What is the "rising action" in "The Monkey's Paw"?

Rising action takes place between exposition (setting up the characters, setting, and situation of a story) and the climax (the point of highest dramatic tension). The rising action is all about building to the climax and how the conflict escalates to the final confrontation.
In "The Monkey's Paw," the rising action occurs when Mr. White ignores the sergeant-major's warnings about the monkey's paw and makes a wish on it anyway. This generates suspense, leaving the reader to wonder if the sergeant-major's warnings are legitimate and if horrible things will befall the family after Mr. White wishes for two hundred pounds.
When Herbert is killed at work and the Whites receive two hundred pounds as recompense, the tension escalates. Mrs. White goads her husband into wishing their son to return to life, setting the stage for the climax where this does appear to happen.

The rising action of a story is the way that the plot is established and developed, and the events of the rising action lead up to the story's climax. The plot of "The Monkey's Paw" is established with the arrival of the White family's old friend Seargent-Major Morris. He tells the family stories of his time abroad and eventually begins to talk about the monkey's paw that he says grants wishes—but only at a severe price—which was meant to teach people about the necessity of fate.
The family demands to see the paw, and Mr. White eventually takes it and pays Morris for it, despite Morris's protests. The family confers on what to wish for and settles on Herbert's plan to wish for the money they needed to pay off their house. The next day, Herbert dies at work, and the family receives the exact sum they asked for in the form of Herbert's life insurance. Mr. and Mrs. White are distraught and discuss bringing Herbert back with their remaining wishes, which they finally attempt.
All of these events and any other plot details contained between the first events of the story and the climax (the arrival of the unseen, late-night visitor) listed here can be considered rising actions.

Rising action can be defined as those events in a story that build suspense and increase the readers' interest. In "The Monkey's Paw" the rising action starts when Sergeant-Major Morris tells the Whites about the paw and how the fakir put a spell on it to grant three wishes. He further tells them that if those wishes are granted then unpleasant consequences will follow. This is what happens to those who defy the power of fate. Morris speaks from personal experience here, and as he doesn't want the Whites to succumb to the temptation of making three wishes on the paw, he throws it into the fire.
Yet, Mr. White retrieves the paw from the fire. This takes the rising action to the next level. Treating the monkey's paw as a harmless piece of mumbo-jumbo, the Whites proceed to make their first wish: to have the £200 they need to pay off their mortgage. Their wish is duly granted, but not in the way that they'd hoped. For their sudden windfall comes in the form of compensation paid out after their son Herbert dies in a workplace accident. At this point in the story, the suspense is building; we're anxious to know what happens next.
The next and final stage of the rising action comes when the Whites use the second of their three wishes to try and bring Herbert back from the dead. This will lead directly to the story's creepy climax.

How does being unable to read affect other aspects of people's lives?

Individuals can survive in some areas of modern life without learning to read; in fact, the value of universal, public literacy has only been widespread for the past 800 years or so, beginning with the end of the Middle Ages. Acceptance of illiteracy continued through the modern slave trade, when literacy was viewed as dangerous for slaves to have, a possible catalyst for organization and rebellion.
Today, one way in which illiteracy disadvantages people is by limiting the rate of learning. People who cannot read depend on the individuals they meet in person in order to acquire new knowledge through spoken discourse. In contrast, people who can read generally have access to libraries, search engines, encyclopedias, and other curated storage systems of knowledge.
Another way in which illiteracy impacts people is by inhibiting them from experiencing written stories that can help develop empathy. Written language exposes readers to the internal lives of others, demonstrating how they think differently yet arrive at analogous conclusions, values, and stories that expand one's own conception of what it means to be human. In an increasingly globalizing world, where people meet other people they would not have been able to meet even a generation ago, empathy is more vital than ever.

How would you factor and simplify the following: 6x^2(x^2 – 4)^2 – 5(x^2 – 4)^3

We are asked to factor and simplify 6x^2(x^2-4)^2-5(x^2-4)^3 :
First we factor out the common factor (x^2-4)^2 to get:
(x^2-4)^2(6x^2-5(x^2-4))
Working within the parentheses, we use the distributive property to get:
(x^2-4)^2(6x^2-5x^2+20)
(x^2-4)^2(x^2+20)
Now, x^2-4 is a difference of two squares and will factor further. On the other hand, x^2+20 is prime (irreducible) (at least in the real numbers*). Factoring, we get:
((x+2)(x-2))^2(x^2+20) or
(x+2)^2(x-2)^2(x^2+20) which is the result we seek.
* In the complex numbers, this further factors to:
(x+2)^2(x-2)^2(x+2sqrt(5)i)(x-2sqrt(5)i)
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PolynomialFactorization.html

