Why does Jackson spend so much time describing every detail about the box?

The box is representative of one of the central themes of the story - tradition, and the danger of unthinkingly and unquestioningly continuing traditions without considering their true ramifications.  In describing the box, Jackson is exploring the nature of the village's tradition of having a lottery.  She says, "the black box...had been put into use even before Old Man Warner, the oldest man in town, was born...Mr. Summers spoke frequently...about making a new box, but no one liked to upset...tradition...the present box had been made with some pieces of the box that had preceded it...constructed when the first people settled down to make a village here...the...box grew shabbier each year...it was...splintered badly along one side...faded...stained".  If the box represents the lottery tradition, then it has been around for a long time, is in need of reevaluation, but no one gets around to, or dares, to really look at it or change it.

Approximately when does the story begin?

The story that seems to begin after an interesting divergent beginning (that goes into history about 10-20 years and almost 100 years ago...) sounds like it is 1932 or 1933. In the first line of the novel Scout tells us that this is the story about Jem being 13 and breaking his arm. We know that he's 13 by the end of the novel. By the end, Ewell looked for the job from the WPA (1935).

When the kids meet Charles Baker Harris (Dill), the introduce themselves and their ages. Scout's 6 or almost 6, and Jem is 10. The trial, is two summers later in which Atticus refers to 1935. This leads me to believe it starts exactly in the summer of 1933.

What does the name Faber mean in the book "Fahrenheit 451"?

The name itself comes from a word meaning someone who makes stuff. It comes from the Latin word meaning a craftsman.

In the afterword to one edition of the book, Ray Bradbury points out that Faber is part of the name of a pencil making company, Faber-Castell. But he says that he did not consciously name Faber after the pencil company.
He thinks that maybe unconsciously he did and that he named Montag after a paper company because pencils and paper equal writing equal books.

So it does not seem that Bradbury had anything in mind when he named the character.

What group are Americans fearful of today? Is this a reasonable fear?

The news of recent years seems to indicate that many Americans are fearful of powerful congressmen.  In his new book, In Search of Self-Governance, Scott Rasmussen observes that most Americans

have come to believe that the political system is broken, that most politicians are corrupt, and that neither major political party has the answers.

Rasmussen adds that the gap between the people who want to govern themselves and the politicians who want to rule them may be as large today as the gap between the colonies and England in the 1700s.

In a Fox News survey of just this month (March,2010), American voters expressed deep anxiety about the fragility of the economy of the United States as they face uncertainty about jobs and "the public sector spending."   Only 30% expressed confidence in the size and role of the government, while 65% (05% were noncommital) say that the government is now "too big" and "is restricting personal freedoms."

With the passage of The Patriot Act and the controversial issues about the health care bill, there are people who feel that their fears are reasonable about "personal freedoms."  Certainly, their anxieties about the economy seem fairly reasonable. Unemployment is very high in the majority of states, schools have been forced to close in cities such as Kansas City, MO, and Detroit, MI.  Some states in the U.S. are even insolvent; California's financial situation is dire.  The National Debt is "astronomical" and people worry that Congress and the President will not, and cannot, fix these problems.

What are the 5 most important events in the story and what are the conflicts?

1. Jonas has a wonderfully regulated life until his twelvth birthday at which point all Twelves receive their assignment. Jonas receives the job as the Receiver of Memory.

2. Right after Jonas receives his assignment he is ripped from his life with his friends and must endure the lonliness of his new assignment. He also learns that he must endure a great amount of pain to successfully do his assignment which also makes him fearful of what he about to embark on.

3. Jonas begins his job as the Receiver of Memory. The Giver begins to feed Jonas memories. He begins to feel angry with the people in his life because they are superficial in their emotions and desires. Jonas versus the community begins.

4. Jonas witnesses his father's job of "releasing babies" and this is where Jonas learns of the murder that takes place for no better reason than these children are not falling within the specifications that the society has deemed copacetic.This is where we find the conflicts of Jonas versus the community most prevalent.

5. Jonas escapes with his brother Gabriel (who is set to "released"). The ending is wrought with ambiguity where Jonas is concerned because it's difficult to say what actually happened to him.

What are the climax and resolution of "The Sniper"?

“The Sniper” is a story about the Irish Civil War by Liam O’Flaherty. The basic situation and rising action of the story shows a young sniper on a rooftop trying to outmaneuver another sniper on a nearby rooftop. As usual, in the rising action the main character struggles to solve a problem that intensifies and/or changes. In this story, the main character is wounded by the enemy and has to come up with a plan to defeat him.

The climax to the story occurs when the main character tricks the enemy into exposing himself and is able to shoot him dead. At this point, the main character has resolved his primary conflict. To the reader, the significant part of the story seems to be over. However, the writer has a surprise in mind for the reader at the end of the story. In the falling action, which occurs between the climax and the resolution, writers usually show the effect of the climax on the main character. In this story, the main character suddenly, and perhaps surprisingly, suffers remorse over his killing of the enemy. This prepares the reader for the bigger surprise to follow.

Resolutions often provide an ironic twist—something that is surprising or unexpected. In this case, after killing the enemy, the main character leaves the roof and climbs down to the street to look at who he has killed. When he turns over the dead body, he sees that he has killed his brother. This event underscores the nature of civil war—we often have to fight our neighbors or even our own family members.

What is the setting of the Scarlet Ibis?

"The Scarlet Ibis" is not one of those stories that has an obvious setting; however, there is overt reference to the setting throughout the story. In particular, the story occurs in and around the family home in Southern America, obviously in and around the surrounding countryside based on the author's descriptions. Remember, too, that setting is more than where a story takes place, and this story takes place during the "blighted" summer, with the hurricane bringing down trees and ruining crops." In addition, the devastation of the setting seems to foreshadow the destructive effects that Brother's pushing Doodle beyond his limits.

Be sure to check out the link below for more information on the setting and the specific effects of setting, especially Old Woman Swamp.

What happens to Kumalo as he tries to find a bus to Sophiatown? Who helps him find his destination?

I must admit that there isn't much to add to the first answer in that this is one of the first things that happens to Stephen Kumalo in the book (and we are not very far along in the plot when this happens).  Stephen Kumalo gets duped out of the money for bus fare, learns how to pay for the bus, and gets directions from an aged gentleman.

Stephen Kumalo is trying to figure out how to get to Sophiatown by bus, so he asks someone near to his own age to help him.  Unfortunately, the boy tells Kumalo that he will buy the ticket for Kumalo.  After Kumalo gives over the money, the boy (and the money) are gone!  The only thing the boy actually helped with was finding the bus station.

This is where Stephen Kumalo's first mentor, Mr. Mafolo, comes in.  He gives Kumalo some important information:  one can only pay bus fare when entering the bus.  He also helps Kumalo figure out which bus goes to Sophiatown.  In my opinion, it is the first time that Kumalo discovers this ultimate truth that he reveals later in the novel:

But there is only one thing that has power completely, and this is love. Because when a man loves, he seeks no power, and therefore he has power.

What is the structure and the poetic devices used in the poem 'London'?

In Blake's, "London," the speaker uses an adult narrator who is walking through the streets of London, a city that is not only the capitol of England, but the capitol of the British Empire.  The city, as the speaker experiences it, falls short of what it should be, in the speaker's (and Blake's, by extension) perception.

Humans suffer under charters, regulations, popular opinions and mores, which all lead to "mind-forged manacles." 

The speaker uses rhyme, with every other line rhyming in each stanza.  He uses repetition:  "In every..."; "charter'd"; "mark" and "Marks"; "cry."  He uses alliteration:  "And the hapless Soldiers sigh...."

The poem also uses allusion, referring to the "Chimney-sweepers" who appear in other poems in Blake's collections Songs of Innocence and Songs of Experience (in which "London" is included).

Rhyme, repetition, consistency of theme, and the linear walk through the streets of the narrator, create unity in the poem, with the speaker's opening of the final stanza leading to the final thoughts:

But most thro' midnight streets I hear....

And in the final stanza we see what sex and marriage in London lead to, what women having to sell themselves to survive leads to, and what marriage that must be maintained because society says so leads to. 

How did the World War 2 affect the lives of American women?

The most famous way in which WWII affected the lives of American women was by changing the sorts of jobs that were open to them.

As so many American men went off to war, all sorts of jobs that had previously been held only be men were unfilled.  Women started working in jobs like assembling airplanes and running power tools.  They did things like flying airplanes from factories to where the Armed Forces needed them.  Instead of being housewives and secretaries only, they started doing all these things.

Of course, women were also affected by having to deal with having husbands and sons off fighting and by having to cope with all the shortages and rationing that happened during the war.

Many women, like my grandmother and my wife's grandmother ended up moving around quite a bit to be near to where their husbands were stationed.  My grandmother then took my mother (an infant) and went to live with her parents when my grandfather got shipped overseas...

What's the difference between Zaroff and Rainsford in "The Most Dangerous Game"?

At the ending of this story, it is not clear that there really is a difference between Rainsford and Zaroff.  At least, some have said that the ending implies that Rainsford may just step into Zaroff's place and start hunting himself.

However, you can argue that they are different, especially if you don't believe this interpretation of the ending.  While Rainsford does like to hunt, he does nothing that shows that he is brutal like Zaroff.  Rainsford does set all sorts of traps for Zaroff, but that is completely self-defense.  Rainsford kills Zaroff, not in self-defense, but it's hard to imagine what else he should have done -- go to sleep and hope Zaroff wouldn't come kill him?

So, I think that Rainsford is not cruel and inhuman like Zaroff is.  Rainsford is only violent when he needs to be.

What are the advantages of having government debt?

The major advantage of having government debt is that it allows the government to do more things than it otherwise could.  This is similar to how borrowing money to buy my house allows me to do more things.  If government uses its debt wisely (by investing), this is fine.

A second advantage is that it allows government to be flexible in fiscal policy.  If a government has no debt, it has no way to stimulate the economy during a recession.

If a government has no debt, it also cannot show that it is credit-worthy.  If it suddenly needs to borrow, it will have to pay high interest rates.

"Whoever controls the past contols the present." What is the meaning of this phrase?

