How does The Great Gatsby give us insight into anomalies, inconsistencies and paradoxes in human behaviour?

The text shows us that, even if there is no evidence to suggest the real possibility of achieving the American Dream, even if it seems like a total fiction or fantasy, people are willing to believe in it. George Wilson believes that he'll come up with the money to take himself and his wife out west—despite the fact that he's been attempting to get ahead for how many years and remains just as poor as he always was. Gatsby thinks that he can relive the past; in fact, he's absolutely convinced of it, despite the fact that Daisy is married—and a mother—and that he is a criminal who has made his fortune illegally and who can never achieve the status of a resident of East Egg, someone with "old money" instead of "new." We cannot turn back time or bring back the past, and Gatsby's refusal to accept this reality results in his ultimate demise. Similarly, Wilson's refusal to accept the truth—that he will never, ever be able to get ahead, to live the dream—helps lead to his demise as well. When he learned of his wife's affair, he simply began to believe that everything would be fine if they could leave the valley of ashes. However, the text shows that no one can ever really escape their status; neither Wilson nor Gatsby give up, and they both die as a result.

What does Yorick's skull symbolize?

Hamlet's encounter with the grave diggers and Yorick's skull is an important sign of Hamlet's development. Throughout the play, death is always present, whether it is taking the form of dead fathers, ghosts, revenge plots, murder, or suicide. "To be, or not to be?" is not just a question of existential despair; it becomes a very real question about life and death and the "undiscover'd country." In many ways, this more philosophical approach toward the problem of death distinguishes this play from the many other revenge tragedies of the era, which revel in passion and revenge plots.
It is challenging to put into words what has transpired within Hamlet since his setting off for England with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. He has obviously arranged for his friends to be killed and has escaped with pirates, who set him down in Denmark. He seems also temperamentally a different person. In these first moments upon his return, he seems to have made a certain peace with some aspects of his situation, but Yorick's skull, tossed unceremoniously up from the grave, is a literal memento mori, that frequent trope in early modern art.
Holding the skull of his former companion, Hamlet sees death in its immediate and tangible sense, leading him to reflect on the common experience all humans share. From his early contemplation of "self-slaughter" to his accidental and intended murders to this confrontation with the very sign of death, Hamlet grows from a self-absorbed sorrow for his father's death to a resigned acceptance of death. This recognition seems to be the understanding that allows him to finally accept that he will indeed die. In 5.2, just before his fateful fencing match, he tells Horatio,

If it be now, ’tis not to come. If it be not to come, it will be now. If it be not now, yet it will come—the readiness is all. Since no man of aught he leaves knows, what is ’t to leave betimes? Let be. (5.2)

Yorick's skull is the symbol of that inevitability of death.

Yorick’s skull is a reminder of mortality and the permanency of death.
“Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him, Horatio: a fellow / of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy. He hath / borne me on his back a thousand times; and now, how / abhorred in my imagination it is!”

How old is Mr. Bounderby?

Mr. Bounderby's age is alluded to in Chapter 4 of the novel. Dickens writes that Mr. Bounderby "looked older; his seven or eight and forty might have had the seven or eight added to it again, without surprising anybody."
This is a rather roundabout way of saying that Mr. Bounderby is 47 or 48 years old, as indicated by, "his seven or eight and forty." Dickens also writes, however, that Mr. Bounderby looked perhaps 54 or 55 years old, as his appearance would have caused people guessing his age to add another "seven or eight" to his actual age.
Mr. Bounderby looks older than he is because he has no hair, and because he is a large, fat man ("inflated like a balloon") with a "puffed" head and veins that "swelled" in his temple. From this appearance, it is obvious that Mr. Bounderby doesn't live a particularly healthy life.
Mr. Bounderby might account for the fact that he looks older than he is, however, by referring to his difficult upbringing. He says, later in Chapter 4, "I was born with inflammation of the lungs, and of everything else . . . that was capable of inflammation." We learn later in the story, however, that these stories about his difficult, impoverished upbringing are all lies. He hasn't had to fight his way up from the bottom, with no help from anybody else. He has, in fact, lived a comfortable life and has benefited from lots of help along the way. His older appearance is simply a consequence and reflection of his gluttonous, unhealthy lifestyle.

What are two examples of manipulative communication used by the pigs, that in reality mean something different than what is being said?

Squealer, Napoleon's propagandist-in-chief, loyally spouts the changing party line morning, noon, and night. Every time he opens his big piggy mouth, he lies through his teeth, creating a parallel universe where truth and facts no longer have any relevance. But Squealer's lies serve a vital purpose for the new regime—they manipulate the animals into getting them to do what Napoleon wants.
An example of this comes when Squealer tries to justify the pigs hogging all the apples and milk for themselves while the other animals are going hungry. Squealer says that the pigs don't really like apples and milk; they're only eating and drinking these items because, as brainworkers, they need the extra nutrition. Squealer's presenting the pigs' greed as a noble sacrifice: they're consuming food and drink they don't like so that they can be strong enough to be able to run the farm for the good of the other animals.
Another example of manipulation comes when Squealer accuses Snowball of being a traitor. By this time, the absent Snowball has become public enemy number one; he's used as a boogie-man figure by the regime, the scapegoat for everything that goes wrong on the farm. (And an awful lot does indeed go wrong). In his latest unhinged propaganda rant, Squealer claims that Snowball's been plotting with Mr. Jones to take over the farm and restore the hated human oppressor to power. But it need hardly be said that this is a complete lie. Snowball played a leading role in driving Mr. Jones from the farm during the epic Battle of the Cowshed, showing considerable bravery and intelligence in the process. Napoleon, however, deeply resents the prominent role that Snowball played during the battle, and so he uses Squealer to rewrite history, giving the other animals a completely distorted picture of what really happened that day.

How are narrative conventions used to represent attitudes?

Narrative conventions are the techniques employed by a writer to lend meaning to a story. They can include everything from point of view, imagery used, form, characterization, and so on.
The point of view in this story is an interesting one. By necessity, the narrator is an omniscient, disembodied one: it seems to watch the house as if watching it from a distance on a television screen, watching even though there are no people left to see. Phrases such as "dawn showed faintly" raise the question of who dawn is showing itself to; likewise, things "could be seen" and "could be heard," but what resonates with the reader is the question: by whom?
Bradbury answers that story, to an extent, in the way he chooses to characterize the house and the things in it. In the absence of people, the house has almost become a living thing itself. It has human attributes; it "shuddered," has "nerves," and when it begins to fall apart in the heat of the fire, it is described as being "revealed as if a surgeon had torn the skin off." This simile enforces the personification which Bradbury utilizes throughout the story: there is a sense that the house, having been filled with "voices" by the humans who once lived in it, has now gone beyond the point of being a created thing, and become sentient. It cries for "help," it "[tries] to save itself," but to no avail. Like the humans who are absent from this world, it must ultimately perish.
The characterization of fire, too, is one of personification. Fire "fed" and "crackled," "lay in beds, stood in windows, changed the colors of drapes!" In the absence of humans, this most elemental of things literally takes their place. The metaphors Bradbury uses here enforce the idea that fire can consume anything humans have created; it has its own motivations, too, and will outlast anything man made. At the end of the story, fire has consumed everything but the one "last voice" still announcing the date.
There is significance, too, in the date being the last thing said in the story. While the house may have been disintegrated, a new "dawn" has still risen, and the sun is still shining on the house that is no longer there. "Today is August 5, 2026," and the dawn shows whether or not there is anything there to see it. The closing paragraphs of the story serve as a reminder that the world will continue to turn and new days will continue to come, whether or not there are humans here to witness it.

What problem does Maricela face?

Maricela is one of the narrators featured in the short children's novel Seedfolks, written by Paul Fleischman. Maricela faces a number of problems in this novel. In this response, I will briefly outline a few of the important problems in her life.
Maricela is a Mexican American teenager. Due to the racial discrimination often experienced by Mexican people, Maricela worries about what other people in her community think about her.
The most pressing problem facing Maricela, however, is her pregnancy. This leads her to drop out of school and causes conflicts with her parents. She doesn't view her pregnancy positively, at times considering abortion or wishing for a miscarriage.
Involvement with the community garden helps Maricela to view her problems in a different light and provides her with much-needed social support. For example, people involved with the garden give her helpful advice about her pregnancy. As noted by Aneta Dybska in the source below, "the garden fosters cross-generational and cross-cultural dialogue."
https://depot.ceon.pl/bitstream/handle/123456789/8749/11_pjas8.pdf?sequence=1

https://search.proquest.com/openview/ef2ac27d1d9ef8c2f7bc628b0c69aff6/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=42045

On what memorable day in history does this story take place?

The story takes place on 22nd November, 1963, the day on which President John F. Kennedy was assassinated.
It seems that everyone in Elena's neighborhood, including her mom, is deeply shocked and saddened by this tragic event, but Elena has other things on her mind. That evening she's scheduled to go to Eugene's place to study. Elena's very excited at the prospect; it's all she can think about, even on a day of national mourning. She has a big crush on Eugene; they've been getting closer, and Elena sees their forthcoming study session as an opportunity to get closer still.
As it happens, Eugene's mom won't let Elena into the house. She doesn't say it in so many words but she's clearly prejudiced against Puerto Ricans like Elena. What had promised to be such a wonderful evening ends in humiliation and disappointment for Elena. She returns home with her tail between her legs, feeling incredibly sad, albeit for completely different reasons to everyone else in the neighborhood.

What is the relationship between Nur and Imtiaz Begum in In Custody?

Imtiaz is the second wife of Nur. Nur also has a first wife who is older than Imtiaz.
When Deven finally gets to meet Nur, he's unimpressed by the way the man lives. One of the worst things about his living situation is his flamboyant younger wife, Imtiaz Begum. Deven immediately dislikes her. He dislikes the way she's created a spectacle of their living quarters, how she acts, and how she dresses. He thinks that she's copying Nur's work. He says that she looks like any dancing girl or prostitute.
When Nur and Deven leave the room, she follows them. She yells at Nur for leaving and says that he can't stand being around a crowd that isn't there for him. She drops money that she made from reciting her poetry onto the ground while chastising her husband. It's clear that they aren't happy and that they resent each other.

In Holes, what two important discoveries does Stanley make after tumbling into the gully?

