining human behavior, it is this writer's view that the cognitive-behavioral approach does the best job at accounting for psychopathology. The cognitive-behavioral approach has been developed into an evidence-based therapy known as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, or CBT. CBT is known to be effective for treating a variety of different psychiatric disorders (Chand & Huecker, 2019). A cognitive-behavioral approach to human functioning considers both internal and external experiences. The "cognitive" in this approach focuses on the internal thoughts of the individual, while the "behavioral" in this approach looks at the observable behaviors of the person as well as outside factors that influence that individual's functioning.
A cognitive-behavioral approach to explaining psychopathology can help one to understand anxiety, depression, autism, ADHD, and many more psychiatric conditions. For example, autism may be looked at through a lens of both the internal and external experiences that influence the person's behaviors and life experiences. The internal experiences, also known as private events, are impacted by the external world. Events and stimuli in the environment influence the individual, which then triggers a certain behavior or reaction. Although various disorders may differ in their underlying cause (or possibly have an unknown cause), understanding of any disorder can be achieved through a cognitive-behavioral lens.
This is not to say that other approaches do not have merit. Many approaches to understanding human functioning have excellent ability to contribute to our understanding of the human species. For instance, a sociocultural approach can help us to look at a larger picture when trying to understand psychopathology. In the example of someone with autism, a sociocultural approach could help us to see the influences and perspectives of the society at large and the culture in which that person lives. However, you can still utilize a cognitive-behavioral approach to analyze and provide further understanding of the condition.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470241/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5797481/

To what extent is Hamlet a melodrama?

Let's look at the answer to the question this way: what are the essential characteristics of melodrama, and how does Shakespeare's Hamlet conform to those characteristics?
One feature of melodramas is sensational plots that revolve around unremitting tragedy, unrequited love, undeserved loss, or heightened emotion. Hamlet does involve these kinds of issues, but Shakespeare treats these issues on a high intellectual and emotional level.
Another feature is absurd, contrived plot lines and scenes. Unless you count the Ghost scenes, this is not a feature of Hamlet.
A hallmark of melodramas is single-minded, one-dimensional stock characters. The characters in Hamlet can be considered stock characters to some extent—Hamlet, the dashing hero; Ophelia, the beautiful, long-suffering ingénue and heroine; Claudius, the evil step-father and villain; Gertrude, the somewhat dim-witted, social-climbing mother; Polonius, the foolish, doddering old man; and Horatio, the hero's good friend and confidante. But the characters are intellectually and emotionally complex, nor are they one-dimensional or single-minded.
There is also an emphasis on good versus evil in melodramas. Good and evil aren't clearly defined in Hamlet. None of the characters, except possibly Claudius, are entirely good or entirely evil. As Hamlet says,

HAMLET: . . . there is nothing eithergood or bad but thinking makes it so. [2.2.257-258]

Intense emotion is present in melodramas. It is also present in Hamlet, but it is not exaggerated or manipulative. There are no contrived "tear-jerker" situations or scenes.
Melodramas often have an underlying social message or "moral of the story." Hamlet has no subplots or subtext regarding social or political injustice, the plight of the working man, struggling families living in poverty, or related issues.
Melodramas often have an episodic play structure. An episodic play structure involves a large number of different characters (like Hamlet) and locations (unlike Hamlet), covers a lengthy period of time (from 2-9 months, depending on who's counting, which is also true of Hamlet), and typically includes subplots in addition to the main story (also true of Hamlet).
Melodramas are written in a straightforward, uncomplicated, perfunctory style and are often written in stilted prose. Hamlet is written primarily in unrhymed iambic pentameter (blank verse), with some rhyming couplets to signal the end of scenes.
There is quite a lot of prose in Hamlet. The common folk, like the gravediggers, speak in prose. Hamlet speaks in prose to people below him on the aristocratic scale, and sometimes for dramatic effect, but the prose is hardly stilted.