This phrase pertains to the importance of language in any society.  The party argues that reality is not fixed but can be changed simply by using words to do it. They can say 2 plus 2 equals 5 and make it true, just as they can say a certain person never lived--just eliminate all words written about that person and all evidence disappears. By controlling language, therefore, the party can control the past, make it whatever they want it to be or not be, and in doing this they will control the present as well.  Truth lodges itself in language rather than in a reality external to it.  This is what Winston desperately to refuse to believe, but under torture finally succumbs to the power of language controlling and shaping reality.

What do you think Goodman Brown has been forced to accept?

I think Brown has been forced to accept the dual nature of humans.  Prior to his little venture into the woods with Satan himself, Brown believes, as a devout Puritan, he is predestined for heaven.  He states that once he returns to faith he will cling to her skirts and follow her to heaven.  However, as soon as he enters the woods he begins to see that the people around him, who Brown thinks are virtuous, may not be so great.  For example, he learns that the devil knew his father and grandfather.  He also learns that three of the people he respects most, Goody Cloyse, Deacon Gookin, and the minister are also well acquainted with the devil.  He never is able to reconcile this and that is why he dies a bitter man.

It is interesting to note that Brown never accepts the duality of sin in himself.  He is able to see the sinful nature in others, but does he see it in himself?  Just look how easily he gets lured deeper into the forest, despite his declarations to turn back.  Eventually, he is even driven to rage and tear through the woods so that he is the most frightening thing in it.  Maybe if Brown had been able to recognize his own sins, he might have been able to accept the sins of others and lived a happier life.

According to Old Major what is the cause of all the animals' problems?

Old Major eloquently depicts the lot of animals. In chapter one, he says:

"Now, comrades, what is the nature of this life of ours? Let us face it: our lives are miserable, laborious, and short. We are born, we are given just so much food as will keep the breath in our bodies, and those of us who are capable of it are forced to work to the last atom of our strength; and the very instant that our usefulness has come to an end we are slaughtered with hideous cruelty."

In chapter two we see what actually happens in the farm. It is a confirmation of Old Major's ranting about the evils of humans. Jones and his men confirm all that Old Major said. 

"June came and the hay was almost ready for cutting. On Midsummer’s Eve, which was a Saturday, Mr. Jones went into Willingdon and got so drunk at the Red Lion that he did not come back till midday on Sunday. The men had milked the cows in the early morning and then had gone out rabbiting, without bothering to feed the animals. When Mr. Jones got back he immediately went to sleep on the drawing-room sofa with the News of the World over his face, so that when evening came, the animals were still unfed. At last they could stand it no longer."

After the philosophy called "Animalism" is formed, the animals point out that men are the only animal that only consumes and never brings forth anything. Here is what the animals say:

"Man serves the interests of no creature except himself. And among us animals let there be perfect unity, perfect comradeship in the struggle. All men are enemies. All animals are comrades."

The problem, therefore, according to Old Major is that man is selfish and only uses the animals for his own gain without any consideration. 

Can you summarize The Importance of Being Earnest?

The Importance of Being Earnest is a play, not a book.  But anyways, what happens in the play is that Jack Worthing has created a troublesome younger brother named Ernest, in order to escape the country.  He then becomes Ernest in the city.  Well, one day, he visits his friend Algernon in the city, so he can propose to Gwendolen, Algernon's cousin.  Algernon, coincidentally, is hosting a tea for Gwendolen and his Aunt Augusta (Lady Bracknell).  When they visit, Algernon busies Lady Bracknell so that Jack can propose to Gwendolen.  However, Lady Bracknell stops the proposal and interrogates Jack about his marriage prospects.  After finding out that Jack does not have a mother and a father, but was discovered in a handbag, she leaves aghast.  Gwendolen comes running back in to ask for Jack's information in the country so that she might visit him.  Algernon notes this and Act I ends.

In Act II, we're at Jack's country estate, where Cecily, his ward, is studying with Miss Prism, her tutor.  She hates studying so she sends off Miss Prism with Dr. Chasuble asap.  That's when Algernon arrives at the estate pretending to be Ernest. Cecily is ecstatic, since she's always dreamed of a romance with Ernest.  Jack returns to the country, after "killing off" Ernest, only to find out that Ernest has come to his estate (as Algernon).  He tries to kick Algernon out, but Algernon ends up getting engaged to Cecily instead.  Meanwhile, while the two guys try to set up a rechristening (to become Ernest), Gwendolen comes to the estate to look for Ernest (Jack).  She however runs into Cecily, and the two cat fight over tea over Ernest.  When the two guys show up, the two girls realize they have been deceived and run into the house as "sisters" while the boys eat muffins.

In Act III, everything gets resolved.  The two girls reunite with the two boys, and everything seems happy until Lady Bracknell comes running into the house demanding that Gwendolen goes back with her. She however, approves of Cecily for Algernon, which Jack disapproves, until he can marry Gwendolen.  They are at a standoff until Prism is mentioned, and Bracknell goes to find her and demands to know where the baby is.  This is when we find out that she lost the baby in a handbag at Victoria station at the Brighton line, cue Jack.  Jack goes running for the handbag, and we find out that he's Algernon's older brother and his real name is, of course, Ernest.

What is the conflict between women and men?

This is such a great play...the short story "A Jury of her Peers" is the same idea in a slightly different format.

Based on a true story, Glaspell wrote these works after reading a newspaper article reporting on a woman in the same situation.

Minnie Wright, a farmer's wife, is accused of killing her husband, John Wright, by strangling him with a rope.

The play begins with the Sheriff, the neigboring farmer, and the attorney at the farm with the Sheriff and farmer's wives.  They are there to gather evidence against Minnie.

The entire time the men are on stage, they are criticizing Minnie for her poor housekeeping skills, and the women who are there for their idle chatter about "trifles".  For example, the preserves, the quilt being knotted or quilted, and the birdcage.

They do not know it, but these seemingly unimportant details that the men poke fun at are the very motives and evidence for the murder of Minnie's husband.

The women discover what the men need to convict Minnie, but they decide to hide it based on their ability to understand what Minnie went through in her marriage to John.  They have judged her, found her guilty, but set her free since they believe she has suffered enough already.  In their eyes, perhaps John Wright did not deserve to die, but he is the guilty party for his abuse of his wife and the murder of her bird.

Does mass affect the value of the coefficient of friction?I have a lab that's due this Friday and its to find the coefficient of kinetic...

Coefficient of friction does not depend on the mass applied. it depends only on the area and nature of two surfaces in contact. However, the frictional force exerted does depend on the the normal force, which in turn may depend on the mass.

The coefficient of friction is defined as normal force divides by frictional force. Thus:

Coefficient of friction = Fnormal/Fapplied

As per the data of the experiment conducted by you, which you have given in your question, the values of Fnormal are:

(1) 2.67 (2.67) N, (2) 4.65 (2.86) N, (3) 6.60 (3.06) N, (4) 7.58 (3.16) N, and (5) 9.54 (3.36) N.

Please note some of the values of Fnormal calculated by you are not correct. Fnormal is equal to mass multiplied by acceleration due to gravity (9.81). I have given above the correct values with values calculated by you in parenthesis.

And the correspoding value of Fapplied are:

(1) 1.625 N, (2) 2.825 N, (3) 4.50 N, (4) 5.125 N, and (5) 6.5 N.

Based on these values we can calculate 5 different values of coefficient of friction as follows:

(1) Coefficient of friction = Fapplied/Fnormal = 1.625/2.67 = 0.61

(2) Coefficient of friction = Fapplied/Fnormal = 2.825/4.65 = 0.61

(3) Coefficient of friction = Fapplied/Fnormal = 4.50/6.60 = 0.68

(4) Coefficient of friction = Fapplied/Fnormal = 5.125/7.58 = 0.68

(5) Coefficient of friction = Fapplied/Fnormal = 6.5/9.54 = 0.68

What is Frederick Douglass's overal claim in The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass??What evidence does he use to support his claim?

Douglass' primary claim in his narrative is that a nation predicated upon individual freedom cannot allow slavery to exist.  His first hand accounts of the cruel nature of slavery and the thought processes of the various slave owners help to substantiate his assertion.  It is difficult to challenge the accuracy of the first hand account offered.  At the same time, Douglass' exploration of Christianity, and its hypocrisy when used to justify slavery, and the idea that the promise of freedom cannot be realized when a group of people are enslaved, helps to bolster the claims that slavery is America's "original sin."

Explain the use of imagery in Petrarch's "Sonnet II"?

Imagery is a broad term used to encompass all the images of imagination that a work of literature conjures up. These mental images may be evoked by literal descriptions of characters, settings or events (e.g., the white pique curtains blew in deep billows in the wind coming in the open window); by sensory descriptions (e.g., the cinnamon smell and the warm apple pie mixed with the jingling sound of the fluffy kitten's new bells made the room feel like Christmas despite the 112 degrees blasting heat through the window); by allusion (e.g., he was a regular Prince Arthur); by simile (e.g., the vanilla ice cream with fresh fruit was like a summer snow angel); or by metaphor (e.g., love is a rose, anger is a storm).

Since the metaphor Petrarch uses for the poem to make a comparison for Cupid is a military one (e.g., Cupid is ambushing and attacking the defenseless speaker), the imagery is of war and combat. There is sensory imagery like the tactile image in line 1, "make me smart" (hurt), and the ironic taste (gustatory) imagery in line 2, "And a delicious vengeance." Line 6 has the visual image of "bright eyes," while 7 and 13 have motion imagery with "pour'd" and "speed." There is also the imagery of allusion. Line 3 has "Love," which is an allusion to Cupid, the god of love, which is itself an allusion to the mystery of falling in love, or being ambushed and struck unawares with love. The military allusions include words like bow, coward, courage, defend, dread archery, dart, brisk attack, repel, and foe.

There is an example of simile imagery in lines 3 and 4 where Petrarch writes: "Love secretly took up his bow again, / As one who acts the cunning coward's part." Here, Cupid is compared to someone who is behaving like a "cunning" (i.e., deceiving) coward. In similes, like and as are used interchangeably. Petrarch also incorporates the imagery from literal description, like is lines 5 and 9. In line 5, the speaker's personified courage goes (or retires) to stand guard in his heart, while in line 9, the speaker describes being scared "at the sudden brisk attack."

How does Montresor set his plans of revenge?