After tumbling into the gully, Stanley finds water and an onion.
In chapter 38, Stanley and Zero continue climbing the mountain. During the exhausting climb, Stanley notices a large stone precipice ahead. He makes his way towards it but never reaches it. Instead, he falls into what appears to be a gully.
Inside the gully, Stanley notices that the ground is muddy. He is initially distressed at his predicament but soon cheers up. He concludes that there must be water in the gully, since water is needed to turn soil into mud.
So, Stanley begins digging into the soil with his hands. The more he digs, the more water fills up in the hole he has dug. Eventually, Stanley manages to dig a hole as deep as the length of his arm.
Both boys drink the water, and Stanley continues widening the hole. He soon discovers a round, smooth object hidden in the mud. When Stanley wipes the dirt off the object, he sees that it is an onion. Stanley then proceeds to eat half of the onion. He gives the other half to Zero.

Why didn't more rebellions like Shays's break out?

In the wake of the American Revolution, Shay's Rebellion was an uprising of rural Massachusetts farmers against the new American confederation government, particularly judicial courts and others involved with tax and debt collection. In many ways, it paralleled the recent grievances of colonists against their distant rulers, the British, which resulted in the Revolutionary War.
Many of the farmers had served in the Revolutionary War but were not fully or properly compensated. Furthermore, there was a wide shortage of hard currency, which was increasingly demanded by their creditors. The lack of military service compensation and lack of access to currency gave the farmers grievance against the federal government.
In Massachusetts, Boston merchant James Bowdoin was finally able to be elected Governor over John Hancock, only because Hancock resigned for health reasons. Bowdoin was particularly harsh on the rural farmers regarding debt collection: the farmers were taxed higher than when under British rule, collection efforts were more aggressive, and farmers in default were arrested and their farms repossessed. They were also politically disenfranchised by biased voting requirements. They were overtaxed and underrepresented—these facts gave the particular rebels of Shay's Rebellion grievance against the government of Massachusetts.
There were several reasons that similar rebellions didn't occur:Shay's Rebellion was a rather specific case incited by an overzealous Massachusetts government. Though much of the country was in economic stress, Shay's Rebellion had much to do with their specific state's greedy and unforgiving government, including a big business-involved governor, James Bowdoin.
Discontents were discouraged from uprising by harsh punishments imposed on rebels. Samuel Adams was one of many who called for the Shay's rebels' executions. At least one bill prescribed the death penalty for all rebellion militiamen. Basic civil liberties and protections were stripped in Massachusetts. A bill was passed giving amnesty for sheriffs who killed insurgents, and habeas corpus—the doctrine that demands legal justification for imprisonment—was suspended. Massachusetts' Disqualification Act politically and socially disenfranchised those who took part in the rebellion. For three years, they were forbidden to vote, serve on juries, hold public office, or work as a schoolmaster, innkeeper, or liquor salesman.
Reasons for rebellion were being addressed and resolved. In Massachusetts, John Hancock was elected back to the office of governor, as Bowdoin's actions made him too unpopular. Hancock was much more lenient: he did not enforce hard currency payment of debts, taxes were cut, collections of old debts were not pursued, and other policies were enacted to help the common people at the cost of big business and Massachusetts governmental investments. Many rebels were also pardoned for their crimes or had their sentences commuted.
On the federal front, Shay's Rebellion was cited as a reason to create a stronger federal government. The federal government, as it was at the time under the Articles of Confederation, was unable to respond to the rebellion largely due to an inability to raise funds to pay an army—and also for other reasons inherent with a weak, inefficient government. Some argue that Shay's Rebellion was a big catalyst for the dismantling of the Articles of Confederation and the drafting and adoption of the new Constitution, which then allowed for a stronger federal government. This new government contained a stronger central executive figure to more quickly and decisively respond to crises, a means to tax and otherwise raise funds to pay for a military, and set into motion a plan for centralized federal banking and universal currency. The biggest reason similar rebellions didn't arise was that the new federal government could better deal with rebellions, as evidenced by President Washington's squashing of the Whiskey Rebellion soon after.

Describe and analyze the character of Judy Jones.

It is important that the reader mainly sees Judy through Dexter Green's eyes, which admire Judy less for who she is than for what she represents: the upper class to which Dexter wishes to belong. Her father is the prominent Mortimer Jones, a member of the Sherry Island Golf Club, where Dexter caddies. Dexter uses the idea of Judy—the young, idealized beauty whom he remembers—to convince himself that he can always return to the past and recapture moments that are long gone.
When Dexter first encounters Judy, he describes her as "arrestingly beautiful," with a color in her face that suggests "fluctuating and feverish warmth" as well as intense life and passionate vitality. Mr. Sandwood, a young man who is also a member of the golf club, where Dexter is now a guest, also finds Judy beautiful, while T.A. Hedrick finds her too promiscuous to be pretty.
As for her personality, Dexter describes it as "the most direct and unprincipled . . . with which he had ever come in contact." Judy is assertive, unlike many women of the era (including Dexter's fiancee, Irene Scheerer) and goes after whatever she wants "with the full pressure of her charm." He also notes how Judy makes men conscious "to the highest degree of her physical loveliness." On the other hand, she is not a woman who can be "won," and, when men come on to her too strongly, she loses interest. Judy goes through numerous suitors, including Dexter. With Dexter, she has an on-again–off-again affair which culminates in an engagement that never results in marriage.
Judy is aware of her beauty, which she thinks is greater than that of any other woman in her town, but neither her beauty nor her wealth make her happy. The subject of Judy's beauty, however, is entirely determined by who is looking upon her. For Dexter, there is no one more beautiful or more coveted than Judy (though, for him, so much of Judy's beauty and charm is determined by her class status).
Judy may very well have been the most beautiful girl in Black Bear, Minnesota, but Dexter's associate, Devlin, finds that she was "a pretty girl when she first came to Detroit" but is merely "all right" now. Devlin's comment about Judy's looks disillusions Dexter and helps him realize that he idealized Judy as part of his dream that he could hold on to the past and regard himself, still, as a young man with plenty of time to create more future plans. For Dexter, those plans involved owning all of the "glittering things" which belonged to the upper class, including Judy. When Dexter learns that Judy has aged and leads an unhappy life with an alcoholic, he realizes that he, too, is growing older and that his career is no longer "largely a matter of futures." He also realizes that his image of Judy as a coveted object never accounted for her humanity.

What foreshadowing of the discovery of the body of Homer Baron are we given earlier in the story? Share your experience in reading "A Rose for Emily": did the foreshadowing give away the ending for you? Did it heighten your interest?

The death of Homer Barron is foreshadowed in the interlude describing the terrible smell which came over Emily's property. The phrasing allows a connection to be made by the reader without any implication that the same connection might have been made by the narrator, or the townspeople, at the time—indeed, it seems from the tone of the narration that the fact that Emily's "sweetheart...had deserted her" without anyone knowing his whereabouts was seen as almost incidental. This is simply a means of placing the incident of the smell in context in the story of Emily's life.
The "ladies" decide that the smell must have come from Emily's kitchen now being the purview of one lone black servant. Eventually, the smell becomes extremely bad, and they begin to assume it might have been some animal "dead in her yard," but the social structures of the town are such that nobody wants to actually speak to Emily about it. She is not the same class as the others, and she holds a particular position in the town. As such, the people decide to take on the smell themselves. They sprinkle lime in the grounds of Emily's house, and shortly thereafter, the smell goes away.
At this point, the narrative moves on from the smell, onto the idea that Emily may be going crazy like her relatives, but a seed has been planted in the reader's mind. When the story goes on to explain who Homer Barron really was, up to the point of Emily going to the shop to buy some poison, the reader puts two and two together. The townspeople think that Emily is going to kill herself, but when Barron is suddenly gone, the reader—at least, in my case—becomes sure of what has happened, earlier suspicions confirmed.
Did you guess the ending at this point? Earlier? For me, it simply heightened my curiosity to know what was really going to happen, what Emily had done with the body of Homer Barron, and why. It's up to you to say how these clues made you feel about the story as it developed.

Who is the Duke of Strelsau in The Prisoner of Zenda?

Michael, Duke of Streslau, is the story's antagonist. The younger half-brother of King Rudolf V of Ruritania, he has the king drugged, abducted, and imprisoned in a fortress on the eve of his coronation. If everything goes according to plan, then Michael will take over as king.
Unfortunately for the wicked Michael—and fortunately for everyone else—a group of concerned courtiers devise a plan of their own to save the day. They manage to persuade an English tourist, one Rudolph Rassendyll, to impersonate King Rudolf, thus preventing Michael from acceding to the throne. The Englishman is a distant relative of the king and bears a staggering physical resemblance to him. With his romantic streak, taste for adventure, and deep sense of honor and duty, Rudolf is the ideal man to fill the king's shoes and thwart the Duke of Streslau's dastardly plot. At least for the time being.

What is the moral of "The Monkey's Paw"?

The moral The Monkey's Paw is explicitly stated by Sergeant-Major Morris when he tells the Whites that "Fate rules people's lives and those who interfere with fate do so to their sorrow." In other words, people are subject to fate, but trying to take control of one's destiny will lead to worse outcomes than if one just let fate take the lead. We see this when Mr. White's wish for money results in the death of his son. This all raises questions about the role of free will in a person's destiny. Was Herbert's tragic death the inevitable consequence of fate, or were the White's responsible for it as a result of their attempt to meddle with destiny? Can the actions and wishes that we make change the course of our lives? The answer to these questions largely depends on how one interprets this story.
This also leads us to another moral of the story—be careful what you wish for. The first two wishes that Mr. White makes do indeed come true. However, the cost was much higher than anyone would willingly pay if they knew of it in advance. Perhaps the moral here is that we can indeed make wishes and see them accomplished, but there will inevitably be costs and sacrifices that we never can truly foresee.