HAMLET: . . . What a piece of work is a man! Hownoble in reason! How infinite in faculty! In form and movinghow express and admirable! In action how like an angel! Inapprehension how like a god! The beauty of the world, theparagon of animals! And yet to me what is this quintessenceof dust? [2.2.308-313]

Melodramas use spectacle, romantic scenic elements, and animals. Scene designers do what they can, but the "platform" and interior rooms of Elsinore castle, a plain somewhere in Denmark, and a churchyard aren't intrinsically very scenic or spectacular. There is the romantic element of the brook in which Ophelia supposedly drowned, but there are no lakes, forests, or other romantic locations. There are also no animals, unless the director decides to give Gertrude or Ophelia one of those yappy little dogs to carry around.
Sometimes melodramas have a musical background. This is not the case with Hamlet. Ophelia does some singing, as does the gravedigger, but their songs don't serve as background or underscoring to the play.
Both melodramas and Hamlet feature comic relief. In Hamlet, an example of this the gravedigger scene—but it's comedy on a high level, not exaggerated slapstick or buffoonery.
Finally, melodramas often feature fast action. In Hamlet, nothing really happens in a hurry except perhaps the fencing scene at the end of the play, and that's pretty much stop-and-go until everybody dies.
All in all, Hamlet demonstrates some characteristics of melodrama—which most plays do—but Hamlet is not a melodrama.

Cite three pieces of evidence from the novel The Book Thief that Rosa Huberman, though harsh and insulting, really does care for Leisel Meminger?

Rosa is often stern with Liesel, but her generosity is shown from the beginning just by having opened her home to the girl.
At numerous points, Rosa suggests, primarily through small gestures, her affection for Liesel. When the mayor’s wife decides to fire Rosa, Liesel explodes and yells at her; later, when she tells Rosa it is her fault, Rosa reassures her that it is not.
Later, as Liesel worries about Max’s fate, Rosa encourages her to relax and sends her outside to play soccer with Rudy. When Max is ill, Rosa further assuages her concern by visiting her at school to give her news of Max, covering this consideration by scolding her about a brush. When Max leaves the Hubermans’s home, he entrusts his sketchbook to Rosa with instructions. At an appropriate point, Rosa gives the book to Liesel and tells her that Max had left it for her.

Why does Mrs. Mann punish the children when they complain of hunger?

Mrs. Mann's punishing the orphans when they ask for more food has less to do with discipline and more to do with covering up her own embezzling. She takes for herself some of the funds allotted to the upkeep of the orphanage. The last thing she needs is an orphan calling attention to their lack of nutrition by asking for more food.
The orphans are also guilted into silence, even by the officials outside of the orphanage. Later on, when Oliver is brought before the Board, one of the gentlemen present tells him, "[I hope] you pray for the people who feed you, and take care of you, like a Christian." The men of the Board accuse Oliver of ingratitude when he betrays the least bit of misery. When they learn Oliver has asked for more food, one even suggests he is doomed to become a criminal when he grows up—he must be greedy if he wants more.
When Oliver asks for more food, he is indirectly calling to attention just how bad the orphanage is. His request not only puts Mrs. Mann in danger of being prosecuted, but it also criticizes the state for its treatment of the unfortunate. This is what leads to the overreaction from the adults in charge.

Oliver Twist’s mother dies right after he is born, and he is placed in an orphanage. Mrs. Mann runs the orphanage, and even though she is given ample money to feed the children, she keeps most of the money for herself and barely feeds the orphans. She does not care if they starve, and when orphans die, she covers up their deaths and say it was an accident. When the children complain about being hungry, they are punished. When Oliver asks Mrs. Mann for more food, he is placed in solitary confinement. Mrs. Mann does not want the children to complain about being hungry, because she does not want anyone to find out she has been stealing from the orphanage.

Analyze in detail the ways in which the texts in A Passage to India by E. M. Forster and "An Encounter" by James Joyce relate to Clive Bell's chapter and theory on "Aesthetics and Post-Impressionism."