Montresor carefully plans out his revenge against Fortunato. He chooses Carnival as the time to carry out the murder because he knows people will be drinking and having fun. He makes sure his servants will not be in the house, so no one will see Fortunato coming into his house. Montresor knows Fortunato is egotistical when it comes to judging good wine, so Montresor tempts him with the story of buying a cask of Amontillado. Once Montresor has lured Fortunato away, he is so nice to him, pretending to worry about his health so Fortunato won't suspect anything. He encourages Fortunato to drink as they walk through the catacombs so it will be easy to chain him to the wall. Building the brick wall insures that no one will find Fortunato even if anyone suspects that Montresor might be involved. There truly is a method to Montresor's madness because he's telling his story fifty years later, and he never gets caught.

Why did the Lyte family return to Boston soon after visiting their country house in Milton? Describe Merchant Lyte's condition.it is in johnny...

I think that the answer you are looking for is early in Chapter 8. In Chapter 7, the Lytes go out to Milton.  But in Chapter 8 they come hurrying back to Boston.  They have to hurry because a mob of Patriots has attacked them and is chasing them.  The Sons of Liberty knew that Merchant Lyte was a prominent Tory and they had been hoping that he would come out to Milton so they could attack him.

Merchant Lyte is "desperately sick."  When he saw the mob, at some point, he "turned purple and fell."  He is so sick that Dr. Warren is called to tend to him.

Why did Achebe choose to take the title of his novel from Yeats' poem?

"The Second Coming" alludes to the second coming of Christ.  In the poem, this second coming of Jesus is seen as a chaotic event that rocks the world.  In Things Fall Apart, the missionaries are bringing the church's message of Christ, and it's this very message that begins to tear the tribe apart.  It not only pulls away members of the tribe, but it questions and contradicts the very foundations of the tribal belief system.

Why does Nick Bottom want to play all the parts?

He believes himself to be able to play all the parts...a one man show.  We all know folks like him, unfortunately.  This is part of what makes this play so darn funny, and when his head represents his personality and his name later in the play, we all walk away with very sore sides from laughter!

How did Hindley humiliate Heathcliff on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day?

Christmas Eve marks the return of Catherine Earnshaw to Wuthering Heights, and she returns a much changed girl. In her absence, Hindley has succeeded in relegating Heathcliff to the status of a servant, which is how he is treated. In fact, when Catherine returns, Hindley introduces him as such.

'Heathcliff, you may come forward,' cried Mr. Hindley, enjoying his discomfiture, and gratified to see what a forbidding young blackguard he would be compelled to present himself. 'You may come and wish Miss Catherine welcome, like the other servants.'

Hindley is truly cruel and torturous in his treatment of Heathcliff. This continues the next day, when Hinldey invites the Lintons to spend Christmas with them. Although Heathcliff promises to attempt to "be good", it all goes terribly wrong, as Hindley and Edgar greet his every move with contempt.

I urged my companion to hasten now and show his amiable humour, and he willingly obeyed; but ill luck would have it that, as he opened the door leading from the kitchen on one side, Hindley opened it on the other. They met, and the master, irritated at seeing him clean and cheerful, or, perhaps, eager to keep his promise to Mrs. Linton, shoved him back with a sudden thrust, and angrily bade Joseph 'keep the fellow out of the room - send him into the garret till dinner is over. He'll be cramming his fingers in the tarts and stealing the fruit, if left alone with them a minute.'
'Nay, sir,' I could not avoid answering, 'he'll touch nothing, not he: and I suppose he must have his share of the dainties as well as we.'
'He shall have his share of my hand, if I catch him downstairs till dark,' cried Hindley. 'Begone, you vagabond! What! you are attempting the coxcomb, are you? Wait till I get hold of those elegant locks - see if I won't pull them a bit longer!'

So as soon as he enters the kitchen, Hindley demands that Heathcliff be locked away from the rest of the family, and proceeds to tease and torment him for trying to clean himself up and join the party.

How is madness used as a theme in "Twelfth Night"?

Malvolio should probably be the starting point for any exploration of madness within the play. The sub-plot of the play and the 'letter trick' are designed by Toby and Maria to make Olivia think Malvolio is mad: prancing around, blowing kisses, in his yellow stockings, it seems a good diagnosis. 'This is very midsummer madness', Olivia says in the scene.

Yet Malvolio is NOT mad - but in love with Olivia. Olivia says herself in a later scene 'I am as mad as he [Malvolio] if sad and merry madness equal be'. Olivia, of course, in love with 'Cesario' (actually a girl, Viola, in disguise) is, like Malvolio, fooled into falling in love, which explains her hugely unusual behaviour towards Cesario, who is, after all, only a servant.

Look too at what Feste says when reading the letter to Olivia in the final scene: his crazed delivery of the text is not madness itslef, but just reading madness. That is, Feste only speaks the words that a supposed madman has written down - but does that (could that?) make you mad? Is an actor mad just for speaking the lines of a mad character?

Few people would argue that, but it makes the point that Twelfth Night dwells on: that madness is threaded through every day life, and boundly close up with 'sane' behaviour. Perhaps, as Romeo says in Romeo and Juliet, it is love which is 'a madness most discreet' in 'Twelfth Night'. 

Why does Ralph fail as a leader in Chapter 3?I need examples from the text to prove the answer!

It is hard to know whether you want to know what shows that he has failed or what causes him to fail.

As far as what shows that he has failed, we can see that he has failed because none of the kids except Simon and Piggy are really willing to keep on helping him build the huts.  The rest of them do not stay focused, and he is the one who ought to be keeping them that way (if he is a leader).

As far as why why he has failed, I think the only thing we can really say is that he is a bit whiny and not very positive.  When he talks to Jack he seems like he is complaining.  He ends up talking about how he doesn't actually like working.  This attitude would not be very inspiring, I think.

What is the meaning of "nemesis"? How should I determine who might be the nemesis of King Lear? What exactly should I be looking for?

In your typical tragedy, the main character has a "tragic flaw" whic ultimately leads to his/her downfall. You could say that King Lear's worst enemy is himself. After all, it was his choice split the kingdom, banish Cordelia and Kent. In much of this play King Lear thinks people are hurting him much more than they are. Whose fault is that?

Cordelia loves her father the most but is not willing to exaggerate her speech like her sisters did. Lear is looking to be flattered. Kent, an advisor, advises the King on his actions and for speaking truth he is banished.

Later on in the show people do terrible offense to the King. They are perhaps enemies. But a nemesis is one who stands in the way of everything the character wants. Isn't Lear's inability to accept the truth standing in the way of his own happiness? By the time he realizes this it's too late.

Why does Claudius not proceed with legal action against Hamlet for killing Polonius?

Most likely because Hamlet is the prince, and therefore above the law in some senses.  There are a few other possible reasons too however.  Legal action would have been too 'by the book' for Claudius.  In other words, Claudius is a murderer - he murdered his brother.  He deals with things in a different way than most kings do.  Also, he is beginning to know that Hamlet is a threat to him so he would rather do something that ends in Hamlet's death.  Legal action could have taken too long.  And finally, Claudius is unsure like the rest of them about Hamlet's sanity, although he suspects Hamlet knows what he is doing.  So, he sends him to England with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and a note that tells the King of England to behead him.  Hamlet of course, escapes.

what the relationship between mrs. bennet and her children especially elizabeth and lydia?how does a parnets relationship with their child affect them

Mrs. Bennet is was not the best mother we can think of in literature. She had a tendency to whine and not fix, to demand and not support, and to complaint excessively in the hopes that her daughters would be have as she wanted them to, in order to land themselves a good husband.

With both Elizabeth and Lydia she acted as only one would expect. Elizabeth is the antithesis of Mrs Bennet in almost its entirety. She is her second child, opinionated, outspoken and resilient in a time where women had to be seen and not heard, tactful and shy. Since Elizabeth did not represent the image of the marriage-able daughter , Ms. Bennet basically had to be what we could say "on top of her" at all times making sure that her behavior, or her tendency to express her mind does not scare men away. However, it is clear to see that Elizabeth was way smarter and witty than her mother, and often ignored her. For this, there would be no punishment ever, and the father was no help in disciplining her either.

Lydia, which was a terribly selfish and quite foolish daughter, also received similar treatment but was always over-protected. However we see how that didn't work because she ended up eloping with Wickham to her mother's great distress and shame. However, as the mother only preocupation was image and status, when Lydia was made to marry Wickham, still we see the little or no influence of Bennet over her daughters' behaviors or destinies.

What does the quote "its just as much Maycomb County as missionary teas" mean?

Atticus says this to Aunt Alexandra when Jem is so upset after Tom Robinson is declared guilty.  Aunt Alexandra thinks the children shouldn't have been allowed to go to the trial, but Atticus justifies it by saying, "This is their home...they might as well learn to cope with it" (Chapter 22).  He believes the children should be exposed to the reality of their hometown, the good and the bad.  He goes on to emphasize that the injustice of the trial is as much a part of Maycomb as the good parts, as exemplified by things such as missionary teas in Aunt Alexandra's eyes, even though subliminal attitudes of racism are ironically well entrenched there too.

How should I do a PowerPoint on The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-time Indian?

Powerpoint is a fairly easy program to use, and it can help to organize a presentation.  The best place to begin for this assignment is to look at any specifics provided by your teacher.  Are you to examine characters?  Detail the plot?  Discuss themes?  Each of these can be organized into separate slides.  For instance, each character or each theme would get its own slide.  Write an outline first, then simply dedicate a slide to each bullet point of the outline.

If the powerpoint is going to be used as accompaniment to a presentation, remember that not all your information needs to be on each slide.  Rather, the slides should give bullet points or important phrases which you can use to remind yourself what you want to talk about.

The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian is a great book to translate into a powerpoint because Sherman Alexie already uses graphic elements in his book.  You probably shouldn't use Alexie's drawings in your presentation, but you could draw some of your own.  Also consider using comic book elements such as captions and thought bubbles. By having fun with the visual elements, you could turn this into a really interesting assignment.

What would be a good thesis statement for the short story, Sonny's Blues, and why?

Hi!  It's me again.  I recently suggested to you some of the themes in "Sonny's Blues," and I think you liked them since my reply got 5 stars.

To write a thesis statement, I suggest using one of the themes as a basis.

Theme a: What it was like to grow up in Harlem.

Thesis Statement a: "Sonny's Blues" describes the almost impossible task of growing up as a black male in Harlem in the 1930's and 1940's.