We do not need a monkey's paw to make wishes. We are free to make wishes at any time. And some of them come true. Unfortunately, it often turns out that the wishes that do come true result in disappointment—or worse. This fact of life seems to be the theme behind the theme of "The Monkey's Paw." We have all had the experience of getting something we wanted and then finding out that we made a mistake in wanting it. An example of a really serious mistake is marrying the wrong person. A less serious mistake is taking the wrong job. Benjamin Franklin wrote the following truth:
All human situations have their inconveniences. We feel those of the present but neither see nor feel those of the future; and hence we often make troublesome changes without amendment, and frequently for the worse.
Wishing is the same as wanting. We all want something we do not have much of the time.
Samuel Johnson wrote a long poem titled "The Vanity of Human Wishes" in which he offers many examples of how people are disappointed by getting something they want. Macbeth desperately wanted to become king, and that turned out to be the worst mistake he ever made. Both Schopenhauer and Emerson speak of a "law of compensation" which dictates that a price must be paid for everything we want.

What is an important quote about home from the book?

In Tim O'Brien's book, The Things They Carried, there are many times in which a soldier discusses something which reminds him of home, but to me the most important quote about a soldier's home is this quote about coming home after the war:

The town could not talk, and would not listen. "How'd you like to hear about the war?" he might have asked, but the place could only blink and shrug. It had no memory, therefore no guilt. The taxes got paid and the votes got counted and the agencies of government did their work briskly and politely. It was a brisk, polite town. It did not know shit about shit, and did not care to know.

This quote illustrates the difference between the soldiers and the civilians. It emphasizes the divide in knowing and not knowing the horrors of war. Many soldiers arrive home to apathetic or even angry receptions after struggling in nightmarish conditions while at war. This quote shows the soldier's own anger at the town he called home, and that he now sees it from the outside. His time as a soldier has, in a sense, taken his home from him forever. It is now an impersonal, "polite" town that "did not know shit about shit, and did not care to know." O'Brien shows that the soldiers recognize their separation from their homes on a deep level.

What were the thirteen colonies of the United States?

When British settlers first arrived here, they settled along the Atlantic Coast and formed the thirteen colonies. These colonies were Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. Settlers arrived from England seeking religious freedom and a better life, but they were not the first ones to arrive here. Native Americans were already living on the land, and explorers from European countries also established small settlements before the English established dominance of the area. The thirteen colonies were ruled by the King of England until they declared independence in 1776, but throughout colonial times, the colonies established a high degree of self-government. It was these thirteen colonies that eventually became the United States.

How do Hoftede's five value dimensions and the GLOBE framework differ?

Both Hoftede’s five cultural dimensions and the GLOBE framework examine a particular country's beliefs and traditions and rate them on specific areas. Hoftede’s five dimensions look at these culture differences: power distance (level of inequality in a community), individualism (how integrated a society is into groups), masculinity (gender roles), uncertainty avoidance (how a culture handles unstructured situations), and long term orientation (perseverance). Countries are given scores in each of the five areas which is then correlated and compared to data from other countries.
The GLOBE framework was developed after Hoftede’s dimensions and expands on his work. The GLOBE framework compares countries looking at nine different areas including power distance, uncertainty avoidance , assertiveness (value of competition), humane orientation (kindness to others), future orientation (value of planning), individual collectivism (integration into groups), gender difference (gender roles), in-group collectivism (membership in small groups), and performance orientation (improvement).

Why did the cows break into the storeshed?

This whole episode sums up the plight of the farm animals before the revolution. They are hungry and haven't been fed for days. Mr. Jones, as usual, has neglected his duties as a farmer. He spends practically the whole time getting drunk and feeling sorry for himself instead of feeding the animals like he's supposed to. And so the cows, driven by desperation, have no choice but to break into the cowshed to fill their empty bellies.
As with Animal Farm in general, this episode is an allegory for the Russian Revolution. The urban masses, driven on by hunger, staged a rebellion against the Tsarist regime in the then Russian capital, Petrograd. This led to the Tsar's abdication and the subsequent establishment of a liberal democratic government during what became known as the February Revolution.
The irony of the cows' situation is that they, and the other animals on the farm, will later experience much worse hunger when the so-called Animalist regime, under Napoleon, has been established. This parallels what happened to millions of Russian workers after the Bolshevik coup in October 1917, when hunger and repression became the order of the day in what was supposed to be a workers' state.

In chapter two of the novella, the animals rebel against Mr. Jones after he neglects to feed them for several days. Mr. Jones had recently lost a lawsuit and became extremely depressed and disheartened. He began spending the majority of his days drinking in his Windsor chair instead of taking care of the animals and his farm. Orwell writes that Mr. Jones's men were dishonest and idle and that the animals on the farm were underfed.
On the Saturday of Midsummer's Eve, Mr. Jones went into Willingdon and got so drunk at the Red Lion that he did not return home until midday on Sunday. When Mr. Jones returned home, he went immediately to bed without feeding the animals. At this point, the animals had gone multiple days without being fed, and the cows took it upon themselves to break into the storage shed to eat. Essentially, the cows broke into the storage shed to eat from the bins because they had not been fed by Mr. Jones or his men in two days.

How did Matilda manage to convince her family that there was a ghost in the house?

The young Matilda gets so angry at her bullying father for ripping up her copy of The Red Pony that she plots revenge. She visits her friend Fred and trades him a week's allowance for the chance to borrow his parrot. The parrot likes to say “Hullo” and “Rattle my bones!”
Matilda hides the parrot in the dining room chimney of her home. When the bird starts to squawk "Hullo" and "Rattle my bones," the family thinks it is burglar. When they search and find no burglar, Matilda says it must be a ghost. This frightens her family into running off. Later, they return, and her parents are nicer to her for about a week.
The Wormwoods are incompetent parents who Matilda can easily outsmart. Matilda is young, but she is more intelligent than they are, as is illustrated by this story of how easily she convinces them the house is haunted by a ghost.

What does James Joyce say about religion in Irish society in Araby?

In his writings, Joyce is often extremely critical of the Catholic Church in Ireland, presenting its domination of Irish public life as chiefly responsible for the country's cultural and intellectual sterility. And in "Araby" it's no different. The unnamed narrator, like virtually everyone in this society, is a Roman Catholic. Wherever he goes and whatever he does he's surrounded by the symbols of the Church. The boy has been raised as a Catholic, goes to a Catholic school. His very language is steeped in religious imagery. It's notable that he refers to the object of his affections—Mangan's sister—as a "chalice." It's as if she's the Holy Grail, and he is her knightly protector.
The symbolism here is unavoidable. The narrator's putting of Mangan's sister on a pedestal diverts him from the truth, from the cold, harsh realties of life. It's only when he arrives at the bazaar too late that he's finally disabused of his fantasies. Joyce appears to be drawing a parallel here with the Catholic Church. As a staunch atheist, Joyce believes that the Church is leading people away from the truth, deliberately keeping them in a state of ignorance to consolidate its hold over them. On this reading, the childish fantasy life of the narrator is intended to represent what Joyce sees as the religious delusions under which the vast majority of Irish Catholics labor.

Who does the author blame for his homosexuality in Boy Erased?

The author comes to blame himself for his homosexuality. It's not surprising that he should feel this way; he's simply internalized all the negative, hateful messages concerning homosexuality that he's received from his father's church throughout the whole of his short life. From an early age, he's been taught that there's something seriously wrong with being gay. In response, the author has repeatedly tried to banish his homosexual feelings, but without success.
This has made him feel like a complete moral failure, as if it's his fault that he still harbors what to his father are "unnatural" passions. As such, Conley goes through the whole of his early life experiencing what he describes as a "constant guilty ache" that runs through his whole body, which he comes to accept as second nature.

What is the theme in Li-Young Lee's poem "I Ask My Mother to Sing"?

The speaker in "I Ask My Mother to Sing" richly conveys the significance of shared cultural experience.
Unlike his parents and grandmother, the speaker has never been to China to see Peking or Kuen Ming Lake. Yet he feels the power of his family's connection to these places through his mother's and grandmother's song. The way the speaker begins the poem is significant:

She begins, and my grandmother joins her.

There is an immediate connection to ancestry, and you can almost imagine the speaker going on to say "and her grandmother joined her, and her grandmother sang through her..." The power of an oral tradition that connects them is meaningful.
The tone shifts in the third stanza:

how the waterlilies fill with rain untilthey overturn, spilling water into water,then rock back, and fill with more.

The waterlilies are a metaphor for life, explaining the ways he watches his mother and grandmother, in their life experience, expand to capture all of the pain that they can and then "overturn" but never give up. They always "rock back," strong enough to handle the next challenge. This also connects the author to the speaker in the poem, conveying the pain of his family's exile from their beloved China.
The power of oral tradition connects the speaker to China, the land of his family and ancestors. Through the song of his mother and grandmother, he is able to appreciate a land with deep and meaningful connections to his family.

The theme of the poem is cultural memory, or the transmission of culture between generations. The poet's mother and grandmother both know the song and so did his father, who would have accompanied them on his accordion if he were alive.
In the second stanza, the poet reveals that he has never been to Peking (presumably the object or origin of the song). It would be more of a matter of course for him to hear and learn these songs in context, in China, but still he loves to hear the song and see in his mind's eye the simple visual images of the waterlilies filling with water, which they eventually tip back into the pool where they are floating. Such images conjure up a vision of the country he has not seen and fix it in his mind.
Although the women are both crying, neither is too overwhelmed with emotion to continue the song. Passing on the culture is important and they communicate its importance to their son, who will have to remember the song and sing it in his turn. This is, in part, what he is doing by writing the poem.

The theme in Li-Young Lee's beautiful poem "I Ask My Mother to Sing" is nostalgia. The poem is a story about the experience of sharing in cultural memories between generations in immigrant families through song. The persona in the poem is the child of a Chinese immigrant family, but the poem touches on the fact that this persona has never "been in Peking, or the Summer Palace, nor stood on the great stone boat to watch the rain begin on Kuen Ming Lake" and highlights a poignant feeling for many children who have never been to their ancestral homeland—a cultural nostalgia passed down in families through the power of oral tradition. Li-Young Lee is the child of Chinese parents born in Indonesia. Both parents were from powerful Chinese political families, and Lee's father helped to found a university in their new home in Indonesia. As anti-Chinese tensions escalated, Lee's father was jailed for a year as a political prisoner. After his release, the family fled and eventually landed in the US in 1964. This fragmented cultural identity is Lee's legacy and informs much of his poetry. When he says "but I love to hear it sung" of his mothers' (and her mothers') voices describing the unknown and yet familiar places, he speaks to a common yearning held by the children of immigrant families: the nostalgia for something they've never known in person but have been deeply influenced by in song and story.

