In "The Summer of the Beautiful White Horse" by William Saroyan, what does Aram feel about the crazy streak in the family?

In the story, Aram feels that Mourad perfectly exemplifies the 'crazy streak' in his family. He thinks that this streak explains Mourad's extraordinary behavior in regards to the stolen horse.

Aram explains that a man can be genetically descended from his father and still diverge from his paternal heritage in terms of spirit. Effectively, Aram feels that Mourad is the 'natural descendant' of the bad-tempered and mercurial Uncle Khosrove, even though Mourad is the genetic son of Zorab, a very practical man.

Aram is ambivalent about Mourad's rationalizations about the stolen horse, but he does admire Mourad's daredevil sense of adventure. While Aram's own sense of decorum would never have allowed him to steal John Byro's horse, he appreciates the opportunity, accorded him by Mourad's 'crazy streak,' to ride the magnificent horse for a time.

Could you explain the DSM-5's section on substance-related and addictive disorders in laymen's terms?

In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5 (DSM-V), there have been several changes related to diagnosing substance use. There were previously two categories to diagnose substance use — substance abuse and substance dependence, as it was thought that substance abuse was the first phase people went through, followed by substance dependence. Research now suggests the substance abuse phase can be very severe, so these two separate categories have now been combined into one, called Substance Use Disorder. This diagnosis requires 2-3 symptoms from a list of 11, while the older diagnosis of substance abuse only required one symptom. With the exception of caffeine, each substance is classified as a separate disorder. 

In addition, Gambling Disorder has been added to the section called Addictive Disorders, as it is now recognized as similar to substance disorders with regard to its cognitive origins, clinical presentation, physiology, comorbidity, and treatment. Internet Gaming Disorder is still in Section III of the DSM-V, the section for disorders that require further research. Caffeine use disorder is not a diagnosis in the DSM-V, though there is research that discontinued use can result in withdrawal symptoms. It is also in Section III, marked for future research.

What were the significant social effects of World War II on Australia and Britain?

World War II resulted in significant social changes in Britain. Members of different socio-economic classes fought alongside each other in the military and on the home front, helping to begin to reduce the rigid class distinctions in Britain. Everyone was subject to the rationing of foods and resources, resulting in a sense of equality. In addition, millions of women helped in defense plants and on farms while men were fighting in the war, changing the way in which women were viewed and helping to slowly reduce sexism and enlarge people's ideas about what women could accomplish in the workplace. In addition, the government became very involved in people's lives and more powerful in instituting a draft and leading the war effort abroad and at home. After the war, the government developed a welfare state that was heavily involved in providing for its people, while the country began to let go of the colonies it had long controlled as an empire. British people no longer saw themselves as imperial powers; instead, they concentrated on rebuilding their country after the war.

Similarly, in Australia, which was part of the British Commonwealth, women joined the war effort by working in factories and working on farms. These changes affected the way in which people saw women. In addition, people of all socioeconomic groups had to pull together for the war effort, helping to reduce social distinctions. People had to endure rationing, as they did in Britain, to save goods and resources for the war effort, and as these rules applied to everyone, the effect was to reduce class distinctions during the war. 

What stylistic devices are used in Lady Macbeth's soliloquy in Act I, Scene 5?

In this soliloquy in Act I, Scene 5, Lady Macbeth establishes herself as incredibly ambitious, immoral, and cunning. Let's see which stylistic devices in particular help convey her villainous character during this soliloquy.

1. Apostrophe. While apostrophes are, of course, those little marks of punctuation, apostrophe is also a literary device in which the speaker addresses someone or something who isn't actually there. Keep in mind that Lady Macbeth is alone during this speech. She's holding the letter from her husband, and talking aloud to herself. When Lady Macbeth directs her comments toward her husband, calling him "thee" and "thou," she's using apostrophe. This stylistic device adds drama to the scene and probably helps the actress project her voice better, and turn her face more toward the audience, than if she were simply muttering to herself.

2. Metaphor. By saying her husband has too much "milk of human kindness," Lady Macbeth uses a metaphor to criticize her husband's kind nature as babyish or womanly.

3. Parallelism and alliteration: "What thou wouldst highly, That wouldst thou holily." With a repetitive, balanced sentence structure and a clever following of "highly" with "holily," Lady Macbeth is calling extra attention to the artfulness of the idea she's talking about here: that her husband really wants something, but he's too goody-goody to do what's necessary to get it.