Clive Bell's influential volume of aesthetic criticism, entitled simply Art (1914), is best known for its articulation of three notions which ultimately became catchwords not only in his immediate environment of the Bloomsbury circle (of painters, poets, and novelists) but in Anglo-American Modernist circles as well.
The influence of Bell's notion of "significant form," is, for example, readily apparent in T. S. Eliot's prose criticism. Indeed, it is the notion of "significant form"—by which Bell means "lines and colors combined in a particular way, certain forms and relations of forms [that] stir our aesthetic emotions"—for which Bell is perhaps best known.
Almost equally important, however, are the related concepts of 1) "aesthetic emotion" (meaning simply the "peculiar emotion provoked by works of art") and 2) "post-impressionism," which Bell uses variously to refer to then-recent developments in French art post-dating the heyday of Impressionistism (that include Claude Monet and others).
Post-impressionism, as exemplified by Edouard Manet, marked, in Bell's view, a recovery of attention to sempiternal "significant form" in the fine arts and, as such, an awakening after the figurative slumber of the plastic arts that Bell detected in Impressionism—of "aesthetic emotion. Post-impressionism, then, was a movement—a revolution—and, in a sense, merely a recovery of the perennial capacity of the best art to provoke a particular human emotion through the personal experience of encountering it.
In James Joyce's short story "An Encounter," two young boys skip school and play truant for a day. While walking around a field, they encounter a strange older man who talks to them about literature. The narrator pretends familiarity with the works to which the man refers, namely those of Thomas Moore, Sir Walter Scott, and Lord Lytton.
The older man sees in the narrator a kindred spirit and exclaims: "Ah, I can see you are a bookworm like me," whereas the other boy (Mahony) is dismissed as one who "goes in for games." The man then proceeds to make the narrator very uncomfortable by alluding to having a sweetheart, and, ultimately, saying how much he would enjoy whipping a boy—an experience which he seems to associate with "some great mystery."
It is hinted at that the pleasure that the man derives from his imagined experience is co-extensive with his aesthetic taste, as evidenced in his choice of literature. Both prompt extreme emotion in the man; for example, he points out that he "never tired" of reading Lytton and Scott. He seamlessly moves off into his discussion of girls and boys and whipping. The narrator is frightened by the strange man and is relieved when Mahony (now called Murphy, as they have decided to use fake names) rescues him.
In "An Encounter," the young narrator lacks the "aesthetic emotion" stirred up by a work of art, largely because he has not experienced the works of art in question but also because something in him is not yet equipped for that level of experience. It is frightening to him, and he can only pretend to have access to it in order to appear to be sophisticated. The reality of the threat that the man represents to the boy is immediate; the promise of (pre-modern) art is somehow associated with that threat, but it is remote for the time being. The novels mentioned by the man do not speak directly to the boy's contemporary experience.
In E. M. Forster's A Passage to India, post-impressionism is not something that eludes the grasp of children but rather something that gives rise to hurt feelings and misunderstanding between adults from different cultures. Forster actually uses the term "post-impression" in depicting a conversation between Dr. Aziz, the Indian doctor, and the British expatriate Mr. Fielding. It is Dr. Aziz who, upon hearing that a new visitor to India (Miss Brested) is "artistic," asks if she is "a post-impressionist." Mr. Fielding replies rather harshly: "Post Impressionism, indeed! Come along to tea. This world is getting too much for me altogether."
This exchange gives rise to offense on the part of Dr. Aziz. He feels that he has been insulted. To him:

the remark suggested that he, an obscure Indian, had no right to have heard of Post Impressionism—a privilege reserved for the Ruling Race.

In fact, Forster indicates, Mr. Fielding actually thinks that the whole notion of "Post Impressionism" is pretentious and silly, not that Mr. Aziz is. Here, as in Joyce's "An Encounter," talk of art—or, in this case, art criticism—does not create harmony or foster friendship; rather, it provokes alienation and reinforces differences.

How would you describe the narrator of this story?