What traditions did colonists bring to America?

The colonists brought many traditions with them from the Old World. The first tradition would be the English language. Most of the colonists thought of themselves as good English citizens who were loyal to the Crown and Parliament. Most colonists were Protestants who regarded the French and Spanish as the enemy. Of course, that did not stop them from trading with them, but the colonists always fought on the side of England throughout the eighteenth century when the Crown looked for volunteers.
The English colonists also brought over ideas of individual land ownership and a legal system. Much of early colonial law is based on English laws. English citizens living in the colonies sought to create laws similar to what they had in England. English citizens in the colonies also had the same holidays as those who remained in England; the exception to this would be the Puritans who saw some holidays as being anti-religious. English citizens in the colonies also enjoyed tea, a tradition which they brought over from the Old World.
While the colonists had their own system of governance with legislative bodies that were more responsive than Parliament, they still regarded themselves as loyal English citizens. By maintaining their language, legal code, and patriotism, they maintained their English identity.

What made someone eligible to be enslaved in colonial America?

Nothing official would make an individual eligible for enslavement in colonial America, for the simple reason that European settlers could not be held as slaves in the colonies. Often slavery and indentured servitude are discussed as being equivalent in nature when they are not.
Indentured servitude was a major practice in the colonies, especially early in colonial history. An indentured servant was an individual who received passage to America in exchange for a term of bondage to a master. Indentured servants were mistreated by some masters, though the servants were granted some legal protections and provided with the opportunity to sue an abusive master. Additionally, indentured servants were free citizens at the termination of their term. Slaves, by contrast, were fully considered chattel property for the duration of their lives, with the designation extending to their children as well.
Indentured servitude may also have been practiced in some areas of the American colonies to cover outstanding debts, but there is no evidence that this was a significant or widespread practice.

In Octavia Butlers "Speech Sounds," how does the story’s central conflict and its resolution serve the story’s theme?

Well, there are a lot of themes in the story. Here are the ones that stand out to me:
1) The importance of language. In Rye’s world, most people can’t speak or read, and this inability to communicate verbally has turned people into animals. Rye and the bearded man are able to have a human connection because of their verbal abilities. It is the bearded man’s humanity that ultimately gets him killed, but Rye’s hope for the future is rekindled when she finds the children, both of whom can speak perfectly. The final words of the story, “It’s okay to talk to me,” reinforce how important words are in even the simplest acts of empathy and fellow feeling.
2) The hidden identity. Rye is an outsider, or “other,” in this society because she can think straight and talk. If this were known, she would be envied and probably a target for violence, so she is very careful to keep her abilities secret. What binds her to the bearded man is that they share the same secret (relative un-impairment); when she finds the children, her decision to raise them is based in part on recognizing that their ability to speak needs to be protected or shielded from others. In this sense, the final words of the story suggest that she is creating a safe space for them, and that in her small way, she is trying to bring civilization back.
3) Trust. An essential component of Rye’s world is mistrust—no one is to be trusted. This is in part because most people have lost the use of language, so, beyond crude gestures, it is impossible to know what someone’s intentions might be. Part of what makes the bearded man different is his ability to listen to Rye’s needs: he asks her which way to go in the car, and, more importantly, does what she says. The best example of his understanding her needs is when he produces a box of condoms: Rye is so surprised and delighted that he has understood her, she actually giggles.
In each case, the conflict (Rye vs society) serves to highlight what is lost when people lose language. In a similar vein, the resolution (Rye’s finding the children who can speak) suggests that language is the essential component for rebuilding human relationships and, presumably, civilization.

How does Janey Dunbar feel about drawing for her husband?

At the start of the annual lottery, Mr. Summers asks if there is anybody missing from the lottery, and the crowd responds by saying that Clyde Dunbar is missing. After consulting his notes, Mr. Summers is reminded that Clyde Dunbar broke his leg, so he calls on his wife to draw for their household. Typically, husbands draw for their families, or the oldest son is given the honors. Since Horace Dunbar is not old enough to draw for his family, the responsibility falls on Janey Dunbar, the mother. When Mr. Summers asks who will be drawing for the Dunbar family, Janey responds by saying,

Me. I guess . . . Guess I gotta fill in for the old man this year.

Janey Dunbar's response to Mr. Summers's inquiry reveals that she is reluctant and hesitant to draw for her family. Janey does not come across as enthused and is rather unwilling to draw for her family. It is subtly suggested that she does not approve of the annual lottery; she even sends Horace home before the killing begins. Perhaps Janey is saving her young son from witnessing the horrifying experience. Regardless of her intent, Janey Dunbar is reluctant and anxious about drawing for her family.

What does "nineteen parts of the species in twenty" mean in the essay "Labour and Exercise" by Joseph Addison?

The purpose of the essay "Labour and Exercise" is to discuss how the body stays in good health through both labor and exercise. As the essay was written in 1711, Addison cites labor as the primary way that humans can preserve their health and their bodies in the context of the primary industries of the time.
When Addison writes, "Manufactures, trade, and agriculture naturally employ more than nineteen parts of the species in twenty; and as for those who are not obliged to labour, by the condition in which they are born, they are more miserable than the rest of mankind unless they indulge themselves in that voluntary labour which goes by the name of exercise," the reader can use context to understand the phrase "nineteen parts of the species in twenty."
By "the species," the reader can assume Addison is referring to the human species, since the essay is about the human body and the labour and exercise of it. In the beginning of the sentence, he speaks about the industries that employ "the species," that is, people. In the following sentence, he writes, "as for those who are not obliged by labour," that is, as for the people who don't work. Therefore, the reader can assume that "nineteen parts of the species in twenty" means nineteen out of twenty people, or 95% of the population. The full thought could be paraphrased as follows: 95% of the population works in the manufacturing, trade, and agriculture industries.

In Nectar in a Sieve, what are Rukmani and Nathan most surprised by when they approach the doctor who once employed their son, Murugan?

When Nathan and Rukmani find out that their land will be sold to the tannery, they are shocked and dismayed. Without the land, they have nothing. They decide to go to the city and find help and refuge with their son Murugan and his wife. Selvam agrees to help look after Ira and Sacrabani. When they reach the city, Nathan and Rukmani have no idea how to find their son. At night, they seek safety and food in a temple. Ironically, the only bundles of belongings they have are stolen there while they are sleeping. The next morning, they also find out that the money in Rukmani's pouch that was tied to her waistband has also been taken. With literally nothing left, the couple wander the street in hopes that they can be directed to their son. They ask a young group of children for directions to Murugan's location. One of them, a boy named Puli who has leprosy, says that he will take them to Birla, the man for whom Murugan supposedly works. When they get to the location, the servants tell them that no one by the name of Murugan lives there. As they turn to leave, the doctor who once employed Murugan arrives. She tells them that she has not seen Murugan for over two years. She says that he left to make more money working for the Collector on Chalmundi Hill. Nathan is not happy to hear this news. When they finally get to the Collector's house, they only find Murugan's wife Ammu. She tells them Murugan has left her and is probably not coming back. Not wanting to burden her, Nathan and Rukmani leave soon after. Now, with no prospects of finding Murugan, Nathan and Rukmani return to the city. They are disappointed in their son Murugan's actions. In addition, they have no money and no hope, and it seems things will continue to go downhill for them.

Why was Makhaya in jail in South Africa in When Rain Clouds Gather?

Makhaya is a young Zulu rebel who was imprisoned by the apartheid South African government for sabotage. He is a freedom fighter who struggled to end the brutal apartheid government system. When Makhaya finally is released from prison, he begins making plans to cross the border into Botswana, where he hopes to find freedom. The South African government has put an order against Makhaya leaving the country, but he bravely defies this order and slips across the border into the country of Botswana. He hopes to leave his past of experiencing brutal racism and government oppression behind him as he starts a new life as a political refugee in Botswana. By leaving South Africa behind him, Makhaya also unfortunately leaves his comrades and those who cannot escape.

What is Daniel's father's name in The Sun Is Also a Star?

In chapter 5 of The Sun Is Also A Star, we are told that Daniel's father's name is Dae Hyun. The name Dae Hyun is said to mean both greatness and honor.
Throughout The Sun Is Also A Star, we learn a few details about Dae Hyun's life. We learn that he was a poor South Korean who, before he moved to America with Daniel's mother, Min Soo, worked in his father's crab fishing business.
We also learn that when Dae Hyn and Min Soo first arrived in America, they were helped by Dae Hyun's cousin, who gave them a loan, and also by other South Korean immigrants.
Dae Hyun loves his sons very much and tries to protect them, mostly from poverty. He thinks that America, the land of opportunity, is the best place to protect his children from poverty. He is not completely uncritical of America, however. He thinks that America values the individual over the family, for example, which is not how he thinks it should be.

How old is Deo, and what nationality is he?

Deo was born in the African state of Burundi in 1970. This would make him twenty-three or twenty-four years old when he first arrives in the United States. Deo flees his native country to escape the inter-ethnic conflict between Hutus and Tutsis that has been ravaging Burundi and neighboring Rwanda, culminating in mass genocide against his people, the Tutsi.
Deo is very fortunate to leave the country when he does, as he comes frighteningly close to being killed himself. The campaign of mass genocide begins while he's working as an intern at a rural hospital. When Hutu soldiers break into the hospital looking for Tutsis to kill, Deo must hide or end up being another one of the millions of victims of this genocidal terror. Thankfully, he is able to make good his escape, and after obtaining a business visa, he gains entry to the United States to begin a new chapter in his remarkable, inspiring life.

Why is the title of the story appropriate?

It's an appropriate title for two reasons. First of all, it relates to the overriding theme of greed. The greedy Russian peasant Pahom spends all his time acquiring as much land as he can get his hands on. But somehow it just never seems to be enough. The more land he acquires, the more he wants. So this raises the inevitable question: How much land does a man need?
Secondly, the title of the story hints at the answer that Tolstoy provides to his own question. Pahom eventually dies as a direct result of his greed, exhausted after trying to gain as much land from the Bashkirs as he can traverse in a single day. For all the land that he's acquired, all the vast wealth he's accrued, Pahom can't take any of it with him into the next world. In this world the answer to the question "How much land does a man need?" is "Just enough to be buried in."