Identify the author and the story from which the passage comes. Examine the most important or striking details of the passage itself. Depending on the passage, point out details on character and characterization, setting, conflict, style, and narrative point of view. Include a clear thesis statement that explains the importance of the passage in terms of the rest of the story. Depending on the passage, show how it contributes to theme, to character, to conflict, or to setting: "They were older when they married than most of their married friends; in their well-seasoned late twenties. Both had had a number of affairs, sweet rather than bitter; and when they fell in love—for they did fall in love—had known each other for some time. They joked that they had saved each other “for the real thing.” That they had waited so long (but not too long) for this real thing was to them a proof of their sensible discrimination. A good many of their friends had married young, and now (they felt) probably regretted lost opportunities; while others, still unmarried, seemed to them arid, self-doubting, and likely to make desperate or romantic marriages."

This passage is from the short story "To Room Nineteen" by Doris Lessing. It is important to note that this passage comes at the very beginning of the story. There is only one line before it:

This is a story, I suppose, about a failure in intelligence: The Rawlingses' marriage was grounded in intelligence.

Lessing has not yet given the first names of Matthew and Susan. All we know is that they are married and intelligent.
The passage focuses on their marriage. The only pronoun used is "they," not "he" or "she." Lessing is establishing the characters as a unified pair. They share a similar history, have the same opinions, and even use the same jokes. The passage is in third-person with a focus on this couple.
I think a striking aspect of the passage is that while it seems to be sweet and romantic when discussing this perfect relationship, the whole thing has a practical sense to it as well. Lessing uses repetition to clarify for us that they indeed "fell in love," which shows us that this is an important detail. While the characters are practical and sensible, they genuinely loved each other when they married. The phrase that stands out as showing their practicality over sentimentality is "their sensible discrimination."
This passage does not directly introduce a conflict, but when I read it I wonder if their relationship will stay as strong as it is. (A "failure" is brought up in the first line of the story, and after reading the whole story, we know the problems that arise that lead to the tragic ending, but in a passage analysis we can only look at the selected text). That being said, since the passage seems to present them as a perfect couple, it makes me wonder what (if any) their shortcomings are.

What happens in Canto XI of Dante's Inferno?

Canto XI
Dante and Virgil have traveled past the burning tombs of Frederick II and the Ghibelline Cardinal. The stench emanating from the forever flaming bodies is horrendous. Dante and Virgil duck under the cover of one of the stones, trying to take cleaner breaths. Dante sees that the inscription on the tomb reads:

“Pope Anastasius I hold,
Whom out of the right way Photinus drew."

These two men are, in Dante’s estimation, the worst of the arch-Heretics. Phonitus was a Deacon in the Church of Constantinople (the Greek Orthodox Church). Phonitus believed, and led Pope Anastasius to believe, that Christ’s birth was not miraculous at all; rather, he argued, Jesus was the product of natural human sexual relations. Additionally, Phonitus tricked the pope into giving him communion, an act strictly forbidden for those outside the Roman Catholic faith.
Virgil tarries, and Dante urges his guide to move on; but Virgil wants to prepare his charge for the horrors that are to come. The next circle will house the Violent. Inside the large seventh circle are three sub-circles. The largest outer ring is reserved for conducted violence against people or property. These murderers and bandits are submerged in a river of blood:

A death by violence, and painful wounds,
Are to our neighbour given; and in his substance
Ruin, and arson, and injurious levies;
Whence homicides, and he who smites unjustly,
Marauders, and freebooters, the first round
Tormenteth all in companies diverse."

The next inner circle imprisons those who have committed violence against themselves: the suicides and the squanderers:

"Man may lay violent hands upon himself
And his own goods; and therefore in the second
Round must perforce without avail repent
Whoever of your world deprives himself,
Who games, and dissipates his property,
And weepeth there, where he should jocund be."

The final circle is exclusively for the tormenting of those who had committed crimes against God or nature. These sinners were, in life, the blasphemers, the sodomites, and the usurers. These shades exist on a plain of sand, which eternally erupts underneath them in excruciating flames:

"Violence can be done the Deity,
In heart denying and blaspheming Him,
And by disdaining Nature and her bounty.
And for this reason doth the smallest round
Seal with its signet Sodom and Cahors,
And who, disdaining God, speaks from the heart.
Fraud, wherewithal is every conscience stung,
A man may practise upon him who trusts,
And him who doth no confidence imburse.
This latter mode, it would appear, dissevers
Only the bond of love which Nature makes;
Wherefore within the second circle nestle
Hypocrisy, flattery, and who deals in magic,
Falsification, theft, and simony,
Panders, and barrators, and the like filth.
By the other mode, forgotten is that love
Which Nature makes, and what is after added,
From which there is a special faith engendered.
Hence in the smallest circle, where the point is
Of the Universe, upon which Dis is seated,
Whoe'er betrays for ever is consumed."