The narrator of the story, Jackson Jackson, is a homeless Native American living on the streets of Seattle. Jackson may not have much in terms of material possessions, but he does have the ability to get along with people. Jackson comes across as a friendly, good-natured man with a fundamental sense of decency, despite his numerous travails. Whatever he goes through, Jackson can always somehow crack a joke.
Even more importantly, Jackson has still managed to retain his identity as a Native American. We see this when he spots what he believes to be his late grandmother's dancing regalia in a pawnshop window. Jackson knows just how much the regalia meant to his grandmother and how important it is as an expression of tribal culture. Indeed, so important is it that he tries valiantly—without success—to rustle up enough money to buy it from the pawnbroker.
Jackson sees himself as a hero, valiantly embarking upon a quest to win back the stolen regalia. But he's a somewhat quixotic hero, forever getting into one kind of scrape or another as he sets about his task of raising the money. This makes him a very likable character, as well as recognizably human, in the fullest sense of the word. Jackson may be a deeply flawed individual, but his heart's in the right place.

What are examples of man versus boat in "The Open Boat"?

"The Open Boat" is a short story by Stephen Crane based upon the shipwreck he was involved in en route to Cuba, an experience which left him stranded in a small lifeboat with three other men off the coast of Florida for thirty hours. The story parallels this event through the narration of the correspondent. The correspondent is a man who is shipwrecked alongside a captain, a cook, and an oiler and forced to survive by floating in open water in a small boat.
In terms of classical conflict structures, "The Open Boat" demonstrates the theme of man versus nature, as the story tosses the protagonist and his companions into an unstable situation in which they are forced to confront the uncontrollable forces of the sea. Part of this struggle involves coming to terms with the indifference that nature seems to have toward their suffering. In that sense, the story could also be viewed as thematically addressing the idea of "man versus boat" in that their small dinghy serves as the container for their struggle. It enables their survival and allows them to "get an idea of the resources of the sea in the line of waves that is not probable to the average experience." It thrusts upon the four men a new perspective, and in doing so, it forces the correspondent to wrestle with his isolation and uncertainty about his fate.

What are some of the powers of herbs?

In act two, scene three of Romeo and Juliet, we meet Friar Lawrence, who carries a basket of flowers, weeds, and herbs, and speaks to himself about the special properties that they possess. He doesn't identify any specific powers that the herbs possess, but he says that they all have the power to do good or harm, depending on how much of each is used. As he puts it, "Virtue itself turns vice, being misapplied."
The idea here is that a medicine becomes a poison if administered in the wrong dose and vice versa. This is ironic because the help that Friar Lawrence gives to Romeo and Juliet, although meant kindly, becomes, by the end of the play, poisonous. Friar Lawrence tragically fails to apply his learning about herbs, weeds, and flowers, to his own actions.

What does Sal worry about as as Gramps drives along the winding mountain roads in Walk Two Moons? Why is she so nervous?

Sal worries about her grandfather's driving both because he drives quickly and because her mother recently died in a vehicular accident.
Sal says that her grandfather drove through Wyoming like "a house on fire." They go through a variety of terrain, but he doesn't slow down. He's focused on getting to where they need to be. Once they see the geyser, they go to Montana. Sal says that she didn't realize the route through that state would be all mountains—and it makes her scared enough that half of her attention is focused on the twists and turns of the road.
Sal's mother died when her bus went off the road, flipped, slid through an overlook, and slammed into a group of trees. A man who tells her about the accident says that when night fell, the rescuers were still cutting through the brush to reach the injured. Since her mother died, Sal has been scared of car accidents and death. These fears are exacerbated by the drive through the mountains with her grandparents.

Who is the antagonist in The Narrow Road To The Deep North?