How did Buddhism challenge Hinduism?

Buddhism challenged the traditions of Hinduism primarily in its denial of a centralized religious authority. The authority of Hinduism lay in members of a priestlike class called Brahmins whose status was determined by family lineage. Buddhism, in contrast, endowed all of its practitioners with the potential to reach enlightenment.
Buddhism more implicitly challenged the narratives of Hinduism in its lack of focus on creation myths, origin stories, and other dogmatic abstractions. It rejected the unfairness of the caste system and oppressive gender norms which Hinduism perpetuated and, in turn, drew its power from. Though they were far from reaching modern conceptions of "justice" in terms of social and economic equality, Buddhists believed that gender and caste formed no basis for achieving enlightenment.

How does Blake explore the "two contrary states of the human soul"?

In "The Marriage of Heaven and Hell," William Blake wrote, "Without Contraries is no progression." This perspective helps readers understand Blake's Songs of Innocence and Experience, a collection of poems in two parts. Poems from Songs of Innocence present life from a child's trusting viewpoint in which a benevolent God and kind people soften the rough spots of life. Poems that represent "Songs of Experience" were added later and released in the combined volume in 1794. They view life in all its ugliness and pain. To best reach the truth, Blake suggests, one must consider both sides of a topic. Several poems in the first section have matched counterparts in the second section.
"Holy Thursday" from Songs of Innocence portrays a group of orphans, led by the beadles, filing into St. Paul's Cathedral. Described as "these flowers of London town," they have a "radiance all their own." Likewise, the elderly men, "wise guardians of the poor," are presented favorably. However, in the counterpart "Holy Thursday," readers see a dark and cynical description of the same event. The orphans are described as "babes reduced to misery, fed with cold and usurous hand." Instead of using flowers as metaphors, Blake uses "bleak & bare" fields and "thorns," insisting that "it is eternal winter" in the lives of these children. This poem decries the fact that children should live in poverty and hunger.
Likewise, Blake juxtaposes "Infant Joy" with "Infant Sorrow." The first poem praises the blessing of a newborn baby, repeating "sweet joy" four times within the twelve lines of the poem. "Infant Sorrow" presents an angry, struggling, sulking newborn whose parents "groand" [sic] and "wept" upon his arrival. Certainly these two poems represent the "contrary states of the human soul" well: "I happy am," and, "Into the dangerous world I leapt."
By presenting these two poles of human life, Blake allows readers to enjoy the pleasures of life from the perspective of naive optimism while also acknowledging the pain that people endure from their own choices and from circumstances they can't control. The beauty of life is more attractive when juxtaposed with the ugly, and the ugly is more stark when compared to the lovely. Looking at both honestly should motivate people to strive to eliminate the bad and cultivate the good.

Blake explores the two contrary states of the human soul in his collection of poems called Songs of Innocence and Experience, which is subtitled "Shewing the Two Contrary States of the Human Soul." The two contrary states he examines correspond to the Biblical state of innocence before the Fall—before humans ate of the tree of Good and Evil—and the state that followed. After the Fall, humans began to live, as we do today, in the world of experience, which includes a clear knowledge of evil.
Blake sees the child's experience of the world as one of innocence, and he explores that world through a child's simple eyes. Some of the most wrenching poems, such as "The Chimney Sweep," depict children who are still innocent and trusting despite being exploited for gain in the most evil of ways.
Poems like "The Lamb" are innocent lullabies about a gentle world where an all-loving, protective God is identified with meekness of the baby lamb. Other poems, like "The Tyger," raise questions about why the God who created the lamb also created a beautiful but predatory animal like the tiger.
The poems are a shout out for a return to a more innocent state, and as we read them all through the lens of experience, we fear for the innocent children who do not know how cruel the world can be. We wish the world were a kinder place. Blake's poems thus raise the question of why we don't work harder to make the world a kinder place and more like paradise before the Fall.

The universal ideology of Blake constructs a view of human life that is even more complicated than what conventional binary thinking produces. Blake accomplishes this through his poetic investigation of the “two contrary states of the human soul.” Blake’s complication of the binary is not detaching the two states from one another, but in fact, creating a new unity.

What supporting details does King give to support his central idea that ”one day the South will recognize its real heroes”?

When King says, "one day the South will recognize its real heroes," he is referring to the many heroes of the Civil Rights Movement. Specifically, King cites a number of people who have engaged in civil disobedience and peaceful protest during the movement. For example, King makes connections to Mother Pollard, a senior who worked on the front lines of the Montgomery Bus Boycott. He also mentions James Meredith, who was the first African American student at the University of Mississippi (Ole Miss) when he enrolled there in 1962. King also references the countless students (high school and college), ministers, and other "everyday people" who have committed to acts of peaceful protest like the Greensboro sit-ins and other lunch counter sit-ins. King believes that their bravery, both individual and widespread, shows them to be the true heroes of the South. These people are truly serving the region by diminishing racism, which King prizes far above the contributions of "typical Southern heroes" like Confederate figureheads.
https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/letter-birmingham-jail

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

The paragraph in which "one day the South will recognize its real heroes" is found directly references the people who peacefully protest segregation and discrimination. King names James Meredith, a civil rights icon who broke the race line with his enrollment at the University of Mississippi in 1962 as its first African American student. King alludes to Mother Pollard, who was a leader of the Montgomery bus boycott in her seventies. King also alludes to the high school and college students and pastors with the commitment to execute sit-ins at segregated lunch counters. These are all extraordinary ordinary people. Their individual and collective heroism, King predicts, will turn the tide against institutionalized racism. King claims that these people will be remembered as heroes of the South, perhaps alluding to them supplanting figures from the Confederacy in the public imagination.

How did Meursault change his outlook by the end of the novel? Why did he want to be greeted by cries of hatred?

Meursault's desire to have people scream hatred and abuse at him prior to his execution is a sign that he does, after all, want his life to have had at least some meaning. This represents a major change from the steadfast nihilism he's displayed up until this point. Meursault recognizes that if people greet him with cries of hatred, then it will mean something; it would be an unavoidable expression of righteous anger, and no amount of nihilistic indifference would ever be able to withstand it.
For the first time in his short life, Meursault wants to be part of something that has meaning for him. Killing the Arab was meaningful in itself—but because it happened to someone else, Meursault never really owned its meaning. His forthcoming execution is different, however; this will be his death and no one else's. Everything associated with this death will have meaning for him.
It says something about Meursault's radically existentialist outlook that only his own death can supply his life with meaning.

In the poem "The Railway Junction" by Walter De La Mare, where might the people have come from and where might they be going?

In the evocative poem "The Railway Junction" by Walter de la Mare, an unidentified narrator sits at a railway junction through and watches people pass. Nothing is explained about the narrator except that he himself is waiting for a train, as he writes: "At the appointed hour, I shall myself be gone." Two possible destinations for the passengers are presented. They may either be traveling towards "darkening hills" or towards "distant seas." Where the people that the narrator describes have come from is not mentioned or even hinted at.
Besides the narrator, a number of people are listed as having passed through the railway junction. These include a bow-legged groom, a parson dressed in black clothing, a widow and her son, a sailor carrying a cage, a gamekeeper carrying a gun, and a beautiful woman wearing a veil. These brief descriptions indicate that the narrator barely glanced at them, as people usually do in public places. He also mentions that all of these people "mutely came." In other words, he didn't talk to any of them, and they didn't talk with each other. The narrator emphasizes that he knows nothing about them: "I nothing know why thus we met—their thoughts, their longings, hopes, their fate . . ."
In summary, there is no indication at all in the poem of where these people came from or where they are going. They are strangers observed on a train platform, nothing more. It is up to each reader to speculate about the backgrounds and destinations of these people. If you have this question as an assignment, simply use your imagination.

Which of the following is a definite indicator of a chemical change? a) A new substance called a precipitate is formed. b) The shape of the substance is changed. c) The color of the substance is changed. d) A substance is converted from a liquid to a gas. Choices b & d describe physical changes. While choices a & c are both indicators of chemical changes, but I need one definite indicator of a chemical change. Please help.

A physical change is a change in the shape, size, or state of a substance. Also, a physical change does not mean that the change has occurred in the substance itself (i.e., no new substance is formed). Thus, a change from a liquid to a gaseous state (choice d) is only a physical change, as no new substance is formed—only the state of the matter has changed. Similarly, a change in shape (choice b) is also a physical change.
In comparison, a chemical change refers to a change in the substance itself. This means that a new substance is formed. Hence, the formation of a new chemical—a precipitate (choice a)—is a chemical change. Similarly, the color change (choice c) refers to a chemical reaction and the formation of a different substance; hence, a chemical change has occurred.
In short, the formation of a new substance is a chemical change, while physical change does not entail the formation of a new substance.
Hope this helps.

How do we know Bruno's family is rich in The Boy in the Striped Pajamas?

Bruno's family is indeed quite well off. We know this because they live in a palatial, five-story house in an exclusive suburb of Berlin. The house has large windows with extensive views, as well as ornamental features like elegant bannisters. The family also employs a number of servants to attend to their every need, such as Lars the butler and Maria the maid. One would certainly need a substantial disposable income to be able to afford such staff.
When it comes to making the big move to "Out-With" (as Bruno calls Auschwitz), it's notable that there a quite a few belongings that need to be packed. Even Bruno, who's still only a young boy, has rather a lot of stuff to take with him. This would appear to provide further evidence of his family's affluence.

By the mid-nineteenth century, the South had become a "cotton kingdom." How did cotton's profitability shape the region's antebellum development? How did southern white legislators and intellectuals attempt to strengthen the institution of slavery in the 1820s? What prompted them to undertake this work? Finally, although bondage restricted slaves' autonomy and left slaves vulnerable to extreme abuse, they resisted slavery. Discuss the variety of ways in which slaves attempted to lessen the harshness of slavery. What were the short- and long-term effects of their efforts?