4. Personification. By talking about the "valor" of her own tongue (the bravery of her words) and by saying that "fate and metaphysical aid" both want Macbeth to be crowned, Lady Macbeth is speaking in a firm, confident, forceful way, which shows us that she's not simply the masculine one in her marriage but also the more powerful one. 

Lady Macbeth's soliloquies are rich in stylistic devices like these, and I'm sure you can find more examples of them if you continue to examine the text closely. The four listed above strike me as the most effective ones in establishing Lady Macbeth's terrifying willingness to do anything necessary to grab power for herself and her husband.

What is the blue hotel like in Stephen Crane's story "The Blue Hotel"?

The hotel, known as the Palace Hotel, is painted the blue which matches the leg of a certain heron (probably the Little Blue Heron), and it stands alone on the prairie. This hotel is the first building sited by the traveler who steps down from the train since it stands alone before the location of the smaller, clap-board houses which populate Fort Romper, Nebraska.

The Palace Hotel at Fort Romper was a light blue...[and] it was always screaming and howling in a way that made the dazzling winter landscape of Nebraska seem only a gay swampish hush.

The Palace Hotel is owned by a flamboyant Irishman named Pat Scully. The blue color of the hotel is symbolic of this owner, whose boldness and arrogance causes him to feel that he possesses a superior dwelling which should catch the sight of travelers and bring them into his hotel. Since it is an unnatural color, it may foreshadow the unnatural death of the Swede, later hinted at by the red light that places its color onto the snow. There is also an unnatural collusion of the cowboy and the Easterner in effecting the Swede's murder.

In Oedipus The King, compare and contrast male with female characters.

In Oedipus the King (also known as Oedipus Rex), the male characters dominate the play in terms of numbers. The men are the heroes and the villains in the sense that the conflict on stage and in recounted stories revolves around them. 

Oedipus, Creon and Tiresias are each male (although Tiresias was once turned into a woman and can be seen as somewhat androgynous perhaps) and these three characters do most of the speaking in the play.

Some of the biggest differences in characters are not best seen by contrasting male and female characters, but instead by comparing attitudes held among both genders in regards to logic and insistence. However, in making the gender comparison, we can see that men are presented as being rash and quick to anger and fits of pride. The queen, Iocaste, is level-headed and largely keeps her own counsel (whereas Oedipus feels the need to find support for his views from others).

When Oedipus begins to doubt Creon and threatens to have Creon killed, Iocaste arrives on the scene. The chorus wonders if “this dreadful quarrel can be resolved through her,” suggesting that this female character might have powers of reason and influence enough to mediate between the male king in his brother-in-law.

She chastises both men:

“Poor foolish men, what wicked din is this?

With Thebes sick to death, is it not shameful

That you should rake some private quarrel up?”

In admonishing the men, Iocaste is also offering a direct characterization of their foolishly violent attitudes. 

Iocaste is respected by the men for her position and for her intellect. Oedipus tells her that “none of these men deserved [his] confidence as you do.” Yet, in the end, she kills herself after unsuccessfully pleading with Oedipus to give up on his inquiry into his own past and then finds out the truth about her husband.

The female character is a figure of caring, making repeated attempts to advise Oedipus in ways that will assure his comfort and peace of mind. The male characters hear Iocaste, but, as in the case of Oedipus, these male characters do not always listen.

The male characters are head-strong and stubborn, standing on points of pride. This is true for Oedipus to a greater extreme than it is for Creon and Tiresias, but we can still see both minor characters acting on stubborn pride as well.    

What is a character trait for Macduff in addition to his loyalty and his bravery in Macbeth?

Another character trait for Macduff is his hostility toward Macbeth. He puts into action the campaign to dethrone Macbeth while he also personally seeks revenge against Macbeth for the murder of his wife and son.

In Act II, Scene 3, Banquo declares, "Fears and scruples shake us" (2.3.123), adding that he will fight against the "treasonous malice" which has killed Duncan. Hearing this declaration of Banquo's, Macduff joins in: "And so do I" (2.3.127). Macduff's loyalty to King Duncan and his family thus impels him to journey to England in order to obtain aid there from King Edward and Lord Siward so that Macbeth can be removed and Duncan's son Malcolm be crowned as the rightful king. 