Theme b: The different ways that people attempt to escape the ghetto: Sonny tries music and drugs, his brother tries to go "straight" and becomes a middle-class school teacher.

Thesis Statement b: "Sonny's Blues" describes the different ways that people attempted to escape the Harlem ghetto in the 1940's; some tried music and drugs, while others attempted to assimilate into middle-class society.

Theme c: The complex relationship between two brothers

Thesis Statement c: "Sonny's Blues" describes the complex relationship between two brothers.  Throughout much of the story, Sonny's older brother is reluctantly thrust into a parental role; at the end, it is Sonny who teaches his brother a lesson.

Theme d: The way a musician expresses his feeling through music

Thesis Statement d: In "Sonny's Blues," we find a masterful description of how a musician can express his feelings through his music.

Good luck!

In Chapters 3-4, what does Wopsle say about "the prodigal"? Why did Dickens include this allusion?How does the narrator feel now about the scene...

His allusion is to the prodigal son in the Bible. He makes the remark that "'swine were the companion of the prodigal. The gluttony of Swine is put before us, as an example to the young.'" "'What is detestable in a pig is more detestable in a boy.'" Wopsle wants to teach Pip a lesson about being ungrateful to have what he does and to be taken care of by his sister.

I'm not real sure what you are asking about in Chapter 18. Joe refuses the money because he would never stand in Pip's way of bettering himself. It's an insult to Joe to think that anyone would have to pay him to allow Pip his freedom to improve his lot in life. Pip notices that the lawyer seems to think Joe is stupid not to be interested in the money and looks down on him as a sort of ignorant country bumpkin. Pip is too excited at the time to pay much attention to it, however.

Where is Robert Walton when he writes Letter 1? Why is he there? What are his plans?

Robert Walton is in St. Petersburg, Russia, (from where he writes the first letter) because he uses it as a stopover on his way to Archangel, a remote town in the far northern part of Russia.  His letter demonstrates his exuberance about Russia, the snow, and his quest to reach the Arctic.  When he reaches Archangel, he plans to gather a crew and obtain a ship so that he can begin his journey.

He expresses several plans in his first letter to his sister.  First, he tries to assuage any of her fears for his safety and convince her that he is doing what he loves. Secondly, he expresses his desire to be known for his expedition, either by discovering the source of the Earth's magnetism in the Arctic, finding new celestial arrangements, or proving the existence of a Northern passage.  What readers should later glean from Walton's first letter is that his obsession with fame and glory is very similar to Victor Frankenstein's own search for glory.

Discussions on the Levels of Management....

A typical organization today is composed of many people working at multiple hierarchical levels. At the lowest level of the organization who perform operational work such as operating machines, cleaning premises, repairing equipments, and laying bricks. These are operational level people with almost no managerial responsibility. The report to managers or supervisors at the next higher level of hierarchy in the organization. These managers in turn report to managers at next higher level. This chain of reporting and supervising may continues for several steps till the highest level of the organizational hierarchy is reached. The actual number of such hierarchical levels varies widely from company to company. A typical organization may have about half a dozen levels of management from lowest to the highest.

Though people at all these levels of management perform management work, the nature of work they perform and the kind of systems and support they need to work effectively differ depending on the their level in the organizational hierarchy. To understand the nature of management work and nature of support systems appropriate at different levels of management, management experts and authors often classify the job of management in different levies of management, and study and describe typical nature of management tasks and requirements each level.

There is no common agreement on number of different management levels thus identified or the terms used to refer to these levels. The mos commonly used number is three levels of managements, which may be described as lower, middle and top levels of management. The most significant differences in nature of work at different levels of management pertains to the the relative importance of the management function of planning, organizing, leading and controlling. Managers at higher levels of management spend more time and effort on planning, organizing and controlling function, while the importance of leading in reverse proportion to the organization level.

There are substantial differences also in the kind of skills required by managers at different levels. Managers at lower levels are required to be much more proficient with the technical knowledge and skill associated with the particular type of operations managed. The Senior level managers, on the other hand, need to pay greater attention to the general skills of conceptualization. Human skill is some thing that is equally important for all levels of management.

The concept of levels of management also used frequently to identify the nature of information needed by managers at different levels. For example, lower level management often require information that is regularly generated internally at fixed intervals regarding past operations. The information is very detailed and structured. In contrast as we move up the management level the information required becomes more ad hoc, which contains a large amount of data collected from sources outside the organization, and which is more concerned with predicting future, rather than describing the past.

What did the British government decide to do about Boston's port in Johnny Tremain?

I assume you are referring to the closing of the port of Boston by the British government in response to the Boston Tea Party.  The punishment was to completely close the port:  "Not one ship might enter, not one ship might leave,"  save for the King's own transports and warships.  This severe punishment actually played into the hands of would-be revolutionaries because it solidified resentment against the British even in those who thought that throwing the tea into the harbor had gone too far and who had been willing to come around to supporting the tea tax.

In To Kill a Mockingbird, what does Scout mean by saying, "There's only one kind of folks"?

Through this remark, the author is juxtaposing various ways for the reader to understand "difference," which is an important topic in the novel.  Everyone is "different" in this story, from Scout who will not act like the lady her aunt wants her to be, to Atticus who does not hunt or play football as his son would prefer. Bo is different because he is a recluse. Tom is different because he is black, and the Ewells are different because they are poor, white trash, people without roots and therefore without morals. When Atticus tells Scout the lowest sort of man is one who takes advantage of Negroes (such as what Ewell does in regards to Tom), he would seem to deny Scout's conclusion, which would otherwise be a comforting and simple solution to the problem of social discord and hatred.

Analysis of "One thousand dollars" by O' Henry. help pleaseI need help with the analysis of this story. Any notes would help concerning many stuff...

The theme of this story is, quite clearly, love and human decency.  It is a story (like many of O. Henry's) about what people do (and should do) for love.

Young Gillian is characterized as something of a playboy.  He clearly wastes money at clubs and on showgirls.  His uncle has not liked this about him and has left him $1,000.  Gillian doesn't know this, but if he spends it well, he gets $50,000 and if he doesn't he gets nothing more.

Gillian spends the money well -- gives it to the woman he loves (even though she doesn't love him).  Then he finds out about the $50,000.  He finds out that if he spent the money badly, the $50,000 goes to the woman he loves.  When he hears this, he lies and says he wasted the money.

Gillian shows the best side of love here.  He knows that Miriam will not love him no matter how rich he is.  So he sacrifices his happiness for hers.

Who is the narrator of "Bartleby the Scrivener"?

It is interesting to note that the narrator remains unnamed, even though the other characters have either names or nicknames.  This makes the narrator a bit of an everyman, and allows the readers to see the story through his eyes.  It also puts the narrator on the same level as Bartleby.  The three other workers - Turkey, Nippers, and Ginger-Nut - all have character traits that indicate they have passions and lives outside of work.  However, the focus of the plot is on Bartleby's inability to find a purpose in life, to find something he prefers to do.  Work is all he is.  Similarly, the narrator is only known to us as a lawyer, suggesting that  he, too, has little life beyond work.  This could be the reason he is so captivated by Bartleby, because he sees himself in this other man.

How did the time period influence The Scarlet Letter?

I am not sure if you mean the time period Hawthorne wrote "The Scarlet Letter" or the time period in which it was set.  I shall try to provide both answers for you.

First, Hawthorne was interested in documents he had come across while reseaching his own ancestors.  He discovered that a woman had indeed been branded with a letter "A" as punishment for adultry.  Hawthorne became fascinated with the religious hypocrisy of the Puritan era.   By the time it reached American shores in the late 1600s, Purtiansim had become a corruption of the original ideals that led to the travesties like the treatment of Hester and eventualy the Salem Witch Trials.  Puritanism suffered a severe decline in adherence thereafter.

As for Hawthorne's time, he offers his "Scarlet Letter" partially as a warning to those who would read it in modern times.  Crowds can easily become hysterical with little or no basis in reality.  For example, on pg 116 (my edition) he writes, "When a multitude atttempts to see with its eyes, it is exceedingly apt to be decieved."  Or, later (pg 185), "Prison is in our own minds."

The message, therefore, is that we should not be fooled into thinking the Puritan acts were some sort of abberation.  They could, have, and will continue to occur.  Just look at the headlines any day of the week... 

Jem forms a new theory in To Kill a Mockingbird about why Boo Radley has not left his house in years. What is this theory? How likely is it to be...

In the beginning of Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, Scout and Jem, and later their friend Dill, are obsessed with the neighborhood recluse and local legend: Boo Radley. For most of the novel, the children operate under the assumption that Boo hasn't left his house in years because he's a prisoner under house arrest (many tall tales discuss the various crimes he's committed, for instance), and much of their energy is spent trying to catch a glimpse of him. However, toward the end of the novel, Jem changes his opinion of his neighbor: Boo isn't being kept inside as punishment for his crimes, Jem argues; rather, he voluntarily stays inside in order to avoid the oppressive nature of the world outside.

Jem's theory is a good one, especially considering its context. It comes on the heels of the Tom Robinson trial, a perfect example of the injustice, hypocrisy, and prejudice that governs much of the adult world. After this experience, Jem is better able to understand why someone might not want to participate in society in general. While it's unclear how true this statement is, whether or not Boo actually feels this way is beside the point. Indeed, what's really important here is the symbolic meaning that's communicated. Through this theory, Jem sets up Boo to be a symbol of the rejection of contemporary society. As such, Lee suggests that it might be necessary to reject the unjust society we live in if we are going to fix it at all.

Verify the identity- tan (x-(3pi/2))=-cotx PLEASE ANSWER QUICKLY. I have a test tomorrow!

To verify tan (x-3pi/2) = -cotx.

Solution:

Consider the left side:

Tan (x-3pi/2) =  Tan (x-3pi +2pi) as tan function is 2pi periodic.

=tan(x+pi/2)

= - tan (supplementary angle of x+Pi/2)

= -tan (pi/2-x)

=-cotx = RHS,  as in triangle ABC with B as triangle, and A as x+pi/2, and C as pi/2 - x, tanA = cotB. Or Tan (x+pi) = cot(pi-x).

Where are the definitions to the story "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi"?

I am not sure what you mean by this question.  If you mean vocabulary words, you might try looking in your textbook on the pages just before and immediately after this story.  Don't forget to check out footnotes on each page of the story as well.