I can answer some of the questions you pose above. After the invention of Eli Whitney's cotton gin in 1794 to remove cotton seeds, cotton became the most important crop in the South. The effect of the growth of cotton on the South was a recommitment to the institution of slavery to have access to the labor to harvest the crop. The South stayed agricultural and did not industrialize, while the North started to turn to industry and the development of railroads. The North became a center for immigration (particularly from Ireland and Germany during this time), while immigrants largely did not go to the South—making the North and South demographically different.
During the lead up to the Missouri Compromise in 1820, southern legislators and intellectuals began to publish defenses of slavery. They wrote that it was even justified in the Bible, and they began to crack down even more harshly on slave revolts and slave infractions. While northerners defended free labor as the system that benefited the country and its future development, southerners argued that the factory system of the North was degrading and that slavery promised the "freest" system for the white man. Slaves resisted the institution of slavery in different ways. What has your research turned up about revolts and about how slaves tried to keep their families together in spite of slavery? What have you uncovered about how slave revolts and other forms of resistance provoked harsh responses from white plantation owners and legislators in the South?

What can the west wind do to the clouds in "Ode to the West Wind"? What are clouds compared to?

In Section 2 of Percy Bysshe Shelley's "Ode to the West Wind," the poet continues his description of the powerful West Wind by describing its effect on the clouds. The wind bears along the clouds as a stream bears along leaves that fall into it. Although line 15 implies the action of the wind by comparing it to a stream that carries fallen leaves, the more explicit description of the wind's action on the clouds occurs in line 44: "If I were a swift cloud to fly with thee." From these two lines, it is clear that the wind has power to move the clouds in the direction it is moving; it causes the clouds to fly along with it.
Section 2 compares clouds to leaves and angels. First, Shelley states that "loose clouds like Earth's decaying leaves are shed," comparing clouds to leaves that fall to the earth in autumn. Taking the analogy further, he says that the branches from which the clouds fall are the "tangled boughs of Heaven and Ocean."
In the second stanza of Section 2, Shelley writes that the clouds are "angels of rain and snow." Although he uses the term "angels" in its sense of "messengers," using that word also makes an implied comparison between clouds and angelic beings.
After comparing the wind to a stream and the clouds as objects that flow or fly along with it, Shelley states his wish that his words could travel over the universe in the same unimpeded way.

What is the role of the female model in Balzac’s story? What role does Gillette play in the relationship between Frenhofer and Poussin?

In Honoré de Balzac’s “The Unknown Masterpiece,” Gillette is the mistress of the artist Poussin. Although she plays a central role, her desires are subordinated to those of the male artists, including her lover.
Gillette is presented as an extremely romantic person, so obsessed with love that she resents Poussin’s devotion to his art. The plot complications around her role involve another, rival artist, the very well established and respected Frenhofer, whom it seems Poussin is eager to impress. Poussin proposes that Gillette model for the older man’s planned portrait of a courtesan.
After some demurring, Frenhofer agrees to use her and she goes to the studio. Later, when Poussin and another artist arrive at the studio, it becomes clear that the “master” is not just in decline but near collapse. He has heaped so much paint onto his canvas that the female figure beneath it has disappeared. Gillette, neglected, has become hysterical and upset with Poussin. After they leave, Frenhofer falls apart and destroys his paintings.

In chapter 14 of The Ruby in the Smoke, what bargain are Mrs. Holland and Mr. Selby agreeing on?

Mr. Selby arrives at Mrs. Holland's home frightened. He is convinced that he is being followed and that his life is in danger, so he has sought out Mrs. Holland for help. He believes that, if he reveals the whole story of his "secrets" to Mrs. Holland, she will protect him. Mrs. Holland remarks that she already knows all of Mr. Selby's secrets; however, he informs her that she doesn't know the entire story.
As it turns out, Mrs. Holland is interested in his story, and they agree to fifty percent of the profits each in exchange for his information. But Mrs. Holland would like for Mr. Selby to ascertain the whereabouts of Sally Lockhart in exchange for her protection of him. Though this makes Mr. Selby uneasy, he reluctantly agrees to this "bargain" with Mrs. Holland. Afterwards, it is said that Mr. Selby believes he has made a mistake, but the deal is already done.

How did an evening at the ball offer Mme. Loosely a chance to present herself in a new guise?

Guy de Maupassant establishes some critical details for his leading characters in his first few paragraphs. Mathilde is described as a young woman of humble means who is frustrated and ashamed of her social status. She is deeply concerned with appearances, and is tormented by the fact that she is unable to live in the kind of wealth and splendor enjoyed by the highest classes. That is what she aspires towards, and yet it is clear that the reality of her life does not match her ideal of what she wants it to be.
Then we come to the subject of the party, and it's important to note her initial reaction, because here that obsession on appearances and impressions is expressed strongly. She actually rebels against going at first, and needs to get a new dress, and after her husband gives her the money to buy one, she then needs jewellery too. Here we see her focus on those appearances, combined with her anger and shame about her own humility. She cannot go to the party unless she can do so while creating the impression of being a member of the elite.
And that's the guise your question asks for. When Mathilde goes to the party, she takes on the trappings of wealth and status for herself, but in this, she's actually taking on a lot more than a simple guise. You're seeing here her deepest aspirations: everything she wants to be but isn't. The party gives her the opportunity to live out that dream.

When life becomes challenging, does the speaker give up? How do you know?

Langston Hughes’ “Mother to Son” is an inspirational poem in which a mother imparts an important life lesson to her grown son, but this lesson works on two distinct levels. One is a universal level in which the mother, the speaker in the poem, delivers universal wisdom to her son, as we can infer when she says she has been “goin’ in the dark” of life “where there ain’t been no light.” The mother has had a complex life, with many twists and turns, yet she has walked on, never giving up. Despite having a life far from perfect, she has persevered in the face of adversity, and so must the son. This is a good lesson for any child to learn.
At the other level however, the poem is rooted in a specific context: it is an African-American mother speaking to her son. Her refusal to give up in the face of life’s challenges gains a double impetus in this reading of the poem. Now we move in from the general to the particular and begin to pay attention to the poem’s language, rhythm, and imagery. Hughes deliberately uses dialect to convey the everyday speech of the mother. “I’se been a-climbing on,/ And reachin’ landin’s/ And turnin’ corners,” she says of her journey on life’s staircase. Her language is colloquial and paints a realistic portrait for us. It also contrasts the depth of her message with what elites may consider “unpolished” language. Similarly, the physical details of the staircase make us picture the “tacks,” the “splinters” and the “boards torn up,” evoking urban tenement buildings of the early 20th century. The details tell us the mother’s challenges are uniquely rooted in her milieu and history as an impoverished African-American woman. Life has challenged her at every turn because of her race and socio-economic background.
The mother’s response to these challenges, her never-say-die spirit, is also specific. Her dramatic monologue has distinct echoes of inspirational 19th-century songs and spirituals sung by enslaved populations. (Langston Hughes often uses elements from African-American oral literature and culture to add meaning in his work). Like her ancestors before her, the mother has never stopped walking and climbing through the odds, even though “Life for me ain’t been no crystal stair.” The “crystal” stair represents an easier life path which was never available to the mother, but why crystal we wonder? Is crystal—or fine glass—particularly easy to walk upon? Wouldn’t something like a plush, carpeted or smooth, wooden stairway have been a better choice here? I think the use of the word “crystal” is very deliberate, because the crystal stairway of the poem is not real, but figurative. It is an idealized, perfect life the son might imagine lies ahead of him. The association of crystal with “clear” refers to a life-path which is clearly laid-out. It could also be a proxy for the American dream, in which everyone has equal opportunities.
The reality, of course, is very different from all these scenarios, the mother gently tells her son, with life uncertain and the American dream a possibility only for a privileged few. Yet another interpretation of the crystal stair is a biblical reference, in which Jacob has a vision of the stairway or a “ladder” to heaven. “And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven; and behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it.” (Genesis 28: 10-22, King James Bible). The ironic message here could be the way to reach spiritual growth is not through the crystal staircase after all, but through real life’s harsh and winding stair. The biblical reference also fits in well with the poem’s metaphors of rising and climbing one’s way to personal growth. The mother has hiked through discrimination and challenges, never turning back or sitting down. Like a mountaineer or a pilgrim bent on her quest to fight circumstances, she is “still climbin,” and telling her son:

So boy, don’t you turn back./ Don’t you set down on the steps/ ’Cause you finds it’s kinder hard.

The speaker in Langston Hughes’ poem “Mother to Son” represents a mature woman who imparts her wisdom to her young adult child. The speaker uses the extended metaphor of a staircase to represent life’s journey. In contrast to the crystal stairs that others get in life, the speaker’s staircase has been full of obstacles that have tried to get in the way of her climb. The climb, of course, is the mother’s final destination, or goal in life.
Her ultimate message to her son is that, regardless of the difficulties he will face in his life, he should never pity himself or give up.
Ergo, the mother is a perseverant individual who never ceases in pursuit of her goal. The text of the poem supports this in the following quote:

Don’t you set down on the steps’Cause you finds it’s kinder hard.Don’t you fall now—For I’se still goin’, honey,I’se still climbin’,And life for me ain’t been no crystal stair.

This is her direct address to her son. In the previous parts of the poem, she discusses the various obstacles she has encountered by explaining how she overcame them. The mother’s life has been difficult, but she hasn’t let that deter her from continuing upward. Using herself as an example of someone who perseveres, she wants her son to be similarly determined, even when life gets difficult.

How would you describe Holling Hoodhood, Mr. Hoodhood, and Heather Hoodhood in The Wednesday Wars?

Holling and Heather Hoodhood are brother and sister to each other, and Mr. Hoodhood is their father. Heather is the older sister to Holling, who is in seventh grade. I wish that I could say that the family dynamic in the story is great and that everybody loves each other, but that is not the case. Mr. Hoodhood is a terrible father figure. He barely shows any interest in his kids. The interest that he does show is almost always negative. He is basically incapable of saying a kind word to Heather, and he generally speaks to Holling about school to make sure that Holling is being good in Mrs. Baker's class so that he can hopefully win the architecture contract that her family is giving to one of two firms.
In Mr. Hoodhood's defense, Heather is a rebellious daughter in many ways. The picture that Holling presents paints Heather as a stereotypical hippie, a flower child. She has little to say to Holling that could be considered loving or supporting; however, that doesn't stop Holling from rescuing her on two different occasions. His devotion to her eventually breaks up her icy exterior, and readers are left with the impression that they will support each other through thick and thin for the rest of their lives.
Holling is a great character. He's hard-working and determined, but he's not perfect. He's afraid of bullies just like any other seventh grader, and he just can't figure out how the entire girl/girlfriend thing works. He is a steady and dependable person, and I think that shines through more than any other characteristic. It's why he saves Heather those two times. It's why his two best friends and Meryl Lee like him so much, and it is why he and Mrs. Baker end up being so supportive of each other. Holling absolutely could have gone the apathetic route with Mrs. Baker's Shakespeare thing, but Holling essentially doesn't know how to do anything less than his best. He eventually learns to love both Shakespeare and his teacher all while becoming a better friend and brother to the people that are closest to him.