In these verses, Dante is alluding to the biblical story of Sodom and Gomorrah, a city so morally evil that it was destroyed by God (Genesis 19:24-5). Cahors was a city in France, infamous for its usury. Usury is the charging of interest on money lent. It is a sin because Adam’s punishment was to “live by the sweat of his brow” (Genesis 3:19). Since there is no labor involved in collecting interest, medieval Catholics consider the practice sinful.
Virgil then tells Dante that when they get to the Eighth Circle, he will see those who are guilty of fraud, a sin almost every human commits. These sinners include those who had been practicers of

“Hypocrisy, flattery, and who deals in magic,
Falsification, theft, and simony,
Panders, and barrators, and the like filth.
By the other mode, forgotten is that love
Which Nature makes, and what is after added,
From which there is a special faith engendered.
Hence in the smallest circle, where the point is
Of the Universe, upon which Dis is seated,
Whoe'er betrays for ever is consumed."

(Note: “Simony” is the practice of selling spiritual items. “Barrators” are those who continually file frivolous lawsuits.)
Dante understand the crimes of the condemned, but he asks Virgil why these souls are punished so much more harshly than those of the upper Hell. The elder poet reminds Dante of Aristotle work, Ethics and how sin is divided: "incontinence, malice, and insane bestiality.” (Note: “incontinence” means a lack of self control, particularly sexual, but also gluttony, wrath, and sullenness; “malice” means the fraud previously described; “insane beastiality” refers to all the acts of violence also discussed previously.)
Of these three, incontinence is the least serious although, of course, it still merits punishment. All of these sinners pay their eternal debt in upper hell. The remainder, the most serious, offenses, are housed below.
Dante understands everything except for the harsh judgment against usury. Virgil explains that the man who thwarts honest work not only cheats his customer, but shows his disdain in real work:

“the usurer takes another way,
Nature herself and in her follower
Disdains he, for elsewhere he puts his hope.”

Time is passing. Virgil notices the changing constellations and tells Dante they must leave the tortured souls of Circle Six behind them.

How were the Chesapeake colonies created?

The Chesapeake colonies (Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) were founded primarily by white, English, male settlers. The first colony of Jamestown (in the Virginia region) was established in 1607 and was the first settlement among all of the 13 colonies. It was sponsored by King James, who granted a charter to the Virginia Company to settle the region (by means of appointing a governor and other officials) and identify raw materials to be sent back to England. Maryland was given to a man named Sir George Calvert by Charles I, who established an enclave for Catholics. The Chesapeake colonies were primarily rural, and the rural classes were primarily wealthy Catholic landowners.
New Jersey and Pennsylvania were founded by Quakers, who were considered to be dissenters by the English Protestants because they believed they could communicate with God directly without the mediation of a preacher. The New Jersey area was ruled by the Dutch before the English took over. William Penn, founder of Pennsylvania, sought to establish a refuge for Quakers in the land given to him by Charles II (as repayment for a family debt).

How is Hamlet melancholic?