Later, in Act V, Macduff returns to Scotland with Malcolm, the rightful heir to the throne of Scotland. There in Dunsinane Macduff confronts Macbeth with hostility, calling him a "bloodier villain" than words can describe. But, Macbeth refuses to fight him, saying,

I bear a charmed life which must not yield
To one of woman born. (5.8.12-13)

When Macduff reveals that it was he who was not "woman born" since he was taken from his dead mother's womb, Macbeth then realizes that the witches' prediction is about to become true. Still, he refuses to yield to Macduff. So, the hostile Macduff calls Macbeth a coward and a tyrant. Enraged by Macduff's hostility toward him, Macbeth then declares he "will try the last" and fights, but is defeated by the avenging Macduff. 

What is the atmosphere in Act 1, scene 5 of Shakespeare's Hamlet?

The atmosphere of this particular scene is especially dark and foreboding.  This is the scene in which Hamlet speaks, in depth, with the ghost of his father who claims he was callously murdered by his brother, the now-king Claudius, while he slept in his garden.  The fact that Hamlet is speaking with the ghost of his murdered father is dark enough, but the knowledge of how vicious Hamlet's uncle (and step-father) Claudius is makes us anticipate some trouble to come between Hamlet, who's been charged by his father with avenging his death, and Claudius, who will obviously do just about anything -- however unscrupulous -- to hold on to his position and his wife.  At the end of the scene, when Hamlet asks those men on the watch to swear that they will not speak a word of what they've seen, the now-unseen ghost actually booms from underneath the stage, "Swear!"  Thus, he is watching and listening to everything Hamlet says and does, and this is also rather chilling.

What is the effect of impurities on freezing point?

The freezing point of a liquid is the temperature at which the solid and liquid forms of the substance are in equilibrium (co-exist). When water is cooled, at 0 degrees Celsius, water starts freezing. On further cooling, the temperature will remain unchanged until the freezing is complete. This temperature (0 C) at which ice and water co-exist is called the freezing point of water. 

When a non-volatile solute is dissolved in a liquid, the vapor pressure of the solvent is lowered. The vapor pressure of the solution thus formed will be always less than that of the pure solvent. This phenomenon is called lowering of vapor pressure. Lowering of vapor pressure is a colligative property. A colligative property depends on the number of solute particles in the solution, and is independent of the nature of the solute. The magnitude of a colligative property is proportional to the mole-fraction(concentration) of the solute in the solution.  

When a dilute aqueous solution of NaCl is cooled, at a particular temperature ice starts forming. This temperature is called the freezing point of the solution. The freezing point of the solution will always be below that of the pure solvent. This is a consequence of the lowering of the vapor pressure. This phenomenon is called freezing point depression, which also is a colligative property.

Thus, an aqueous NaCl solution will freeze at a temperature below 0 degrees C, which is the normal freezing point of water. In general, a solution with a solute (regarded as an impurity in the study of colligative properties of dilute solutions) has a freezing point below that of the pure solvent.

Measurements of colligative properties can be used to determine the molar mass of the solute.                                     

In Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, why doesn't Curley's wife like talking to her husband?

Curley and Curley's wife seem to have a dysfunctional relationship. For one thing, they are always looking for each other without success. Twice in Chapter Two, Curley bursts into the bunkhouse looking for her. The second time he has just missed her. Their marriage obviously lacks communication and the only time they are in the same room together is when she is already dead. In Chapters Four and Five, Curley's wife reveals more about her life with Curley, first in Crooks's room and later with Lennie alone in the barn. In Chapter Four, when she enters Crooks's room, she is predictably looking for her husband. It seems to be an excuse to spend time talking to the men. She says she doesn't like talking to Curley because he is forever bragging about fighting and how he's going to beat someone up:

“Sure I gotta husban’. You all seen him. Swell guy, ain’t he? Spends all his time sayin’ what he’s gonna do to guys he don’t like, and he don’t like nobody. Think I’m gonna stay in that two-by-four house and listen how Curley’s gonna lead with his left twicet, and then bring in the ol’ right cross? ‘One-two,’ he says. ‘Jus’ the ol’ one-two an’ he’ll go down.’”

Later, in Chapter Five, when she is alone with Lennie in the barn, she confesses that she doesn't even like Curley:

“Well, I ain’t told this to nobody before. Maybe I oughten to. I don’ like Curley. He ain’t a nice fella.” 

She only married him in order to defy her mother, who had supposedly stolen a letter about a potential job as an actress. She also expresses her loneliness to Lennie and allows him to stroke her hair, which turns out to be a very bad idea. Her dislike for Curley and her intense loneliness prove to be her eventual undoing. 