What kinds of hardships do the dogs endure?

Life on the trail is incredibly hard for dogs and humans alike. For one thing, it's absolutely freezing cold, and even the dogs' thick fur can't completely protect them from the biting wind and driving snow. Pulling a heavy sled is hard enough at the best of times, but in the depths of winter it's especially punishing, even for a skilled, hard-working animal like Buck.
Aside from the weather, the dogs have to endure attacks by wolves and wild dogs. These animals are ferocious; even worse, they're fearless. When a pack of wild dogs descends upon the team, Buck is forced to fight for his very life. To make matters worse, he also has to fend off his vicious rival Spitz, who takes advantage of all the chaos and confusion to settle scores with his old enemy.
Disease also takes its toll. After being bitten by a wild dog, it's hinted that Dolly, one of the trail dogs, contracts rabies and goes completely insane. Whatever the precise cause of her insanity, she chases and attacks Buck before being shot dead by Francois. For the dogs of the trail, it really is a case of survival of the fittest, the Darwinian message at the core of the story.

Who does Cacambo represent in the real world of Voltaire?

In Voltaire’s Candide, the character Cacambo is Candide’s servant or valet. Cacambo travels with Candide through El Dorado in South America (where they become separated), later reenters the action in Venice, and then helps his master travel to Turkey. His status as Candide’s “servant,” however, is complicated, because he is later enslaved by Sultan Achmet. Near the story’s end, Candide pays “a ransom” to free Cacambo. In relation to Voltaire’s writings about blacks and Africans, Cacambo occupies an ambivalent space.
The character Cacambo serves as a foil to Candide. Practical and cunning, he stands in contrast to Candide’s naivete and optimism. One of the book’s most well-known lines is Candide’s answer to Cacambo’s question, “What is this optimism?”

“Alas!” said Candide, “it is the madness of maintaining that everything is right when it is wrong.”

In numerous places, it is Cacambo’s pragmatism that saves the two of them from dire endings, such as when they encounter cannibals who want to make a meal of them. As a loyal servant and frequent interpreter with useful skills, Cacambo is a positive figure. In his cunning, deceit, and manipulation, however, he also corresponds to stereotypes of non-white people that abound in the literature of the time.
Cacambo’s name and initial description in Chapter 14 indicate that he is a person of color.

Candide had brought such a valet with him from Cadiz, as one often meets with on the coasts of Spain and in the American colonies. He was a quarter Spaniard, born of a mongrel in Tucuman; he had been singing-boy, sacristan, sailor, monk, pedlar, soldier, and lackey. His name was Cacambo, and he loved his master, because his master was a very good man.

In Chapter 26, he is described as “a man whose complexion was as black as soot.”
It was long assumed that Voltaire made up the name, and that it has plays on words associated with elements of his identity. One question is whether the name is pronounced as “kakambo” or “kasambo.” “Caca” is the Spanish slang word for “feces,” so including that element could indicate baseness and low status. Another possible association is with “cacao” and the brown color of chocolate, or “cacahuate,” Spanish for peanut, a food then associated with Africans. If pronounced with the initial s sound, however, the name connotes “sambo” (or “zambo”), Spanish for a mixed-race person; in the eigteenth-century casta racial hierarchy system, sambo was the term for a person with one African and one Native American parent.
The questions of race and slavery are clearly associated with Cacambo’s character and aspects of Voltaire’s life and nonfiction writings. The optimism line is delivered following a speech by a mutilated “negro” slave they encounter, who denounces the barbarities of slavery. Voltaire wrote against slavery in his Essay on the Blacks and the Spirit of the Nations. However, he did not see people of African heritage as equal to Caucasians, in part because he believed they descended from different ancestors (polygenesis) and wrote that they were less intelligent.
Source: Kjørholt, Ingvild Hagen (2012). Cosmopolitans, slaves, and the global market in Voltaire's Candide, ou l'optimisme. Eighteenth-Century Fiction, 25 (1): 61-84.
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/485730/pdf

Write a post of no less than 500 words in which you address the following: How does socialization lead to the reproduction of inequalities in the social structure? Answer this question by drawing on the article by Annette Lareau. Make sure you make reference to the evidence the author uses and provide specific, concrete examples to substantiate your points.

Socialization leads to the reproduction of inequalities in the social structure by influencing the behavior of its participants. When conducting one of her studies, Lareau discovered that previous researchers never explained how family life leads to advantages for children. She also observed that prior to her research, no attention was offered to meaning of events or how different family settings may affect the execution of a task. Her research aimed to get rid of these gaps.
Lareau discovered that poor and working-class folks practice natural growth parenting. This style of parenting lets the kids do whatever they want without any close monitoring. The children are allowed to play with their friends and sleep over if they want to. They can play outside for as long as they want or interact with those they see fit. They can engage in sports if they want to; no one will force them. They can watch TV as long as they are done with the chores. All these activities are supposed to contribute toward the natural development of the child. However, since the parent fails to ask the child for his or her opinion, the growth is limited. The parent only gives the child orders and expects them to follow without reason.
On the other hand, middle-class parents take a more interactive approach to their child's development—also known as concerted cultivation. These parents drive their children to soccer games, band practice, and any healthy activity the parent might have encouraged the child to do. The parents pay close attention to the needs of their children and advise them where necessary. They keep up with their child's grades and motivate the child to perform better. Since parenting is interactive, these parents don't force their children to do what they don't like. They will encourage the child to pursue what they feel is best for them. These parents also don't give their children punishments without a reason. The child is told what they did wrong and asked to choose an appropriate punishment.
Due to the way both sets of kids are raised, they grow up with different values and beliefs. The child raised through natural growth parenting can either grow up bad or good. If they interacted with the wrong crowd, their actions might not be so pleasant. They may devalue themselves and believe that they don't deserve the good things in life because they were born poor. Alternatively, if they interacted with the right people, they might be more open to change and personal development.
On the other hand, a kid raised through concerted cultivation is more confident in their abilities and understands the importance of interacting with others for personal development. They are usually not afraid to try out new things. These children are also not afraid of failure. As a result, they grow up knowing what they want to do with their lives. More often than not, they become more successful than their parents and retain the same social class or go a notch higher.
https://eclass.uoa.gr/main/login_form.php?next=%2Fmodules%2Fdocument%2Ffile.php%2FECD267%2Flareau%2520invisible%2520inequality.pdf

Compare and contrast a 9 year old boy now vs a 9 YO during the world war vs Bruno

John Boyne presents Bruno in a highly unusual situation, living at a concentration camp as part of the director's family. It is very unlikely today that employees' families would live on the premises at prisons and detention centers.
During World War II, thousands of children were imprisoned, like Shmuel. In the Nazi-run camps, many children died; often their deaths resulted from illness, but at camps like Auschwitz, children were killed. Outside of being deliberately imprisoned, during the war thousands of children were left orphaned, separated from their families, and wounded; many became refugees in another country.
Although conditions have improved, many children worldwide do live in refugee camps and detention centers. Children are sometimes forced to be combatants. The situation is especially bleak is war torn countries such as Syria.
UNICEF, the United Nations agency concerned with children, actively works with national and international agencies to improve conditions in places where children are incarcerated or detained.
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/children-during-the-holocaust

https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/hitting-rock-bottom-childrens-suffering-syria-its-worst

How does Elie Wiesel's Night explore dehumanization?

Night explores the concept of dehumanization through the narrative about the degradation the Jews face at the hands of their captors and each other. In the memoir, Elie relates the circumstances of his situation once he and his father leave the ghetto at Sighet, and he describes how, in an instant, they went from being treated like people to being treated like animals.
The Jews are loaded onto cattle cars, packed with nearly 80 people together, to be shipped toward Auschwitz. The close quarters are not considered that bad until the train crosses over the Hungarian-Czech border. Once clear out of Hungary, the pretense of “relocation” is lost, and the Jews find themselves not only being treated like animals but actually called animals by the Nazi soldiers. In chapter 2 Wiesel writes,

The Hungarian lieutenant went around with a basket and retrieved the last possessions from those who chose not to go on tasting the bitterness of fear. "There are eighty of you in the car," the German officer added. "If anyone goes missing, you will all be shot, like dogs."

The German officer telling the Jews that they will be shot like dogs is the first indication that they are no longer going to be treated as human beings. That treatment continues well into their journey into Auschwitz, where babies are shot, women are murdered, and the dead are piled into mass graves. Anyone who is too sick to work is almost immediately killed, showing that the Jews's only worth in the eyes of the Nazi regime lies in their ability to work.
The dehumanization progresses rapidly in the memoir, and it is powerful—so powerful that it eventually begins to work on the Jews themselves. They ultimately dehumanize each other to the point that they mistreat each other. It isn’t a knock against the Jews in the story—they are forced by their circumstances to fight to survive—but it does speak to the power of the dehumanization the Nazis have created in the concentration camps.
Elie’s description of the way the dead are treated shows how desperation has driven the Jews to dehumanize each other,

The living were glad. They would have more room. Volunteers began the task. They touched those who had remained on the ground. "Here's one! Take him!" The volunteers undressed him and eagerly shared his garments. Then, two "gravediggers" grabbed him by the head and feet and threw him from the wagon, like a sack of flour.

The story of how the bodies are disposed of shows the mindset of survival in the camps: the Jews who survive don’t have it in them to care about others, especially those who are dead, because they have to worry about themselves. The Nazis, in treating the Jews like they are less than human, ultimately push them to act like they are less than human—a theme that Elie struggles with through the closing section of the book.