The novel relates events at different points in Dorrigo Evans's life. At each stage, different antagonists are presented and Evans must struggle to overcome the problems they present. Because the action spans several decades, including Evans's ordeals as a World War II prisoner of war and peacetime roles as a doctor, any of those antagonists might be considered central. Another character, Major Nakamura, occupies a prominent role later in the novel.
Because the novel covers a long period of time and shows Evans moving in and out of so many situations, it lends support to a central, more abstract antagonist: the power of the past. The introduction of Nakamura's story toward the end supports this idea.
While an Australian soldier, Dorrigo was taken prisoner, serving as a physician in the POW camp for laborers on the infamous Burma railway. Much of the novel recalls the horrific conditions and the strained relations between prisoners and Japanese and Korean captors. Because of the emphasis on this situation, including as part of Evans' later reflections, the enemy soldiers could be considered the antagonist. However, the complexity of the interactions presented makes it likely this is a secondary-level conflict.
During the war and after, Dorrigo's personal struggles, including complicated affairs of the heart, keep him looking backward. As an older man reflecting on the past, and finding difficulty resolving his inner conflicts, the past weighs heavily on him. Chased by demons he can never quite escape, he attempts to rewrite the past as he composes an introduction to another man's record of the war. Those ongoing struggles give weight to the idea that the impossibility of escaping the burden of the past is the greatest opponent that Evans confronts.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/apr/22/the-narrow-road-to-the-deep-north-review-richard-flanagan

What is statutory law?

Statutory law can be explained simply; the rules and regulations that all individuals must follow in order to avoid liability or arrest.
To enact a statute, the bicameral legislature has to pass a proposed bill through the House and the Senate and then send it to be signed by the executive branch - the president on the federal level or the governor on the state level.
The President signs the bills that come out of Congress, and the governor signs the bills enacted by the state legislature.
After it is signed, the bill becomes statutory law.

Statutory law is a type of law, which is passed by a legislative body. Individual laws passed by a legislative body become statutes.
Statutes are created by officials who have been elected to serve in a government's legislative branch. A new statute doesn't become binding law until the legislative body as a whole has voted to approve it. In the United States, statutes can be passed at both the federal and state levels of government.
Statutory law may cover a variety of topics. For example, criminal statutes can be passed in order to create new laws that citizens of a state or country must follow. Failure to follow a criminal statute can lead to criminal punishment. Similarly, a legislative body may also decide to pass statutes that govern corporations' responsibilities to their customers or the public as a whole. These statutes are often enforced through civil rather than criminal punishment.
In these respects, statutory law differs from the common law. Common laws are based on historical legal precedent. These types of laws are formed from analyzing opinions written by judges who have ruled on similar cases in the past. The driving idea behind the common law system is stare decisis. This Latin term means, "to stand by things decided".
The Supreme Court says the following about the importance of the common law, stare decisis system:

[Stare decisis] promotes the evenhanded, predictable, and consistent development of legal principles, fosters reliance on judicial decisions, and contributes to the actual and perceived integrity of the judicial process.

Both statutory law and common law are prevalent in the United States' judicial system. Judges interpret statutes when a case before them is based on a violation of statutory law. When a legal case is based on a violation of the common law, judges base their decisions on the principle of stare decisis.
FURTHER READING:
http://legalcareerpath.com/statutory-law/
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/stare_decisis

Statutory laws are laws that have been created by a legislative body. A legislative body are those parties that are elected from the people within the state to represent a specific district or area. Every state has some sort of statutory law. Statutory law is different from an administrative law that is created by an executive agency. Statutory laws can be subjected to the interpretation of the courts. Statutory laws are usually presented in the form of a bill. This bill must be voted upon by the legislative body. If it is actually approved, the next step is the approval of the governor for local laws. The governor may sign off on the law and it becomes a statue. If the governor vetoed the law, it will be sent back to the legislature. Once statutes become a law they are effective on the date stated in the bill. Everyone must follow and be respectful of statutory laws.

Statutory law refers to a written set of laws passed by a legislature or a single legislator in case of a Monarchy. The Statutory law may originate from the National (Federal) legislatures, State Legislatures or Local municipalities. The laws are promulgated to give power to people, entities, limit such power, or to amend or repeal other existing laws.
Such law varies from administrative laws that are created by executive bodies that have been granted power by the legislature to make laws to govern their areas of mandate. For instance, Environment Agency make pass laws governing land use on critical areas.
Statutory laws also vary from the common law that has been deduced from judicial rulings, opinions, and interpretation. Common law has been developed over a long period of time with some of the rulings dating back to medieval times. Such law is developed to clarify certain issues that may be ambiguous in the written law.