How does the use of dialect contribute to "Thank You Ma'm" by Langston Hughes?

By using urban dialect in “Thank You M’am,” Langston Hughes adds to the authenticity of the short story.

During his many years as an author, Hughes used the native dialect of African-Americans living in Harlem in his work. He used his writing as a vehicle to advocate for “his” people, and to provide them with literature they could identify with.

In “Thank You, M’am,” Hughes incorporates the urban dialect in dialogue between characters, and through the statements presented by the narrator. In both cases, the dialect adds validity to the story. In addition, the intended audience can relate to the situations in the story because they are familiar.

As you read the dialogue between Mrs. Jones and Roger, you experience urban dialect that shows how the young man responds to the woman he attempted to victimize. Although he tried to steal her purse while she walked home from work, he calls her “M’am,” which is a term of respect. Langston Hughes shows the young man’s desperation, but also demonstrates how he was taught to respond to his elders. Mrs. Jones knows which questions are appropriate to ask Roger, and which ones to leave out of their conversation.

“Um-hum! And your face is dirty. I got a great mind to wash your face for you. Ain’t you got nobody home to tell you to wash your face?”

 “No’m,” said the boy.

 “Then it will get washed this evening,” said the large woman starting up the street, dragging the frightened boy behind her.

What is the percentage of children who live below the poverty line in the US? What do you think living in poverty does to the decision-making of...

According to the National Center for Children in Poverty (see the link below), 22% of American children live in poverty. That means they live below the federal poverty level of $23,550 a year for a family of four. Many of their parents work but earn too little to support their children or have interrupted employment. According to UNICEF (see the link below), the U.S. ranks 36 out of 41 among industrialized nations for its rate of childhood poverty. In other words, childhood poverty is worse in the U.S. than in most industrialized nations. In Norway, only 5.3% of children live in poverty. 

The Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics reported that in 2010, 22% of children lived with food insecurity, meaning that at certain points of the month or year, the family has a less-than-adequate food supply. For example, the parents could be out of work, or the family could be waiting for payments from the government (which often are inadequate and run out by the end of the month). Food insecurity contributes to the inability of poor families to provide nutritious meals to their children, in spite of their best intent to do so. In addition, poverty and the resulting chaos it imposes on a family mean that poor families cannot often plan for meals, and the parents have limited decisions about what kinds of food they can provide. Poor parents often do not have the money to drive to stores (which may be located a far distance away) and to buy all the ingredients necessary to make nutritious meals in advance. 

What are Sade's three most important character traits?

In The Other Side of Truth, the protagonist, Sade, is caring. After her mother is killed, she cares for her younger brother, Femi. She is grieving, and "she wanted to lie down and make everything stop" (page 7). Instead, when her brother shows up at her door, she takes his hand and is present to comfort and lead him through this terrible episode in their lives. Sade is also perceptive. For example, she understands that her mother had been worried about the effects of her father's articles in Nigeria (page 8). Her mother had been worried what the results of his publishing his articles might be, but Sade understands that her mother continued to allow her father to write what he thought was right, in spite of the consequences.

In addition, Sade is clearly courageous at a level well beyond her years. She is able to negotiate the streets of London as a scared foreigner without much help from adults, and she navigates her way to a newscaster's office to tell her father's story in an effort to have her father released. Sade's courage is even more remarkable because she is fearful sometimes about speaking her mind. For example, after she speaks to the newscaster and is leaving his office, "she felt her heart quietly throb" (page 198). Speaking to this man and advocating for her father are not easy for her, but she does so anyway. She maintains hope that Mr. Seven O'Clock, as she calls the newscaster, will eventually tell her father's story and that the truth will set her father free, and her bravery is eventually rewarded when her father is released from detention in England.

What is Kurt Vonnegut's view on equality?

Kurt Vonnegut's short story "Harrison Bergeron" examines a futuristic world in which all people have been rendered equal through the use of personalized handicaps for those who excel at a particular quality. Those who are too beautiful must mask their appearance with hideous disguises; those who are too strong must be burdened by immense weights; those who are too intelligent must be impeded by devices that constantly interrupt their thoughts.

Harrison Bergeron, the titular protagonist, is one of those superior individuals who has been handicapped in many horrific ways. After escaping from prison, Harrison takes over a television broadcast and attempts to defy the government's decrees on handicaps, declaring himself the new emperor. However, his "reign" is short-lived, as he is soon shot dead by the handicapper general, Diana Moon Glampers.