Night shows us what happens when human beings are systematically stripped of their dignity. There are numerous examples of this in the story: horrific episodes where the Jewish prisoners have been so thoroughly dehumanized that they can do nothing but engage in an animalistic struggle for daily survival.
One such example comes in the form of Elie's feelings towards his father. As one would expect, Elie dearly loves him, but, over the course of the book as his father becomes progressively weaker, Elie starts to see him as a burden. When the Nazis subject Elie's father to savage beatings, Elie feels nothing—his normal human emotions have been numbed by the day-to-day horrors of life in the camp. Perpetually riven with hunger, all that Elie can think about as the Nazis beat his father is where his next meal is coming from.
Like all the other prisoners, he has been reduced to the status of an animal by the systematic barbarism of his German captors.

Elie Wiesel explores the topic of dehumanization throughout his novel by illustrating the various means of oppression and violence that are inflicted upon the Jewish prisoners by the ruthless Nazis during the Holocaust as well as the hostility and brutality that takes place among the prisoners.
Wiesel vividly depicts dehumanization by illustrating the atrocities that were committed throughout the Holocaust—commonplace in each of the concentration camps. The Nazis practiced dehumanization by referring to the Jewish prisoners as numbers, tattooing them like cattle, taking their personal possessions, and withholding any sympathy for them. The Nazis mercilessly beat Jewish prisoners, used infants as target practice, publicly hanged individuals, pushed the prisoners to the brink of exhaustion, and refused to adequately nourish them.
Wiesel also examines dehumanization by portraying the violence and brutality that the Jewish prisoners exhibit on each other as a result of their desperate situation. Elie witnesses a young man purposely leave his father behind during a march to increase his chances of survival and also sees a son kill his father over a piece of bread. There is even a scene where Elie has to protect his father from being beaten to death by the other prisoners.
The shocking violence and dehumanization committed by the Nazis and (as a consequence) the violence and desperation exhibited by the Jewish prisoners alike illustrate the darker features of humanity and urge the reader to contemplate their own morality and human nature.

Wiesel's Night depicts a side of human existence that most would not want to witness. However, what Wiesel's work does is bring philosophy and ethics into the study of the Holocaust. The book is one of the most stinging repudiations of the Holocaust ever put onto paper. The moments in the book where the horror of the Nazis are on display remain some of the most compelling instances that seek to galvanize individuals to stand apart from the actions of the aggressors. However, where Wiesel is at his best is when he is able to explore the nature of dehumanization as not something that remained with the Nazis. Wiesel shows that the profound sadness of the Holocaust was how it dehumanized everyone. Perpetrator and target alike were rendered voiceless. In showing that both target and perpetrator are capable of inflicting pain upon others, Wiesel's work makes a very profound statement about who we are as human beings and what we must overcome in order to avoid being part of the machinery of evil. In reading Night, one must be ready to accept the rigorous challenge of self-reflection regarding the world and one's place in it. This is what makes Night such an important book: in a world where voice is still being silenced both politically and personally, the work can be seen as even more sadly relevant.

What is the meaning of grim-death, doughty-in-battle, fate-cursed, & battle-grim based on how they are used in the excerpt of Beowulf?

While you don't mention which translation you are using, these phrases are all what are called kennings. A kenning is a two-word adjective prominent in Anglo-Saxon poetry. They give a distinct terseness to the poetic line and conjure a powerful image in the readers' mind. These do the same thing, all enhancing the sense of the intensity of battle.
The poem focuses on Beowulf's destiny as a warrior who serves as a saving force for Hrothgar's court and then, later, the Geats. He is destined to fight monsters like Grendel, Grendel's mother, and the dragon, who are "fate-cursed." Beowulf is fated to defeat Grendel, though he is himself fated to die in battle with the dragon. A destiny shapes these warriors' lives and cultures, and they must accept their fates with courage and loyalty to king or forever be labeled inglorious.
"Doughty" is a word that means fearless, and knowing the reality (or grimness) of death and its finality requires this type of courage and resolution. Rather than enter battle in a spirit of adventure and longing for fame, the poem's warriors grimly encounter their foes and their potential death, knowing that failure to do so is failure to uphold the foundations of the community, which is based on the comitatus, or a code of loyalty, bravery, and generosity.
In the end, the Geat warrior's unwillingness to face the dragon leaves them leaderless and subject to attack by other tribes, who will no longer fear the Geats.

Outline the themes in The Lion and the Jewel.

One of the play's most important themes is the clash between tradition and modernity.
Lakunle prides himself on being a modern man, influenced by Western ideas to look down on what he regards as the superstitious barbarisms of traditional tribal culture. He blithely assumes that his relatively enlightened attitudes towards women will impress Sidi, but nothing could be further from the truth. Tradition still retains a powerful hold on tribal consciousness, even on those members of the tribe, such as women like Sidi, who tend not to do so well out of it.
The world outside the village may be changing, but inside the confines of the village things pretty much go on as they've always done. Here, wisdom and experience count for much more than abstract ideas of emancipation. That's why Lakunle is unable to make any headway in his quest for Sidi's hand in marriage. His attachment to modern Western values, be they ever so superficial, avail him nothing in a society still steeped in the old customs.

Why was the result of the pie contest a joke on Grandma Dowdel?

In the section of A Long Way from Chicago titled "The Day of Judgement," the joke is on Grandma Dowdel, because if she had not resorted to such a desperate measure as cheating at the county fair, she would have won the pie contest and, by extension, the biplane ride that she desperately wanted to gift to her grandson.
In the town pie-baking contest, the opponent that Grandma is up against is Rupert Pennypacker, who is widely regarded as the best home baker in the entire state. At the most opportune moment, Grandma switches the names on her's and Pennypacker's pie, which creates an ironic defeat for Grandma, as the pie she made was judged to be the best. Because of her interference, however, the award is given to Pennypacker.

At the county fair "Fruit Pies and Cobblers" competition, Grandma Dowdel cheats by switching her pie card with Rupert Pennypacker's. This way, she's dead certain that she will win first prize: a free ride in Barnie Buchanan's plane. Rupert has the reputation of being the best home baker in the whole of Illinois, so it's not surprising that Grandma Dowdel feels she has to resort to such desperate measures to win the contest.
As it turns out, however, the joke's on her. Grandma's home-made gooseberry pie wins the contest after all. But, because she already switched pie cards before the judging began, first prize is awarded to Rupert Pennypacker, not to her. Grandma has to make do with the second-prize red ribbon instead. If she hadn't cheated, she would've won the contest—and against the best home baker in Illinois, too.

I'm looking for analysis of Hayden White's "Content of the Form."

"Content of the Form" is a poem by Hayden White that examines and ponders the nature of authority in art and literature. The poem's thesis is that a particular artwork's meaning is dependent on the interpretation of a viewer or reader.
Art is similar to a communication feedback loop, in which the transmitter—which in this case is the artwork—and the recipient are symbiotic. The receiver gives meaning to the artwork or piece of literature, which is independent of the artist's personal interpretation, message, or intention.
The title itself is evident of Hayden White's thesis. The content of the form, or the meat of the artwork, is what is important in this feedback loop between artist and audience.
The poem is meant to challenge traditional notions of how art or literature is interpreted, thus debunking the old hierarchy which proposed that the artist's vision is the authoritative interpretation of an artwork.
https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/content-form

Why did Montag say he wanted to become a fireman?

After Montag meets his intuitive teenage neighbor, Clarrise McClellan, he begins second-guessing his occupation as a fireman and starts to analyze his meaningless life. On a routine fire call, Montag witnesses a woman commit suicide with her books and refuses to go into work the next day. Montag becomes completely jaded with his occupation and regrets becoming a fireman. When Mildred mentions that he should have thought about it before signing up to be a fireman, Montag says,

"Thought!...Was I given a choice? My grandfather and father were firemen. In my sleep, I ran after them" (Bradbury, 25).

Montag's response is significant and indicates that he never had a choice regarding his future occupation and simply conformed to his family's expectations by following in the footsteps of his father and grandfather. Montag comes from a long line of firemen, who supported the destructive institution and loyally served the authoritative government. As a child and adolescent, Montag anxiously awaited the opportunity to one day wear a fireman uniform and never thought about becoming anything else. Essentially, Montag was inspired by his father and grandfather to become a fireman. Despite his enthusiasm as an adolescent, Montag is beginning to experience a dramatic transformation and question his entire existence.

Montag came from a legacy of firemen. His father and grandfather were both firemen, and so he became one too. For many years, Montag enjoyed his job and was known for doing it well. However, after encountering the free-spirited Clarisse and witnessing the old woman who chooses to burn with her books, he rapidly begins to question his government's policies related to censorship and the limitation of free thought, as well his own role in enforcing those policies.
When he reveals his evolving perspective to his wife, she retorts that he should have thought of all that before becoming a fireman in the first place, and he says "Was I given a choice? My grandfather and father were firemen. In my sleep, I ran after them." Essentially, he never really "wanted" to become a fireman. In his highly conformist society, he just blindly entered the profession and fulfilled its duties because it was what was expected of him.

How is death perceived by Dickinson in this poem? Please cite many examples from her entire poem to illustrate her outlook on death?

Emily Dickinson offers significant subtlety in her short poems, and capturing the precise tone can be challenging, especially when she writes about death or mental illness. In this poem, the figure of Death begins as a personification of a gentleman who comes to call on the speaker. The first two stanzas seem almost flirtatious, as she "puts away / [Her] labor and her leisure" to go on what seems to be a Sunday drive, as would befit a couple courting.
The ride takes the couple past scenes of civic and natural life, befitting a casual drive that a courting couple might take on a Sunday afternoon.
In many Emily Dickinson poems, the final stanza offers a deepening of meaning and a complexity that adds nuance to the simple ballads her lyric poems seem to be. In this poem, we discover that the ride described happened long ago, and the speaker speaks from the grave. The horses heads are capitalized, and while typography can be elusive in a Dickinson poem, it seems to have intentionality. Here, the simple horses we might have envisioned while reading the poem take on a metaphysical quality, as transporters to an afterlife.
The urbane quality that Death seems to possess early on remains but takes on a chilling (yet not entirely unpleasant) quality. The surprise with which we find ourselves at the grave may be most disturbing of all, for the poem clearly introduced Death immediately. In that in-betweenness—between the naming of Death and the unfolding of the implications of the poem—lies the poem's power to provoke a response.