This is a great story...I hope you enjoy it and that this helps a little.

What is the archetype of "The Devil and Tom Walker"?

Washington's archetype was Faust, based on the play by Christopher Marlowe (and perhaps other sources of the Faust legend as well.)  Faust is the man who sells his soul to the devil in order to achieve wealth, but later greatly regrets his decision when he is forced to suffer the consequences.  In Irving's version, the  "narrator relates a story he has heard about a local man's dealings with the devil. The narrator never claims that the stories are true, only that they are widely believed.

According to local legend, a treasure is buried in a dark grove on an inlet outside of Boston."  Like his earlier incarnations, Walker too will come to regret his ill-fated bargain. 

Do Montresor's characteristics justify his actions? how????

An unfortuante person who has suffered injustice or cruel treatment in childhood can sometimes grow up to inflict pain on others, but this can only ever explain their evil actions, not justify or condone them. We do not find out if anything has happened to Montressor that far back, only reading about some sort of imagined slight that happened more recently. However Montressor's characteristics come across as  vindictive, analytical, narcissistic and methodical character traits. Also, he is obsessive as we see by his careful calculations about the interment at the end. Perhaps he has become over-sensitized to matters affronting his self-esteem, and that is why he responded in such an over the top way to a small insult.

How does Huck end up with a nice loaf of bread? What does he mean when he says there's something to praying, "but it don't work for me"?

The second part of your question concerns Huck's own spirituality.  He is agnostic, meaning he doesn't know if there is or isn't a god; for him praying just doesn't connect him in any way.  But the really important part here is that Huck doesn't try to foist his views on others.  If it works for them, fine.  Unlike others he encounters, Huck does not try to press faith or prayer on anyone.

Why is Simon's dead body carried out to sea in terms of glorification?

Simon's burial at sea is done with a mystical fashion. The boys abandon him there, and the sea takes over the burial rights.

There are glowing sea creatures surrounding his body, the water cleanses or purifies him as the blood is washed away, and the tides sweep him out to the sea. The mysticism of the moment-a force we cannot see, takes care of the burial ritual.

Draw a character sketch of Della in "The Gift of Magi" by O. Henry.

And here I have lamely related to the uneventful chronicle of two foolish children in a flat who most unwisely sacrificed for each other the greatest treasures of their house.  But in a last word to the wise of these days let it be said that of all who give gifts these two were the wisest.

O. Henry's narrator intrudes upon the ending of "The Gift of the Magi" to make the ironic observation that Della and Jim Dillingham Young were "foolish" and "unwise."  Then, the contrast between what they really are is stated in the next sentence:  "these two were the wisest."

Della, who subsides from the "first stage" of crying and feeling sorry for herself that she has no money, moves to the "second stage" of doing whatever she can to give a Christmas present to her husband, whom she loves with complete unselfishness.  For, she sacrifices her most treasured possession, her luxurious hair.

This young woman of O. Henry's classic story is the antithesis of the young women one reads about in the magazines on the rack at the grocery store checkout, or many of the young women from the reality shows.  How often is a remark such as "He knows he better buy me a diamond ring that is x carats," or "I told my parents I want a new car, not some old, used thing," etc.?  Della, who is unselfish, knows that real love has no connection to material or physical possessions. This "unwise" and "foolish" characteristic of Della is one that is more beautiful than even her dazzling hair.

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of "sameness" in The Giver.

In The Giver, Lowry presents the reader with the idea of Sameness, which is just as the name suggests, the same for everyone.  The residents of Sameness are told who to marry, what to wear, how many children they can have, where to live, what to feel, and what job they will have; no matter how tempting it may sound to have all of these decisions made for you, and believe me, as an adult, it would sometimes be easier to have them made for you, I can not begin to imagine a society where I had no choice in any part of my life.  Think about it in terms of your own life; how would you feel in this situation.  As a teenager, life would be devastating to be controlled by others.  No video games, no color, no choice!  Surely the disadvantages are evident; the advantages are not as readily evident, other than the fact that you don't have to worry about the judgements of others about your clothes, shoes, etc.  Sameness would take many of the stressors out of everyday life.  It could reduce anxiety due to social differences and probably reduce prejudices, as well as certain social stigma. 

Discuss the mockingbird symbol in relation to Tom Robinson.

Harper Lee in To Kill a Mockingbird cleverly develops a bird motif throughout the novel with names and people who are symbols of the mockingbird.  The names, “Finch”, and “Robinson” are both connections to this recurring bird motif.  However, the mockingbird allusion is probably the most powerful.  Atticus tells Scout and Jem that it “is a sin to kill a mockingbird.”  Miss Maudie goes on to explain that the mockingbird is harmless, and its purpose is to sing for our enjoyment. 

Although there is a good argument for who the mockingbirds are in the novel, Tom Robinson is definitely one of the main characters symbolic of the innocent, harmless bird.  Tom is a man of character who only helps Mayella Ewell because he feels sorry for her sad existence.  Mayella is raising her brothers and sisters on her own and is abused by her father, Bob Ewell.  Her loneliness leads her to seek out affection wherever she can, and unfortunately, she decides to prey on Tom Robinson. 

Tom is innocent of the charges of rape, and it is only because he is a black man that he is found guilty.  He is killed trying to escape prison because he knows that even an appeal will not save him from his fate.  The mistreatment of Tom and his eventual killing is a sin committed by the racist values of southern people. 

Other important “mockingbirds” in the story can include, Boo Radley, Scout, Jem, Dill, and even Mayella Ewell who has no control over her life.  They are all harmless innocents in a bigoted, racist world.

What does Buck have to do to survive the wild, and what do the other dogs think about living in the wild?

To survive in the wild, Buck has to let his instincts take over. This means he learns to hunt and to forget the comforts he had known when he was a domesticated dog.  He can no longer rely on an owner to feed him and take his time eating for example. He learns that to eat enough means defending his food against the other dogs for example.  He becomes a ruthless hunter.  

The second part of the question is more difficult.  I think you are referring to the other sled dogs but you may be referring to the domesticated dogs who were sold in Seattle along with Buck.  The second set of dogs either adapt to life as a sled dog or they die.  The dogs who are already living as sled dogs and somewhat wild - already live by their instincts. 

What are the similarities and differences between Benedick and Beatrice?

Beatrice and Benedick are probably more similar than they are different.  They are both stubborn and independent.  They are both willing to live single lives to avoid being hurt or wounded by the opposite sex.  They are both very clever - so much so that they delight in verbal warfare whenever they see one another (although it can, at times, lead to hurt feelings).  They are both very loyal to their friends and family.  And they both easily fall in love with the other when convinced that it is safe - that the other person already loves them!

Differences, really, are minimal, which is why they make such a perfect couple, as Don Pedro points out before teaching everyone else how to trick the two of them into falling in love!

Check the links below for more information about these great characters!  Good luck!

How does Mr. Hooper's preaching change with the veil and how does Elizabeth respond to it?

Prior to wearing the veil, Hooper had not been particularly effective in delivering his sermons. On the day he puts on the veil, however, he is intense, moving the congregation so much that they feel his words penetrating into their souls. They are uncomfortably mesmerized by his words and can't wait to get outside. Elizabeth isn't frightened of Hooper at first as some of the others are, and she asks him to remove the veil and explain why he put it on in the first place. He refuses twice to remove it and will not explain it to her. Naturally, she is upset that Hooper is willing to give up a life of happiness for the veil, and Hooper dies a lonely man.

What really causes the initial "crying out" of Abigail and Betty? How are they reacting to the mounting conflict around them? How culpable are...

You tagged Act I. In Act I, Betty eventually "comes to" when just the girls are in the room with her, but later, she comes to again with Hale, Parris, and Putnams in the room. The girls do have different motives for "crying out" at this point.

Abigail seems to be faking allegiance to God. She acts like she wants to come clean, and the adults are asking questions about who it is that "haunts" them. The girls begin spewing names. Betty just conforms to Abigail's lead. If she didn't follow Abigail, Abigail might bully her later. She has a healthy fear of Abigail.

I think the adults are looking for an answer to the children's curiosity. The kids don't want to admit they were sporting with the Devil for the fun of it. They almost let the adults suggest that they have been influenced by evil people in the community. The girls quickly fall into this trap and instantly accuse people of witchcraft. The girls know better, but as do most children, they want to get rid of their guilt. Rather than coming clean through confession, they place blame elsewhere.

They are responsible for this, but the suggestive Putnams might also bear some of this blame.

What are the clues identified and how is the mystery solved?

In trying to determine the sculptor of Angel, Claudia and her brother Jamie find only one clue: the bottom of the statue bears Michelangelo's signature mark.

This discovery, however, does not solve the mystery since Michelangelo did not carve all the marble blocks that bear his mark and because the mark could certainly have been counterfeited later.

The "mystery" of Angel's origin is solved when Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler allows Jamie and Claudia access to her secret personal files. They find a piece of paper with a sonnet and Michelangelo's signature on one side. On the other side is Michelangelo's sketch of Angel.

What is the reading strategy or "questioning the text" when reading "The Most Dangerous Game"?

Questioning the text is a most important skill!  When you read a fabulous story, like Connell's, you have to ask yourself, "Why would a very famous big game hunter be hunted by another human?"  If you continue to read on and keep asking that important question, the text will draw you to the answer; "Because sometimes we become what we live."  Why a scary, ominous castle?  (That indicates something is very wrong.)  Why such aristocratic etiquette in a remote place?  (That indicates things aren't what they appear.)  Why is this story being narrated by a third person?  We know that 3rd person gives the author room to make dramatic changes easily because we aren't tied to a character. (That indicates that there will be severe changes in the story; for instance, Zaroff the hunter, becomes the hunted.)  Keep asking those questions!  The author has all of the answers.  All you have to do is find them!

What is the role of transportation?

Tricky question.  I think the most important role belongs to Gatsby's car.  His car is used as the vehicle (pun intended!) for creating the last conflict of the story.  We've been shown this dirty, dingy, gray road where nothing lively or exciting happens between the Eggs and the City.  It's been presented simply as a road that's there and traveled upon.  Only the appearance of Myrtle breaks the monotony of this well traveled road.  Then, without warning, the single incident that leads to the end of every character occurs along this very road.