Scholars who believe that melancholy is Hamlet’s tragic flaw believe that Hamlet “thinks too much” and this “thinking too much” makes Hamlet excessively sad and thoughtful. Ornstein is famous for naming this particular tragic flaw. Just as the long soliloquy that is considered Hamlet’s “to be or not to be” speech can be considered evidence of inaction, it can also be submitted as evidence of melancholy. Shakespeare loved soliloquies. They are found in every single one of his plays. Many scholars consider Hamlet’s “to be or not to be” speech as the most important, existential, and metaphysical soliloquy of all time. It is here that Hamlet weighs the major advantages and disadvantages of being alive. Many scholars conclude that Hamlet is contemplating suicide. (I must include here, though, that there are scholars who disagree and think Hamlet is simply contemplating his own lack of action through thought, which may also lend to Hamlet’s tragic flaw of melancholy.) The entire soliloquy is Hamlet giving his reasoning (to himself and the audience) for contemplating that suicide. Hamlet makes the case that this world is full of sorrow and pain. Hamlet further muses that this suicide is actually “devoutly to be wished," but Hamlet stops his suicide because of his fear of the afterlife. If Hamlet considers death “sleep,” then he is worried about what happens in the “dream” for the soul who kills itself. A bit of background on Hamlet’s melancholy here is that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the sin of taking one’s own life is one of the most serious sins and cannot be forgiven, leading the soul directly to hell (except in the case of desperate, immediate, and final forgiveness in the moments before death). A full forty lines of soliloquy are devoted to Hamlet contemplating this grim idea. Can you think of a more melancholic subject? The scholars who believe this soliloquy has been misplaced and that it isn’t about suicide at all but rather about “troubles of turning thought into action” also give a perfect explanation for the tragic flaw of melancholy.
Let’s look at some more specifics from the speech to point to more melancholy. In lines 85-89, “Thus the native hue of resolution / Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought, / And enterprises of great pitch and moment, / With this regard their currents turn awry, / And lose the name of action." How is this melancholy? Well, Hamlet is convinced that “the native hue of resolution” is being “sicklied ‘o’er with the pale cast of thought.” Some point to the idea that here Hamlet names his flaw when he says “the pale cast of thought.” That is melancholy. Of course, you add the “lose the name of action” idea and you have fodder for the flaw of inaction. Therefore, this quote can be used to prove either flaw. Even if you lean toward the inaction flaw here, you can’t deny that the reason behind his inaction is contemplation of suicide or sad musings on the afterlife or thoughts about esoteric wisdom or the random gyrations of the mind.
Leaving the contemplation of suicide and looking at Act IV, Scene 4 because here is yet another soliloquy that provides ample evidence for the flaw of melancholy. All one needs to do is look at the precise first lines: "How all occasions do inform against me / and spur my dull revenge!" Although this line can be used (to a lesser extent) to prove the flaw of inaction, what is important here is that what Hamlet is constantly doing is precisely “thinking” about acting, while not actually doing so. Now we have Hamlet again naming his flaw, or at least his condition: "A thought which, quarter'd, has but one part wisdom / And ever three parts coward." In other words, Hamlet’s thoughts are mostly cowardice, and only one quarter intelligence.
Here are some more of Hamlet’s words to consider in regards to melancholy: "I do not know / Why yet I live to say 'This thing's to do,' / Sith I have cause, and will, and strength, and means / To do't." It is a wonder that Hamlet can repeat the exact same thing again and again. Hamlet is revealing (again) how he has the motive to do what he needs to do (avenge his dad). How melancholic. Yet again, saying the same thing in different words: The "tender prince, / Whose spirit with divine ambition puff'd, / Makes mouths at the invisible event, Exposing what is mortal and unsure / To all that fortune, death , and danger dare." Now Hamlet is talking about actually having “divine ambition” to do what he needs to do even though it is dangerous. He is standing and talking: idle again.
Let’s look at yet another: "Rightly to be great / Is not to stir without great argument, / But greatly to find quarrel in a straw / When honour's at the stake." Here it is honor that is at stake, but again it is Hamlet simply talking about that honor and not acting on it. This particular quote requires a bit more explanation. If “honour’s at the stake” and your dad has his life taken by your uncle, it would be important for the son to kill that uncle out of honor. “Stir” without any delay, and not finding “quarrel in a straw” (even if it’s one of his father’s lands) so that there isn’t anything getting in the way of what needs to be done. As a reader, you will notice that a support is better used for the flaw of melancholy (as opposed to inaction) if Hamlet doesn’t really have an opportunity to act at that moment (such as when Claudius is praying).
How about this example: "How stand I then, / That have a father kill'd, a mother stain'd, / Excitements of my reason and my blood, / And let all sleep." Hamlet is basically saying, “Here I stand, again not acting, even though my mom is sinful and my uncle killed my dad and, yet, I let it all go (or ‘sleep’) by not acting.” Another moment when Hamlet doesn’t really have an opportunity to act, but stands deep in thought is in Act IV when he says, after another grand soliloquy, “O, from this time forth, / My thoughts be bloody, or be nothing worth!” This line is particularly interesting because Hamlet talks about how important it has been, even before this, to get on the ball and avenge his dad, and yet he still stood around talking. In fact, he continues to stand around talking now. Does Hamlet need to clear his conscience yet again before acting? Interesting that he says only his “thoughts” will be bloody. That makes me laugh, actually. Has he been listening to himself talking? His whole point is that honor requires more than just bloody “thoughts.” It requires action.
As a final thought, I would like to assert that almost any of Hamlet’s soliloquies could be use to show the tragic flaw of melancholy. Hamlet is always thinking and talking to himself about those (often sad) thoughts. Therefore, as a researcher of this topic, any soliloquy could be used as support for melancholy as the tragic flaw.