Statutory law is law created by the deliberate acts of an elected legislature comprised of lawmakers that vote bills into law after drafting, debating and amending proposed bills. Statutory law can be created at all levels of government: federal, state, county, city, and township. Statutes are limited to the jurisdiction that created them, in the case of the lowest levels of government, or may apply to their own jurisdiction as well as to levels of government below them that fall under their jurisdiction.
Statutory law is distinct from common law which is created by judicial rulings which may clarify and extend statutory law in cases that are ambiguous or require interpretation. Common law develops over time as precedents are set and followed, and sound legal principles are consistently applied over time to address new cases and novel situations.
Statutory law is also distinct from administrative law which is created by government agencies authorized by legislators through the agency's executive administrators and bureaucrats. These rules and regulations are just as binding as statutory law and common law.
Just as statutory law may be modified or extended through judicial rulings of the common law, common law may be altered or amended by statutory law from a legislature.

Analyze the quote “Gregor’s eyes then turned to the window, and the overcast weather...”

Gregor's eyes then turned to the window, and the overcast weather--he could hear raindrops hitting against the metal window ledge--completely depressed him.

This line begins the third paragraph of Chapter One. In the first paragraph, Gregor wakes up realizing he has been “turned into a monstrous vermin,” and the rest describes his new appearance. In the second paragraph, as he wonders what has happened, he looks around his room and finds it is unchanged. In paragraph three, he looks out through the window.
The cloudy sky and rain have the effect of depressing him, and he decides to go back to sleep. His new shape has made him uncomfortable, however, as he is stuck on his back. Contemplating his new form, he tries in vain to move. After pondering his situation, beginning to move a bit, and talking through the locked door with his mother, Gregor returns to considering the weather. He reminds himself that jumping to conclusions will not help his predicament, but he should aim for “thinking things over calmly--indeed, as calmly as possible…” As he has done in the past when he made that kind of effort,

he fixed his eyes as sharply as possible on the window, but unfortunately there was little confidence and cheer to be gotten from the view of the morning fog, which shrouded even the other side of the narrow street. "Seven o'clock already," he said to himself as the alarm clock struck again, "seven o'clock already and still such a fog."

Hoping that he might turn back into himself, Gregor’s contemplation of the fog goes along with his recognition that his transformation is likely permanent. The fog outside is a metaphor for the confusion in his head.

And for a little while he lay quietly, breathing shallowly, as if expecting, perhaps, from the complete silence the return of things to the way they really and naturally were.

What is the lesson learned in A Gate at the Stairs?

A Gate at the Stairs was published in 2009 and written by Lorrie Moore. In this novel, the protagonist, Tassie Keltjin, learns about how to handle the emotional pain that comes with love, loss, grief, and separation as she enters young adulthood.
There are multiple instances in this novel in which Tassie must learn to navigate the experiences of emotionally bonding with someone, only to have them taken away from her in the most excruciating ways. Her boyfriend, with whom she became infatuated, eventually reveals that he had been lying to her and must escape the area on being suspected of terrorism. She becomes attached to the young Emmie, who is then taken back into foster care, and she also loses her beloved brother to the war in Afghanistan. These losses teach Tassie about the inevitability of loss as you grow older in an unpredictable world.
A Gate at the Stairs also touches on the nature of misconceptions. Edward and Sarah Brink appeared to Tassie as an odd but unproblematic couple, with a violent history she only became aware of after quite a bit of time. She also missed an important email from her brother, asking if he should join the military or not, and she overlooked the fact that her boyfriend claimed to be Brazilian, yet spoke Spanish and not Portuguese. This novel touches on the fragility of life and our relationships with others. Acknowledgment of these details may have saved Tassie from a great deal of grief, which in part is why she declines to visit Edward Brink at the end of the novel.

