Compare and contrast Gatsby and Tom?How are they alike and different Given the extremely negative light in which Tom is portrayed throughout thenovel

Tom is portrayed negatively by the narrator Nick in The Great Gatsby, and Nick's negative view of Tom may be exacerbated (made worse) by Nick's Midwestern values.  If the narrator were from the East and an extremely wealthy man himself, his portrayal of Tom might be different.

At the same time, though Nick is opinionated, as any life-like fictional character is, he seems more than willing to relate multiple sides of characters.  He presents moments of Daisy's dazzling charm and beauty, but also presents her at times as shallow and greedy.  Jordan, too, is presented with positive, as well as negative, characteristics.  But Nick doesn't really reveal anything positive about Tom.  It's all negative.

That said, then, one can probably assume that while Tom's characterization in the novel may be slightly skewed by Nick, on the whole it's probably pretty accurate.

Concerning the comparisan you need:

• Tom is old money, Gatsby new


• Tom is a pragmatist, Gatsby an idealist


• Tom is practical, Gatsby is a romantic


• Tom is closed-minded, Gatsby open-minded, at least for the most part


• Tom is Eastern, Gatsby Midwestern

What is the plot of the story "The Rules of the Game" by Amy Tan?

At the beginning the narrator recalls, "I was six when my mother taught me the art of invisible strength. It was a strategy for winning arguments, respect from others, and eventually, though neither of us knew it at the time, chess games.” The plot concerns Waverly learning the “art of invisible strength,” which is Waverly's search for an identity that is both Chinese and American. After their fight and Waverly runs away, she eventually returns, and her mother says she will no longer have anything to do with her daughter.  Waverly imagines playing a game of chess with her mother where her mother's pieces conquer all of her own. However, the story ends with Waverly learning this “invisible strength” through her mother’s teachings: “As her men drew closer to my edge, I felt myself growing light. I rose up into the air and flew out the window. Higher and higher, above the alley, over the tops of tiled roofs, where I was gathered up by the wind and pushed up toward the night sky until everything below me disappeared and I was alone.  I closed my eyes and pondered my next move.” With invisible strength she can fly, become who she is on her own terms (“be alone”) and then make her next move in the metaphorical chess game of life.

What is the difference between liberalism, conservatism and radicalism when it comes to the economy?

If we're talking about modern days in the United States, here is the difference.

Liberals believe that the government should be pretty deeply involved in the economy.  They think that the government must do this to prevent unfairness to poorer people and to prevent companies from doing various kinds of bad things (pollution, low wages, etc).

Conservatives believe the government should leave the economy alone (if they are true conservatives).  They believe that a free market, left alone, will produce the best effects.

Radicals want the government to run the economy.  They want the government to not just regulate things but to actually own all the "means of production."  They want all companies to be run by the government.

When was "Annabel Lee" written? How did she die?

The poem was written in 1849. 

The poem, "Annabel Lee" does not state directly how Annabel Lee died.  In the 3rd stanza the line, "Chilling my Annabel Lee", and the lines in the 4th stanza, ..... , chilling / And killing my Annabel Lee" might indicate that she died of influenza or pneumonia which would have been common in the 19th century. This is conjecture, of course, since the poem does not represent any one person in particular.  Many have speculated that the inspiration for the poem was Poe's young wife, Virginia Clemm, but she outlived Poe so her death was not an issue with him.

What is the setting for "The Interlopers" and how does it contribute to the mood?

Saki’s “The Interlopers” is an ironic tale about a generational family feud that appears to be resolved until a surprise ending occurs. In this story, as in many stories, the setting is more important than just the simple reporting of the time and place in which the action occurs.

Good settings should complement and reflect upon a work’s mood and theme. This is often done symbolically, as aspects of the place(s) in the story represent characters’ attitudes, beliefs, hopes, fears, etc. Such symbolism, while not always immediately obvious to the reader, draws the reader deeper into the story.

The setting in “The Interlopers” is "the narrow strip of precipitous woodland" that the families of the two main characters have been conflicting over for several generations.

The land is not particularly valuable in and of itself; by establishing that the setting is a relatively meaningless piece of property, Sake has commented on the effect of possessiveness and spite: people are willing to kill and die for it. The mood here is somber.

When the two main characters are out hunting on this piece of land, the setting is described in a way that emphasizes the danger it represents, as one character has:

wandered far down the steep slopes amid the wild tangle of undergrowth, peering through the tree trunks and listening through the whistling and skirling of the wind and the restless beating of the branches.

So, at this point in the story the setting has done two things—established the characters’ greed, and foreshadowed a mood of dread and danger by establishing the situation the characters will soon find themselves in.

Once the characters encounter each other, the setting takes on a more symbolic function. As they stare each other down at gunpoint, a bolt of lightning shatters a nearby tree, which falls and pins them both to the ground:

A fierce shriek of the storm had been answered by a splitting crash over their heads, and ere they could leap aside a mass of falling beech tree had thundered down on them.