Upon reading this story, it is quite evident that Kurt Vonnegut believes that total equality would be a grave mistake—one that would rob the world of individualism and the gifts of many talented people. America has been dumbed down, enslaved, and nullified in this story; its residents are certainly not rendered free by the delusional "leveling" of the playing field that has occurred. The costs of this brand of equality are nothing short of disastrous, with a dictatorship-like government emerging to ensure that the status quo is maintained. Vonnegut is clearly warning readers about this kind of dangerous propaganda and the consequences that enforcing equality would bring about.

What are some interesting facts about Merrimack v. Monitor?

First, if you wish to be technical, it should be the battle between the C.S.S. Virginia, which is what the Confederacy named the captured Merrimack after it was recovered from being scuttled at Norfolk Naval Yard.  The Monitor actually describes a class of riverine and coastal ships--monitors would be used in the naval warfare on rivers in the Confederacy throughout the war.  

It was rumored that the Virginia would steam its way past Hampton Roads, open up the federal blockade, and even shell Washington D.C.  This one ship started an evacuation of the Federal capital and even Mary Todd Lincoln and her children felt compelled to leave the city--all because of the presence of this one ship!  Given the damage she inflicted on three wooden ships, people felt that their fears were justified.  The Virginia's key weapon was a ram in the bow of the ship, which was meant to literally knock holes in enemy ships.  This was a common way of waging war in an era of smooth-bore cannon.  

This would be the first battle between ironclads in history--ironclads saw very limited action in the Crimean War, but never faced each other.  The Virginia used the time-honored method of firing broadsides into its quarry, while the Monitor used a revolving turret gun--this revolving turret would be the model that other navies would model thereafter.  No one actually died during the battle, and both sides claimed victory.  The Monitor sank in a storm (it had such a shallow draft that it was not meant for open ocean travel) and the Virginia was destroyed rather than fall into Union hands before the end of 1862.  

How is the election of Abraham Lincoln as U.S. president in 1860 connected to the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter on April 12-13, 1861?

After Abraham Lincoln was elected in early November of 1860, the Confederate states began to secede from the country. South Carolina was the first Confederate state to secede, in December of 1860. When this occurred, the federal troops that had been stationed in Charleston, South Carolina, evacuated from the city and relocated to Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor. The federal troops regarded the fort as located on federal ground, but the Confederates claimed the fort as their own. After Lincoln assumed office in March of 1861, he was pressured to take some action about Fort Sumter, as the troops in the fort (who had been sent supplies by the previous President, Buchanan, in January of 1861), were running out of supplies. In early April, Lincoln decided to send supplies to the fort but said he would not send ammunition if the Confederacy did not attack. However, on April 12, 1861, the Confederacy fired on the fort, and the Civil War began. 

How did the Great Depression affect the elderly?

The Great Depression affected the elderly significantly. As the economy dropped, the elderly were in a very precarious position. Companies were not looking to hire older workers. Thus, it was difficult for those who had lost their job to find a new one. The elderly were also impacted by the bank failures. Many of the elderly had a significant portion of their savings in the banks. When the banks closed, some lost a significant portion, if not all, of their savings.

There were other factors that impacted the elderly. The elderly were impacted by the stock market crash. Many people in this group had invested heavily in the market. When the stock market dropped, many of the elderly lost their investments. If they still had a mortgage to pay, the possibility of losing their home was high since they had lost much of their money in the stock market crash and/or in the bank failures. Many times, the elderly had to help other relatives that were struggling because of the Great Depression. This brought added pressure to the elderly.

The Great Depression impacted the elderly in several ways.

In To Kill a Mockingbird, how does the trial change Atticus?

Atticus is disappointed when Tom Robinson is convicted and then kills himself trying to escape prison.  He knew that he was never going to win the case, but it affects him just the same.  Although Atticus explains to his children that the case is almost unwinnable, he also tried his best and really tried to make a difference for Maycomb.  

Atticus realized that acquitting Tom Robinson, despite the lack of evidence, would be very hard for the jury.  He still tried to explain to them why they should.  He may have given one of the most important closing statements of his career. 

Atticus explained to the jury that there are good men and bad men, regardless of race.  He reminded them that there was no evidence to prove that a crime even took place, and he had proved that Mayella’s injuries could not have come from Tom.  He also showed what Mayella’s home life was like, and how her father most likely was the one who beat her up. 