In Seedfolks, what has happened to Ana's neighborhood since she came there as a child?

Ana has seen quite a few changes in the neighborhood over the years. An old lady who originally moved into the area in 1919, she's witnessed the complete transformation of the neighborhood from the vantage point of her apartment window, from which she watches people coming and going.
Once upon a time, Ana's neighborhood was a working-class district, full of decent, hard-working, and law-abiding people. But with the decline of heavy industry and the closing of the factories, the area started to go downhill. Many working people moved out of the neighborhood, turning it into a low-rent district which soon became infested with crime.
Ana has seen so many criminal acts from her apartment window that she's immediately suspicious when she sees a little black-haired girl hiding behind a fridge and burying something in the ground. She suspects that something illegal's going on; perhaps the little girl's getting rid of drugs or a deadly weapon. But Ana couldn't be more wrong; it's just Kim planting some white beans.

Why does Herbert suggest they ask for precisely two hundred pounds?

Mr. White ends up saving the monkey's paw from the fire, and Sergeant-Major Morris reluctantly instructs him to wish for something sensible before he leaves. After Sergeant-Major Morris leaves, Mr. White remarks that he does not know what to wish for because he seems to already have everything he wants. Herbert responds by telling his father to wish for two hundred pounds in order to pay off the mortgage. Mr. White is very close to paying off his home, which is why his son tells him to wish for the remaining two hundred pounds to pay it off. Mr. White takes his son's advice and holds the monkey's paw as he wishes for two hundred pounds. Unfortunately, Mr. White's wish comes at a steep price. In Part Two, Herbert dies in a work-related accident and the White family is rewarded two hundred pounds as compensation.

What would you guess Montresor and Fortunato's professions are?

The entire third paragraph of the narrative suggests that both Montresor and Fortunato are not noblemen but gentlemen who earn their livings by trading in expensive goods, which would include paintings, antiques, jewelry (gemmary), and gourmet wines. Venice, where the story is obviously set, has been a decaying city for centuries. Aristocratic families have been forced to sell off possessions, which could include masterpieces by great Renaissance artists, in order to survive. They would naturally want to deal with gentlemen-businessmen who were knowledgeable and discreet. In many cases, Montresor and Fortunato would not buy expensive items but would act as brokers and receive commissions. Many of the items to be sacrificed might never leave the seller's premises. The prospective purchasers would be brought to the seller's home while the family retired to another wing of their palazzo.
If Fortunato is a "quack" in some areas, this may partially explain why Montresor endures his "thousand injuries." Fortunato may call on Montresor to assist him in appraising such items as paintings and jewelry. The fact that Montresor considers Fortunato a "quack" suggests that Montresor has expertise in some things and Fortunato in others, such as wines, and that they have been interdependent on various occasions. Perhaps they have a symbiotic relationship—but Fortunato may take advantage of Montresor in business dealings whenever he can. The "thousand injuries" are likely injuries in business dealings. These are known only to Montresor. If it were widely known that Fortunato had injured Montresor many times, there would be some suspicion of Montresor when Fortunato disappeared. Montresor is anxious to avoid the slightest suspicion; he wants "impunity," i.e., no suspicion at all.
Fortunato appears to be richer than Montresor. This should also help to explain why Montresor puts up with Fortunato's "thousand injuries." Montresor can't afford to break off relations with this arrogant and selfish man. Montresor consistently acts obsequiously towards Fortunato. In one place in the narrative, Montresor reveals a great deal about the nature of their relationship.
"Come," I said, with decision, "we will go back; your health is precious. You are rich, respected, admired, beloved; you are happy, as once I was. You are a man to be missed. For me it is no matter. We will go back; you will be ill, and I cannot be responsible. Besides, there is Luchesi—"
Perhaps Montresor makes money by his relationship with Fortunato. He needs Fortunato more than Fortunato needs him. But then why kill Fortunato? Evidently Montresor has decided that he cannot put up with his behavior any longer. Besides, there may be some material advantage in eliminating a competitor.