Look at what has happened with Saki’s depiction of the setting now: the men have each been injured and trapped by the tree, which is part of the property they are fighting over. Symbolically this presentation of the setting demonstrates the idea that greed and feuds will entrap people who engage in them. In this case, both men are imperiled by the same aspect (the tree) of the land they are fighting over.

Now the story moves into another phase. Since the men are trapped near each other, they can do nothing but think. They decide to end the feud. So the setting, by physically restraining the men, has brought about their reconciliation. This positive mood is short-lived; however, because the setting has one more blow to deal to the men. When they think they see men approaching them a distance away, the men believe they are about to be rescued. The only question is who the men are:

“Who are they?” asked Georg quickly, straining his eyes to see what the other would gladly not have seen.

“Wolves.”

The wolves, like the tree that trapped them, are also elements of this particular setting. The happy ending we thought we were about to get will not happen. By using the wolves to kill them (we can assume they were attacked by the wolves, although the story ends before this happens) Saki has brought about the men’s ultimate demise through the thing that actually caused their feud in the first place—the land (which is, of course, the setting). If the men had simply killed one another with gunfire we would not have the same symbolic significance. Saki leaves the readers in a cautionary mood--look what can happen when we place possessions above people. 

In "The Road Not Taken," what is the meaning of the last stanza?

The last stanza is much debated but there are a few clues as to its meaning.  Firstly, the narrator tell us with a 'sigh' which seems to indicate regret.  We know that the narrator is now speaking a long time later as he refers to the choice of path he made as being in the past.  "

"I shall be telling this with a sigh

Somewhere ages and ages hence:"

This gives the reader a sense of the future.  The narrator seems to indicate that he chose the less traveled road and that, that one choice in his life had made all the difference.

 Some critics consider the last stanza to be a celebration of non conformity meaning that because the narrator took the path less traveled in other words the unusual way - this action has made and defined even his future life.

Other critics tend to see this poem as sad.  The 'sigh' at the beginning of the last stanza indicates remorse and the distance between the choice of path and the time of narration indicates an older person looking back on life.  

To answer the last part of the question. If you accept the first interpretation of the poem (non conformity) then the reason he chose the less traveled road is to be a non conformist. If you accept the second interpretation, then you do not know why the narrator took the less traveled road - only that he regrets it. 

What were the major reasons for the suffering of women in Victorian England?

Three of the major reasons for the suffering of women in Victorian England were legal, religious, and ideological constraints. In terms of legal constraints, women were not recognized as having legal status while they were unmarried and living under their father's guardianship and, then again, once they were married. Women whose father had died and who had their own means of support--whether through inheritance or work--and who refused to marry or co-habitate could be considered legally independent.

Otherwise, women held no legal rights. Once married, they held no rights to their property or bodies. All their possessions were legally turned over to their husbands upon marriage. A husband could demand both conjugal and childbearing rights of his wife. Children were the property of the husband and could be taken from the wife or sent away without her consent. Should she choose to leave a violent marriage, she would leave penniless and without her children. If she were caught, she would be returned to her husband who had the right to punish and imprison her. Literature to the point is The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, A Dolls' House, Jane Eyre and David Copperfield.

In terms of religious constraints, the New Testament admonition to subordination of women to their husbands was raised to idolatrous standards and the Church of England condoned or, at best, turned its back on mistreatment given wives by their husbands. Additionally, women were typified as weak-minded individuals who were easily swayed by sin, vice and deceit and as the originators of the temptation that tore men from the Biblical Garden of Paradise, Eden; so women were not to be trusted.

This had ramifications in two directions. First, women were not to be trusted in terms of their power to seduce men away from moral conduct. Therefore their dress and deportment must at all times be the extreme of chaste and modest. Clothing of the Victorian period confined women's movement and endangered their health--much as women's clothing does now. Second, they were not to be trusted in the sense that they were not to be exposed to higher ideas such as men could objectively debate and judge as good or bad.

In terms of ideological constraints, women, at their best--when protected from deceit, sin and vice and covered up, thus hiding their seductive powers--were goddesses and angels of the home. They were recognized as the ones who would bear and rear the next generation of men (who would rule and expound untold great ideas) and women (who would bear and rear the next generation of great men and child-bearing women).

Even though women could independently educate themselves to the higher ideas of philosophy, science, and history (if permitted to do so), and even though women were permitted to be midwives and doctors, social pressures of criticism and ostracism were so great that few dared venture where permitted to go. Women of the upper classes restricted themselves to being nurses, writers and governesses. Women of the lower classes labored at menial jobs--domestic service, factory labor, farming--while trying to raise too many children with too little money--very much like women of lower classes do now.