How can I compare and contrast The Crucible and Macbeth?

Arthur Miller's The Crucible and Shakespeare's Macbeth share similar themes and are loosely based on historical events and figures. Arthur Miller's play is based on the Salem witch trials, which took place in seventeenth century New England. Shakespeare's Macbeth is named after the historical King of the Scots, who defeated Duncan I and reigned from 1040–1057 A.D. While both playwrights were greatly influenced by historical figures and events, they used artistic license to distort facts in order make their works more entertaining and dramatic. Both playwrights also incorporate supernatural elements and witchcraft into their plays. Arthur Miller's The Crucible focuses on the hysteria throughout the town of Salem concerning the fear of witchcraft while Macbeth is influenced into making fatal decisions based on the prophecies of the Three Witches. Both John Proctor and Macbeth are also considered tragic heroes, whose inherent character flaws lead to their demise.
Despite the many similarities between both plays, Arthur Miller's The Crucible allegorically represents Senator McCarthy's "witchhunt" for communist sympathizers in the 1950s. In addition to the fact that Macbeth is not an allegorical play, the settings, plot, and motivation of each character are completely different in The Crucible and Macbeth.

Did George do the right thing? What other options did he have?

At the climax of "Of Mice and Men," John Steinbeck places the novel's lead characters Lennie and George in a suspenseful, no-win scenario. When considering whether George did the "right" thing, we have to look at the scene from various perspectives. Steinbeck's narrative makes the reader directly face ethical dilemmas with no clear correct or conscientious answer.

Lennie, a grown man with the intellect and maturity of a child, experiences the world with wonder, curiosity, and sometimes confusion. Throughout the novel, George looks after Lennie as if he were a close family member. The two men have a shared dream of someday owning a farm together, and George leads them from one ranch to another to find work during the lean times of the American Great Depression.

Their dream begins to get closer to reality as others on Curley's ranch learn of the men's plan and offer help and money if they can also join them in their endeavor. It's at this point in the novel where George begins to get more comfortable, lowers his guard, and decides to leave Lennie on his own at the ranch for a day.

Lennie, who loves soft and beautiful things like rabbits, has become fascinated by Curley's beautiful and aloof wife. While George is away at town, she attempts to befriend Lennie and lets him stroke her hair. However, she suddenly becomes afraid of his strength and to get away from Lennie. Panicking himself, Lennie accidentally breaks her neck. Knowing that he's "done a bad thing," Lennie flees to wait for George at their safe meeting spot--one of their former campsites.

When George learns of what has happened, he immediately goes to look for Lennie. When he finds him alone at the meeting spot, he begins to recount the story of their shared dream of owning a farm together where George could tend the fields and Lennie would take care of and pet the rabbits.

In this moment, Steinbeck places the reader in the middle of an ethical dilemma: what is the best way for George to protect Lennie now that others almost certainly want him dead? Having been Lennie's friend and protector for so long, and knowing the seriousness of Lennie's offense, George knows that Curley and the others will likely be cruel and malicious. George does the only human thing he can imagine: he kills Lennie before anyone else can catch him, torture him, and then murder him.

By killing Lennie, George also knows that he is extinguishing a very large piece of himself. Their shared life and dreams are now extinguished. In this spirit, the judgement of what is "right" and "wrong" in this scenario are left up to the reader to determine.

While it can never be considered right to kill anyone, sometimes it’s necessary, such as in a war situation, or if someone attacks you or your family and there’s no realistic alternative to using lethal force. On balance, one would have to say that George was placed in a similar situation with regards to Lennie. George vowed to Lennie’s Aunt Clara that he’d take care of him, and by killing Lennie, George thinks that’s exactly what he’s doing. Although Lennie didn’t actually mean to kill Curley’s wife, and despite the fact that he has the mental capacity of a child, it’s almost certain that he’ll be convicted of murder. And at that time and in that place, that would have meant the death penalty for Lennie. So although we cannot in any way condone George’s actions, it could reasonably be argued that he didn’t have much choice in the matter.

Gandhi believed that man can achieve reform through nonviolent means. How did Gandhi demonstrate this belief?

Gandhi demonstrated his belief in reform through nonviolence by a lifetime of nonviolent political protest that began when he faced racial discrimination in South Africa. He is especially known, however, for organizing nonviolent actions to oppose British rule in India. He believed that nonviolence was key to achieving Indian self-rule.
In 1915, he led a nonviolent protest against high taxes on land in India. In 1930, he led the Dandi Salt March, another nonviolent action, to protest the British salt tax. In 1942, Gandhi again used nonviolent tactics to advocate for Indian independence from British rule.
Gandhi lived his faith in nonviolence through training himself and others in the spiritual discipline of satyagraha, a term that means "the force of truth" or "truth as force." It is based on the idea of speaking and acting out of truth and love. Gandhi insisted that his followers spend time on his ashram being trained in satyagraha before they joined him in nonviolent resistance. He knew that people who lacked this spiritual discipline were far too likely—as is only natural—to respond violently to violence. He knew that responding violently, however, would play into his opponent's hands and divert attention from the message of he wished to convey.
Martin Luther King studied Gandhi's tactics and also had his followers trained in nonviolent resistance.
Gandhi did not simply speak or write about nonviolent protest; instead, he practiced it throughout his life and taught it to others. Although we live in societies that often believe that violence is the only solution to problems, Gandhi showed that another path could be highly effective.