Fitzgerald certainly does a nice job setting us up for it, though.  Throughout the novel we see various modes of travel that are simply used as travel.  We don't expect the car ride home to be the horrible conflict; we expected the conversation that would be had once everyone reached home to be the conflict.

Explain the significance of Michaelis having such a difficult time ascertaining a church or priest that Wilson was tied to in The Great Gatsby?

To me, the fact that Michaelis can't find out where George Wilson goes to church says something about Wilson when you combine it with later stuff in the chapter.  Later in the chapter, George talks about how he has told Myrtle that she cannot fool God.  So George is invoking God, but he does not even go to church.

To me, this shows George as something of a weak man and a hypocrite.  He is telling Myrtle she needs to adhere to this morality but he does not even really care enough about it to belong to a church.

What are the characteristics of Pi in chapter 1?

In chapter one, Pi is intelligent - he discusses his academic studies and relates profound insight about them to the reader.  He is also reflective - he looks at his present life in light of his past and what happened to him.  He is also intimate with the reader, sharing his thoughts and feelings about his experience, his studies, death, life, religion, his hurts etc.

What did the hens do to rebel against the giving up their eggs.

The hens, rather than allow their eggs to be sold by Napoleon and his henchmen in chapter 7, lay their eggs on the rafters so that the eggs will smash on the floor of the barn.  They consider what Napoleon wants to do to be murder.  Because Napoleon and Whymper have agreed to sell 400 eggs a week, they punish the hens by not giving them any food.  The hens hold out for five days and then they give in, allowing Whymper to collect the 400 eggs a week.

In Katherine Mansfield's "The Garden Party," what would be some examples of the theme of experience versus inexperience?

Laura is very aware of her inexperience and youth and it causes her great discomfort when put in situations of authority.

When Laura was told to supervise the workers putting up the marquee, she is impressed with their natural ease with one another, as well as the task at hand. She feels all the more inadequate by her job of watching over them.

Laura attempts to be cool and calm as she sets about her task, and she decides to channel her mother's posture and attitude in an attempt to appear confident. When she got out the bread and butter, she realized that there was no where to put it down, and she could not even throw it away, so she was stuck holding it and feeling foolish.

Laura's embarrassment led her to appear strict and stare down the workers, while trying to instruct them with an air of competence she did not feel. Nothing worked, and in the end she felt foolish, and knew her mother or sisters would not have acted in such a way.

While at first idealizing the workers experience and ease, she soon learns that their lives are not carefree.

In "A Stench of Kerosene," which character's behavior is the most revealing?

I would have to go with Manak's behavior as the most revealing in Pritam's short story.  I believe that his speech and behavior reflect the oppressive nature of traditional social modes.  Manak is shown as someone who is constantly trying to fight the overarching condition of totality in way of the tradition and social honor that surround him. 

How he pleads with Guleri not to leave, and is then rebuffed by her is one example of this.  Another example is seen when he returns home to his mother. She is more than eager to replace Guleri with a new wife who will be able to bear Manak's children, and she rebukes Manak for his sadness in the process. These are both moments where his impotence against the traditional social structure is evident. 

Manak's emptiness and vacant stares (when Bhavani tells him that Guleri has committed self- immolation upon learning of Manak's second wife) display another element of how Manak is powerless to stop the train and "progress" of modernity.  At the same time, I think that his rejection of the child, in the end, is a small moment where he actually speaks out against tradition, something that will become silenced in due time. 

I don't think that Manak is the saddest character or the one most deserving of empathy or sympathy.  That has to be Guleri, who leaves her husband thinking all is well, but ends up having to set fire to herself out of shame for being unable to bear children. Yet, I think that Pritam constructs the character of Manak in such a way that he is shown to be an individual who detests the social and traditional structure in which he lives, but one who lacks the full throated control to reject it and leave it. 

Perhaps, his actions at the end are the start of a process that already claimed two casualties in Manak's love and Guleri, herself.  It is in this where I think that his characterization is the most revealing in the emptiness of an individual who dislikes tradition, but remains a part of it.

What does Hamlet's fourth soliloquy really mean? Act III scene 1 lines 56–89, "To be, or not to be."

It is still not clear if the Ghost's information is real, is true, much as it fits his own'take' on the situation, just as it is questionable if the Ghost is 'real. He requires more proof, and since the conclusion he believes is true would be treasonous to Claudius, he is very wary of putting it out there, so he decides to test his theory, albeit now that it has been galvanized by the Ghost's coroborration, it is still not clearly, objectively true, and he knows that to pursue the revenge he would like might mean his own death, or further, the death of other innocents (mother, Ophelia, courtiers,unpredictable( as he still cannot tell how complicitous the rest of the court is in the murder of his father. Certainly, Polonius, Ophelia's father seems hand-in-glove with Claudius, and what of Gertrude? Who has benefitted from old Hamlet's death? They are all suspect to young Hamlet.?. He is highly aware that he is the deposed Prince, his safe position has been stolen by Claudus, and he requires a court consensus before he rightfully takes any action against Claudius, happy though it wouldmake him to do so. He is also sorry, angry at his mother's ignorant re-marriage, blithely unconcious of the consequences of what she did.

As he sees Ophelia enter, he hopes she will remember all his sins, and so distance herself emotionally from him, as he knows he must get her to separate, so he can take the dangerous actions which lay somewhere before him.

What lessons does the book teach us about our present and our future?

At the time that Mary Shelley created the book Frankenstein the idea of using body parts to replace other parts of a human was unheard of.  People were mostly speculative about what medical advances the future would hold and in some places the procedure of bleeding was still used to treat infection or misunderstood diseases.

Modern science has been developing better and better skills at harvesting and transplanting organs into human beings.  What had started with putting a baboon heart in infant baby Faye in Loma Linda, California, has now arrived at the ability of mankind to be able to have procedures such as heart, kidney, and lung transplants, and even fingers, toes, and arms  reattached.  Now the possibility of a person being cloned has neared the probability stage.

If the book teaches us anything it is to be careful what actions we take ethically in regards to human beings and their lives.  Science has advanced farther than our legal abilities can solve the conflicts that have arisen from the procedures.  The future may well lead mankind into greater and more challenging ethical issues and the reality that one is dealing with a real human who has feelings, needs, and opinions needs to be taken into careful consideration and be ethically challenged before we go to far.

How does Shakespeare dramatize the conflicting views of nature in King Lear?

To expound on the previous post, for the noble characters in the play, namely Kent, Gloucester, the Fool, Cordelia, and Edgar, the ‘Reason’ of the ‘natural’ world order is to remain loyal to and preserve the orthodox view of ‘nature,’ (which maintains that the established social order should be respected and maintained) regardless of the suffering they must endure. There is a contrasting theory of ‘Reason’ of the ‘natural’ world orderi n the play however. For the evil characters, namely Regan, Goneril, Cornwall, Oswald, and Edmund, the ‘Reason’ is to destroy the ‘natural’ world order. These characters wish to topple the orthodox hierarchy, using whatever means necessary, and place themselves atop a new one.

Of course, the storm that rages during the play, with Lear himself caught in it, is a physical manifestation of nature itself raging against this upheavel.

Discuss the Mongol Conquest. What were the positive and negative effects?

A typical understanding of the Mongols--especially Mongols during the era of Genghis Khan (Ghengis the Chief or Ruler)--stems from reports written by eyewitnesses or contemporaneous historians through whom their advent is portrayed as a bloody "bolt from the blue"--a sudden, swift, unexpected surprise from quarters previously unknown thus unfeared--that left only destruction, death, horror and lasting grief as the sign of its devastation. A medieval Russian chronicle from Novgorod vividly describes Mongol impact on the region:

No one exactly knows who they are, nor whence they came out, nor what their language is, nor of what race they are, nor what their faith is . . . God alone knows (Mitchell and Forbes, p. 64).

A thirteenth-century Persian eyewitness in Iran summarized the initial impact of their attack in Iran: "They came, they sapped, they burnt, they slew, they plundered and they departed" (Juwayni, 1916/1997, p. 107). The Arab chronicler ibn al-Athir, although not an eyewitness, chronicled his reaction to the stories that reached him and his fellow Arab countrymen about Genghis Khan's attacks and rise to power. His emotion-filled, half hysterical words have set the tone and perception throughout the ages of history and throughout the peoples of the world of the Eurasian Mongol attacks on the world from the Red Sea to the China Sea and from the steppes to the desserts:

O would that my mother had never borne me, that I had died before and that I were forgotten [so] tremendous disaster such as had never happened before, and which struck all the world, though the Muslims above all . . . Dadjdjal [Muslim Anti-Christ] will at least spare those who adhere to him, and will only destroy his adversaries. These [Mongols], however, spared none. They killed women, men, children, ripped open the bodies of the pregnant and slaughtered the unborn (Spuler, 1972, pp. 290).

Once Genghis Khan had begun attacking surrounding peoples, he described himself as "the punishment of God"--implying the demon of hell being released upon Muslims and Christians who were ready to believe the appellation--and was pleased that others perceived him in fiendish, destructive this role. The religion of the Mongols--a congregate of nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes with groups and subgroups loosely united under a "khan" who could bring goods and security to the group through raids and defenses--was shamanic. This means they worshiped spirits whom they perceived to be indwelling in elements of nature and that allowed interaction and channeling through a chosen religious shaman who had the authority, right and responsibility of entering an altered state to correspond with the spirits for guidance, help, healing and protection. Knowing the clash of religious systems--monotheism of Muslim and Christian versus pan-spirit shamanism--makes the appellation of "punishment of god" more easily understood.

Besides brutal barbarity, the Mongol conquests gave birth to a plethora of historians and chronicles reporting eyewitness or hearsay accounts. These many historical scribe chroniclers, both within the Mongol nation and without, were happy to accommodate the Mongols' desire for notoriety and a rising reputation for barbarism and cruelty. Primary sources in a wealth of languages allow for critical analysis and comparison between these various sources that yields a more balanced account of what actually occurred during the Mongol conquest of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Since Bernard Lewis questioned the basis of the Mongols' tainted reputation in 1995, scholarly opinion has grown more sympathetic toward the legacy of Genghis Khan.

Genghis Khan, the leader of the "people of the felt-walled tents" and the "the peoples of the Nine Tongues" (Onon, 1993, p. 102), was born Temüjin and endured a brutal and merciless childhood. His father was murdered when he was young, and his mother and her offspring were abandoned by their clan to survive in a very harsh and unforgiving environment. later, as a young man, Temüjin's wife Borte was kidnapped by a raiding tribe; woman kidnapping was a common part of tribal raids. The virtue of compassion was expressed in non-Western modes on the harsh steppes. Temüjin became the khan of his family, then rose as khan over a small alliance of other family tribes. In a culture that gave power to men who could promise prosperity through successful raids, during hard times, on neighboring tribes to gain goods and land, not to kill opponents (this cultural distinction is important to remember when considering how Genghis later spread his power through Eurasia), Temüjin came to the notice of the overlord of khans, Ong Khan, who made Temüjin his successor--leading to the anger of Ong's son, Senggum, who expected to be successor and who gathered forces to try to assassinate Temüjin--and the future Genghis Khan. Ghengis's first acts were to unify the families and tribes around him with a strengthened military operation and to make kidnapping of women in raids illegal. In an act of steppe compassion, he also legitimized all children so none were born illegitimate and he made it illegal to sell women as brides. The stage was set on all levels--military, tolerance, reward and punishment--for conquering the world, which Genghis began to do in response to drought, to restrictions from China imposed on trade with the Mongols and, possibly, in response to a shamanic call to conquer the world under one ruler.

Turco-Mongol Unity

Mongol tribal khans maintained power, thus unity, only by delivering on promises of wealth and plenty. If the promise was not met, then the khan fell or was forced to join an alliance with another khan who could meet the promises required by the tribe. By 1206 the Turco-Mongol clans of the steppe, which were originally brought together by Ong Khan, were united under the charismatic rule of Genghis Khan who had a size, unity and dedication of military force and endurance that distinguished it from past steppe armies. Prior to Genghis the tribes had often been manipulated by the Chinese and other settled agrarian peoples that had often commanded the Mongol nomads' predatory raids. According to Mongol cultural ideology as described above, Genghis first raided for the booty (the goods and land or "turf") with which to satisfy his followers and placate his rivals, because a ruler who could not bring the goods promised would soon be removed from power, and with which he amassed prestige and power that supported him against challengers to his rule, such as the defeated Senggum. The initial raids into northern China for goods during the early decades of the thirteenth century were thereafter followed by attacks, with killings, that were the first actions to be characterized by the barbarity with which Genghis Khan of the Mongols has become identified. Once Mongol power was established, Mongol rule during the reigns of Genghis Khan's grandsons, Hülegü in Iran (ruled 1256265) and Qubilai Qa'an in China (ruled 1260294), represented scholarship, art, culture and the rule of fair law with rewards being distributed for merit regardless of ethnicity, religion or nation.

The Mongols themselves were few in number, but from the outset Genghis absorbed other Turkish tribes and conquered troops into his armies. He used traditional steppe military tactics, with light cavalry, feigned retreats, and skillful archery, to conduct what were initially raids to plunder from bases in the steppes into the agriculturally developed and settled lands as opposed to into the steppe grasslands that were home to neighboring tribal nomads. In the phase following raids for plunder, raids that were without the objective of killing (Columbia University), in 1211 the Mongols invaded the independent Chin of northern China, helped by renegade semi-nomadic Khitans, in a mighty struggle for supremacy that continued after Genghis's death finally ending in 1234. It was the defeat of the Chin capital, Zhangdu, (the site of modern Beijing) that gave rise to one of the most notorious stories of Mongol atrocities:

[An envoy from the Khwarazmshah] saw a white hill and in answer to his query was told by the guide that it consisted of bones of the massacred inhabitants. At another place the earth was, for a long stretch of the road, greasy from human fat and the air was so polluted that several members of the mission became ill and some died. This was the place, they were told, where on the day that the city was stormed 60,000 virgins threw themselves to death from the fortifications in order to escape capture by the Mongols (Raverty, 1995, p. 965).

The World-Conqueror

Genghis then turned his attention westward in campaigns against the ethnically Chinese Qara Khitai, whose Muslim merchants and administrators came to form the backbone of his emerging empire. Following a failed trade envoy mission, Genghis then reluctantly attacked Khwarazm (corresponding to present-day Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan), which was the first Muslim state to experience the full fury of the Mongol onslaught. This devastating invasion occurred in retaliation for the murder of a commercial and political trade delegation composed of Mongols, Chinese, and Muslims, who had sought to gain peaceful relations between the two peoples. As proof of his appellation "punishment of God," Genghis Khan unleashed the bloody attacks and merciless devastation on the Islamic West that has made his name synonymous with barbaric mass slaughter.

The trail of blood and massacre that followed the crumbling of the Khwarazm empire in 1220 led westward from Central Asia through Iran to the Caucasus then north into the plains of Russia. The chronicles have told us that 1,600,000 or possibly as many as 2,400,000 were put to the sword in Herat (a city in present-day western Afghanistan), while in Nishapur, the city of Omar Khayyám, 1,747,000 were slaughtered. The two Mongol noyans (generals) Jebe and Sübedei led an expedition in pursuit of the fleeing Khwarazmshah (died 1221), demanding submission to, assistance with and human shields from all they encountered for the resolutely and ruthlessly advancing Mongol armies that brought slavery, destruction and death. Outside every town they reached, the Mongols would deliver a chilling message: "Submit! And if ye do otherwise, what know we? God knoweth" (Juwayni, 1916, p. 26).

This epic Mongol cavalry mission--the Mongols were excellent horsemen bred from childhood to ride and hunt on the small, light, fast horses of the steppes--was perhaps the greatest reconnaissance effort to gather strategic information of all time. It included intelligence gathering about the region, the enemy and the local geographical features, which led to the informed conquest, defeat and massacre of all lands neighboring the Caspian Sea and beyond. Noyans Jebe and Sübedei's expedition of pursuit, terror, and reconnaissance represents the Mongols at their destructive peak; thereafter their armies were both the invincible wrath of God and the emissaries of the biblical Gog and Magog (Revelations 20), a notoriety the Mongols wore like a khil Eat (a robe of honor).

Khorasan in particular suffered grievously for the sins of its deluded leader, the Khwarazmshah. Although the massacres and ensuing destruction were widespread, there was compassion and method in the Mongols' march to power. Artisans and craftsmen, with their families, were often spared the Great Khan's fury. Separated from their less fortunate fellow citizens, they were transported east to practice their crafts in other parts of the empire. While it is said that in Khwarazm (Kiva) in 1221, each of the 50,000 Mongol troops was assigned the task of slaughtering 24 Muslims before being able to loot and pillage, it is reported that Genghis Khan personally implored the famed Sufi master and founder of the Kubrawiya order, Najm al-Din Kubra, to accept safe passage out of the condemned city of Khorasan. The master refused to flee, but allowed his disciples to go. Even at this early stage, the "barbarian" Tatars demonstrated a respect for and knowledge of scholars and learning (although previously they had been a Turco-Mongol tribe rivaling Genghis, the Tatars came to be a generic term for the Genghisids in Europe and western Asia; Tartarus in Greek mythology was Hades or Hell).

The World Ruler

Although Genghis died in 1227, unlike other steppe empires, his survived through his progeny who succeeded in maintaining and extending his power and territories. Genghis Khan rode out of the steppe as a nomadic ruler intent on expanding his power by keeping his cultural promises to his followers and, combining traditional steppe practices with dexterous political and military skill, he became unstoppable. Cities were razed, walls were demolished, the qanat system of underground irrigation was damaged physically and, perhaps more serious, allowed to fall into disrepair through neglect. Nonetheless, Genghis was astute enough to recognize that continued destruction would be counterproductive and eventually destructive to the source of the Mongol wealth. He had wreaked havoc and horror on an unprecedented scale, but it was only as long as he could deliver the prosperity to his followers that he and his progeny would reign unchallenged.

Genghis was a man of vision. The spread of terror had been in the tradition of the conflict between the nomadic steppe and the settled agrarian towns. Although the steppe had won, Genghis knew that its future depended on the sown (the agrarian). The portable felt tents of his childhood had been transformed into the lavish silk and pavilions of his kingdom. The ragged nomadic tribal camps of old had been replaced by mobile cities of wealth, splendor, and sophistication. The infamy he now enjoyed served as his security. In fact, the death tolls recorded and descriptions of the desolation his armies had caused are now considered to be beyond credibility. The province of Herat, neither the city, could not have sustained a population of two million, and the logistics involved in actually murdering this number of people within a matter of days are inconceivable. The already mentioned chronicler ibn al-Athir did much to perpetuate the mythology of the Mongol rule of terror. He recounts that so great was people's fear that a single Mongol could leisurely slaughter a whole queue of quaking villagers too afraid to resist, or that a docile victim would quietly wait, head outstretched, while his executioner fetched a forgotten sword (Browne, 1997, p. 430).

Successors

Before his death Genghis Khan had appointed his second son ödei as his successor and divided his empire among the others. By 1241 Batu, his grandson, had overrun the principalities of Russia, subdued eastern Europe, and reached the coastline of Croatia. The year 1258 witnessed the fall of Baghdad and another grandson, Hülegü, was firmly established in western Asia. Qubilai QaDan was able to proclaim himself not only Great Khan (QaDan means "Khan of Khans"), but also in 1279 the emperor of a united China. War and conquest had continued, but the nature of the conquerors and rulers had changed.

Qubilai QaDan is quoted in contemporary Chinese sources as declaring that "having seized the body, hold the soul, if you hold the soul, where could the body go?" to explain his support and cultivation of Tibetan Buddhism (Bira, 1999, p. 242). The new generation of Mongols were essentially settled nomads, living in semipermanent urban camps, educated, sophisticated, and appreciative of life's fineries and luxuries. Qubilai QaDan has been described as "the greatest cosmopolitan ruler that has ever been known in history" (Bira, 1999, p. 241). His brother Hülegü and the Ilkhans in Iran received other praises for their rule: justice, farsightedness, and statesmanship.