In the poem "Cold as Heaven" by Judith Ortiz Cofer, write about the way the images presented in this poem help create an overall message about death. You might also note the use of allusion (to Lent, and to the season of the year that Lent represents in this part of the world)—how does that play into the message of the poem? Carefully note the use of imagery and figurative language as it happens. Notice the way the poem makes you see things, hear things, remember things. Cold as Heavenby Judith Ortiz Cofer Before there is a breeze againbefore the cooling days of Lent, she may be gone.My grandmother asks me to tell heragain about the snow.We sit on her white bedin this white room, while outsidethe Caribbean sun winds up the worldlike an old alarm clock. I tell herabout the enveloping blizzard I lived throughthat made everything and everyone the same;how we lost ourselves in drifts so tallwe fell through our own footprints;how wrapped like mummies in layers of woolthat almost immobilized us, we could onlytake hesitant steps like toddlerstoward food, warmth, shelter.I talk winter real for her,as she would once conjure for me to dreamat sweltering siesta time,cool stone castles in lands far north.Her eyes wander to the window,to the teeming scene of childrenpouring out of a yellow bus, then to the bottledripping minutes through a tubeinto her veins. When her eyes return to me,I can see she’s waiting to hear moreabout the purifying nature of ice,how snow makes way for a body,how you can make yourself an angelby just lying down and waving your armsas you do when you saygoodbye.

The author of the poem “Cold as Heaven” uses various literary devices, including imagery and allusion, to bring out the message of death. The author uses imagery in different instances within the poem, as discussed below.
The author says, “her white bed, in this white room” when referring to her grandmother’s bed and room. In this statement, the author uses white as imagery to signify heaven. White signifies purity; hence, it is highly associated with heaven. The author also uses the phrase “the Caribbean sun winds up the world like an old alarm clock” to indicate that time was no longer a privilege that her grandmother enjoyed. The statement means that as the beautiful sun of the Caribbean went down, her grandmother’s life was also grinding to a halt, as death was beckoning. The old alarm clock is an image used by the poet to signify that time was up for her grandmother. The author further uses the imagery “enveloping blizzard” to show that there was no future for her grandmother, as her world was coming to an end. Further, to articulate the imminent death facing her grandmother, the author uses imagery in the phrase “wrapped like mummies,” which depicts how dead people were wrapped when being buried. In a bid to depict the deteriorating health of her grandmother, the author uses the statement “then to the bottle dripping minutes through a tube to her veins.” The imagery by the poet in this statement is meant to show that her grandmother was severely ill. The author alludes to Lent to show that death was imminent for her grandmother. Lent is an important period for all Catholics, who are expected to go for penance and cleansing in preparation for death. It is a period when the faithful are expected to prepare themselves so that they may gain passage into heaven. Thus, by stating that “before the cooling days of Lent, she may be gone,” the author means that her grandmother was on her deathbed. Therefore, the author uses imagery and allusion to create an overall message about the looming death of her grandmother.
https://www.austincc.edu/andreac/imagery

How did the United States military change between the Mexican American War and the Civil War?

The Civil War was a turning point in United States military history, both technologically and administratively. From that perspective, it represented a significant advancement over the war which preceded it.
Technologically, the Civil War was fought with more advanced firearms, which afforded vastly improved accuracy and range, and this resulted in much higher casualty rates. In addition, the difference in manpower requirements should be noted: according to PBS, in total, only about 100,000 soldiers served in the Mexican War for the United States. The Civil War required a much higher commitment of manpower: according to NPS, over 2.5 million soldiers served for the Union, as opposed to somewhere between 750,000 and over 1.25 million troops for the Confederacy.
In addition, we can note bureaucratic innovations. The Civil War was the first war for which the United States instituted conscription. By contrast, the Mexican War was fought with volunteers. We should also note that it was in the context of the Civil War that the income tax was introduced to pay for it. These examples suggest a significant degree of political centralization relating to U.S. politics in the Civil War.
https://www.nps.gov/civilwar/facts.htm

https://www.pbs.org/retired-site/

What was the Powhatan uprising?

At first, relations between the Powhatan tribe and the Jamestown settlers were fairly amicable. The Powhatan had helped the English when they were struck down by disease and starvation, providing them with food when the settlers' crops failed. However, as the English colonies expanded, relations between the two sides deteriorated rapidly. Newcomers treated the native tribes and their traditions with contempt, carving up their ancestral lands into lucrative tobacco plantations and destroying hunting grounds by driving away game.
The Powhatan responded to the wholesale destruction of their way of life via a full-scale uprising. They descended upon the English settlements, burning homes, destroying crops, and indiscriminately killing men, women, and children. Something like one-sixth of the entire settler population was wiped out in a single day of carnage.
The colonial authorities responded by arranging peace talks with the Powhatan. But it was all in bad faith, for the settlers' political and military leaders were hell-bent on revenge for the uprising. And revenge was indeed gained at a meeting between the settlers and the Powhatan, at which a number of tribesmen were killed by poisoned wine and others shot out of hand. Now in a much stronger position, the settlers were able to press home their advantage and continue ravaging Powhatan land, stealing the corn that the Powhatan had originally planted to provide food for themselves.

How does Conor McPherson use the ghost stories to explore the key themes of the play?

In the play The Weir, Conor McPherson uses supernatural stories to showcase the rich literary history and oral traditions of Ireland. Many of the tales the characters recount have an element of Irish folklore or mythology. In this sense, the stories conjure the past—both the history of Irish culture and personal histories.
The other subtext of the play is how the past "haunts" the characters. This is especially true for Valerie and Jack. Valerie tells the other people in the pub why she left Dublin. This is in line with the theme of escaping a past that haunts them. Likewise, Jack offers a non-supernatural story but states that it is about a haunting nevertheless.
McPherson does a brilliant job of using the context of ghost stories to create an analogy for the true message of his play. McPherson tells us that ghosts are not just supernatural beings, but "past lives" and memories as well.
http://dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/dergiler/13/1937/20301.pdf