Once in power, the Mongol princes sought to rule their subjects with justice and tolerance, and for the prosperity of all. Their contemporaries differentiated between the "barbarian" nomads of the past and their ruling masters now residing in fabulous imperial courts. The remains of the ragged Khwarazmshah's army, led by the bandit king Jalal al-Din Mangkaburti, now inspired far more fear and loathing than the disciplined Mongol troops. The Mongols had never targeted specific groups for persecution on religious, nationalistic, or ethnic grounds. When Baghdad was attacked, it was with the advice of Muslim advisers such as Nasir al-Din Tusi while supporting Muslim armies were led by Muslim rulers. Co-option was the desired result of the threat of attack or of conquest. Top administrators in all parts of the empire were Mongol, Chinese, Persian, Uighur, Armenian, European, or Turkish. Loyalty and ability were prized above ethnicity or religion. A center of learning was established around 1260 in Iran's first Mongol capital, Maragheh. It attracted scholars from around the world who flocked, in particular, to see the observatory built for the court favorite, Tusi. The Syriac cleric Bar Hebraeus used the libraries, stocked from the ruins of Baghdad, Alamut, and other conquered cultural centers, to research his own acclaimed studies and historical accounts.

Most of what is now known of the Mongols comes from non-Mongol sources, among them Persian, Arabic, Armenian, European, and Chinese observers and commentators, who betrayed a degree of anti-Mongol bias, even from loyal proponents and servants, such as the Persian Muslim Juvaini (died 1282), who expresses a sense of disdain and condescension for these new rulers, the Mongols. It thus seems that the Mongols may have become victims of their own propaganda. The impact of their conquest was of such might that their achievements have been drowned till now in a sea of blood.

Sources: "Mongol Conquests." Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity. Ed. Dinah L. Shelton. Vol. 2. Gale Cengage, 2005.

Images:

Image (1 of 1)

How are Hareton and Heathcliff alike and different?

Heathcliff and Hareton are alike in many ways both in characteristics and circumstances.  Heathcliff had been a poor orphan brought into the Earnshaw household and at first treated like a son.  After the death of the father, Hindley began to treat Heathcliff as a servant, almost a slave.  In a similar manner, Hareton began life as the son and heir of the house, but when Heathcliff managed to basically steal the estate from Hindley, and Hindley died, Hareton became the servant, and almost slave.  Both Heathcliff and Hareton were raised with little or no education or training in social graces.  The difference between them is that Heathcliff allowed his circumstances to warp him, and grew up desiring little more than revenge.  Even his love for Catharine was somehow swathed in darkness and contributed to her death.  Hareton, although quick tempered, really has a good heart and a desire to improve himself.  He is able to rise above his circumstances and the marriage between him and Catherine closes the deadly cycle of revenge and brings healing to the families involved.  There love can be lived and enjoyed in a way that the tortured love of Heathcliff and Catherine could not be.

How does Shakespeare present Juliet and her realtionship with Lord Capulet in Act 3 scene 5 of 'Romeo & Juliet' ?For this question we are only...

In addition to the above answers I want to add that the whole Capulet family is very dysfunctional.  The Nurse has raised Juliet from day one to the point of being breast-fed by the Nurse.  Lady Capulet tries to talk to Juliet in Act One, Scene Three about how she feels about getting married and when she dismisses the Nurse, Juliet looks to her for guidance and not her mother and the Nurse is then asked to stay.

In Act Three, Scene Five, Lord Capulet says, "Wife, we scarce thought us blest that God had lent us but this only child; But now I see this one is one too much, And we have a curse in having her."  What kind of father calls his daughter, a curse, a good-for nothing person, and an anemic piece of dead flesh?  Lady Capulet goes along with whatever Lord Capulet says and does what she is told.  Back in this time all women married early and were expected to be at their husband's beck and call with no questioins asked.  Women were to feel privileged to have an arranged marriage in a noble family, love didn't really enter the picture.

Source:  The Language and Literature Book by McDougal Littell

In "The Cask of Amontillado," who might Montresor be confessing what he did to? This is an inference question.

 "The Cask of Amontillado" begins with Montresor addressing someone familiar, someone who knows the "nature of his soul."  Now, as to who that might be is anyone's guess.  My thought would be that after fifty years, the only person I would trust enough to tell a secret like this would be my husband or wife and/or possibly my children.  The only reason I would do it then would be to clear my conscience.  Another case scenario could be a direct descendant of Fortunato, which sort of invalidates the whole "nature of his soul" thing, but hey, we are inferring, right.  Suppose a direct descendant of Fortunato's visted upon Montresor's death bed, and in an attempt to gain a little further revenge, he spills this whole story to them.  That makes for an interesting spin on the story if you are guessing to whom the narrator is making his confession.  Hope this helps.  Brenda

Why does Vonnegut use an objective narrator who offers no interpretation of judgements about the story he tells?

The narrative point of view is a splendid example of form contributing to meaning.  By withholding judgment, the narrator participates in the plot of the story concerning people programmed not to think for themselves.  In this way, the author behind that narrative device, Vonnegut, encourages us the readers to make judgments, to participate in shaping the meaning of the story.

In the novel Crime and Punishment, how is the pawnbroker's room similar to and different from Rodya's room?

Located upstairs in poor tenement buildings, both rooms are tiny,  have yellow wallpaper, and are furnished similarly, with a sofa and small table in front and a few chairs.  Rodya's room is arguably somewhat smaller.

There is a great difference between the ways the rooms present and are cared for.  The pawnbroker's exudes cleanliness, "both furniture and floors had been rubbed until they shone"    (Chapter 1).  When Rodya visits, the room is "brightly illuminated by the setting sun" (Chapter 1), and someone has attempted to make the room comfortable and inviting, adding geraniums, muslin curtains, and framed prints on the walls.

Rodya's room is discribed as being claustrophobic and dirty, with the "grimy...wallpaper everywhere coming off the walls" (Chapter 3).  The furniture is not in good condition, the sofa in rags, and the books on the table are covered in dust.

What does Proctor tell Danforth about his doubts?

Here are some of the direct quotes:

Excellency, does it not strike upon you that so many of these women have lived so long with such upright reputation, and -

It's interesting the way he puts this because he shows respect, but frames it in a question so that the almighty judge must think about it. Proctor gets cut off by Parris who questions his faith.

In reference specifically to Rebecca Nurse he claims this about who is speaking:

It is children only, and this one [referring to Mary Warren] will swear she lied to you.

Proctor doesn't have doubts about what is going on. He does know truth, but he is trying to present Danforth with reasonable evidence to give Danforth doubt with what the girls are saying.

He further tries to give Danforth reason to doubt by providing a list of names who support and claim the women accused are of good virtue.

What was Tom Robinson's Life like? How old was he, how many kids did he have? Just stuff like that. Was it even mentioned in the book?

There is not much told to us in To Kill a Mockingbird about Tom Robinson's life. We know that he is a black man accused of raping a white woman, and that Atticus takes his case. We know that Helen Robinson is Tom's wife. The Robinsons seem to be upstanding citizens in their community in Maycomb. When the trial comes, we finally learn a little more about Tom Robinson. In chapter 19, Atticus brings to light more facts about Tom's life.

     Tom took the oath and stepped into the witness chair. Atticus very quickly induced to tell us (sitting in the courtroom):
     Tom was twenty-five years of age, he was married with three children; he had been in trouble with the law before; he once received thirty days for disorderly conduct.

Atticus goes on to tell us that Tom had severely damaged his left arm in a cotton gin as a child, and has no use of his arm to this day. This is a very important piece of information for the jury. 

What is Frank's horoscope in All My Sons?

Frank dabbles in astrology. He agrees to concoct a horoscope for Larry. He announces that the day Larry disappeared was one of his favorable days-meaning days when success and luck are highest. He determines that it would be unlikely for Larry to have died on this day.

Is Simon really "batty"?

Golding makes it clear that Simon has been known to suffer fainting spells.  This helps to encourage the other boys to question his mental alertness.  Some critics have argued that Simon is an epileptic, and that he experiences seizures, which lead to his hallucination in the woods with the pig's head.  Although Golding gives no evidence to this, it is certainly one way to connect his "visions" and his fainting spells. 

In scene 6 Lennox and a lord discuss the events in Scotland. What do we learn about Malcolm and Macduff?

In Act 3.6 of Shakespeare's Macbeth, when Lennox and the Lord talk, we learn that Malcolm is in England attempting to secure help to overthrow Macbeth, and Macduff has joined him.  They hope to convince lords from Northern England to take an interest in what is occurring north of the English border.

The scene is important more for what it reveals about others than what it reveals about Malcolm and Macduff:  it reveals that others in Scotland are unhappy with Macbeth's rule, and that others strongly suspect Macbeth of treachery.  The Lord and Lennox speak ironically, indicating that they do not believe the coincidences that have supposedly led to so many deaths.  The indication is that they believe Macbeth is to blame.

But, concerning Macduff, particularly, this scene reveals the fruition of Macduff's suspicions.  He first reveals that he suspects Macbeth when he is the one to question Macbeth's killing of the two grooms--the only possible witnesses to Duncan's assassination.  Then Macduff does not attend Macbeth's coronation.  He is also notably absent from Macbeth's castle. 

Macduff has, then, by the time of this conversation between the Lord and Lennox, acted on his suspicions and, apparently, decided his suspicions are accurate.

How do we compare the actions of Beowulf’s followers when he fights Grendel’s mother and when he fights the dragon in Beowulf?

Beowulf brings fourteen of his best Geats with him to fight Grendel. One is sacrificed before the battle of Grendel. The thirteen who remain are loyal and eager to help their lord. When he descends into the lake where Gredel's mother resides, they ring the perimeter of the lake, along with Hrothgar and his men, and wait for their lord to return triumphant. After killing Grendel's mother and removing the head of Grendel, for a trophy, the lake's surface becomes clotted with blood. The men who await Beowulf fear he is dead and will not return. Hrothgar and his men leave the scene and return to Herot for a meal. Beowulf's men remain out of loyalty and have only a semblance of hope that their leader will return. When Beowulf fights the dragon, he is a much older man, and has ruled Geatland for fifty years. He is determined to rid his land of the dragon and still seeks fame and glory. Beowulf again selects the bravest of his warriors and tells them to wait for him, in case they are needed. He will fight the dragon alone, if possible. The dragon is a fearsome adversary. Its flames melt Beowulf's shield, and its hard skin is responsible for his sword breaking. Fire engulfs Beowulf, and his men, rather than help their leader, run into the forest and are afraid. The difference one sees when comparing the two battles is the reaction of the men. In the fight with Grendel's mother, Beowulf's men do not leave. In neither instance do they fight, but in the battle with the dragon they let down their leader and appear cowardly.