“…A court is only as sound as its jury, and a jury is only as sound as the men who make it up. I am confident that you gentlemen will review without passion the evidence you have heard, come to a decision, and restore this defendant to his family. In the name of God, do your duty.” (Ch. 20) 

Atticus earned the respect of the black community, and also that of others who felt that racism had seen its day.  The case took its toll on his family though.  Although Atticus did not take Bob Ewell’s threat seriously, his children were scared.  The ultimate effect was when Ewell attacked his children, injuring Jem and possibly doing worse if Boo Radley had not intervened. 

By this time, Atticus is clearly worn down.  He thinks about the impact it will have on Jem, but Heck Tate decides that they should say that Bob Ewell fell on his knife.  This prevents either Jem or Boo Radley from taking responsibility. 

“I’m not a very good man, sir, but I am sheriff of Maycomb County. … Know everything that’s happened here since before I was born. There’s a black boy dead for no reason, and the man responsible for it’s dead. Let the dead bury the dead this time, Mr. Finch. Let the dead bury the dead.” (Ch. 30) 

Atticus thanks Boo Radley for saving his children.  Scout walks Boo home, and reflects on the events of her childhood.  The events of the book are Scout’s story, but they are also Atticus’s.

Was the United States justified in interning Japanese Nationals and Japanese-American citizens? Why or why not?

I will share with you various thoughts and events surrounding the Japanese internment. Then, you should be able to come to a conclusion.

After Japan attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, there was a concern in this country about the loyalty of the Japanese who were living in the United States. People were concerned that they would sabotage our war effort and support the government of Japan. These people believed that rounding up the Japanese and moving them away from the West Coast would make it less likely for them to aid Japan during the war.

Those who were against this idea believed the forced relocation violated their civil liberties. There was no proof that the Japanese were disloyal. However, the Supreme Court upheld the relocation. In 1988, the government formally apologized to the Japanese. Each surviving person who was interned was also given a payment of $20,000.

What year did Oliver twist take place?

The novel Oliver Twist was actually published as a serial between 1837 and 1839.  The book was really meant to be a commentary on workhouses in Britain during that time period.  The Poor Law was meant to help out England's poor by giving them a means to help themselves--the Poor House. These Poor Houses were horrible places with cramped conditions, meals eaten in silence, and same-sex accommodations.  There was also scarcities in food and good clothing.  The Poor House was not a place people wanted to go--it was meant to be an encouragement for people not to go there.  Dickens created the character Oliver Twist to show the side of London that no one wanted to see--poor children, beggars, and pickpockets and to hopefully encourage real social change.  Since Dickens was widely read by members of Parliament, this was a good strategy.  

In "The Cross of Lead," why did Bear speak contemptuously of the King?

Bear speaks ill of the King because he believes him to be a tyrant. Bear has a rather unique perspective in life because he spent several years as a monastic, training to become a priest. During the Middle Ages in England, society was ordered into the nobility, the peasantry, and the religious monks and priests. The nobility and peasantry had a very direct relationship with one another, where the peasantry labored and produced food in exchange for protection from their Lords. The religious existed in relationship to the nobility and peasantry, but were offered a special point of view and protection as people who negotiated with God. During his time in the monastery, Bear was removed from the context of peasant life and had the opportunity to realize that the noble-peasant relationship was one of exploitation.

You see, peasants never had the choice whether or not to live lives totally in service to their Lords and King. Their entire lives would be spent laboring, starving, and facing severe punishment for very minor crimes. Under the feudal system, everything in the kingdom belonged to the King, even the animals that lived on the land. As Bear mentions, to kill a wild animal is to commit a crime against the King. If they were to be found out, they might suffer a punishment as terrible as having their hand cut off. The laws and social structure of feudal England were set up in such a way that peasants had only the choice to obey or die.

Bear and his compatriots, like John Ball, want to change the social and legal structure of their society. They believe that the peasants of England are exploited and deserve more money, more freedom, and more food in return for their labor. We learn that John Ball is a priest (or at least wears priest's robes) and is offered the luxury of living outside of the exploitative relationship of noble-peasant. Nonetheless, priests served the peasant communities and spent their time among people who did suffer in this society. Bear's friends are plotting a rebellion to restore some power and freedoms to the hands of the people so that they can achieve a good quality of life. 

In To Kill a Mockingbird, what family member was responsible for keeping the jury in deliberation and seeking a full acquittal?

In Chapter 23, Atticus and Jem discuss the outcome of the trial. Atticus mentions to Jem that it was on of his "Old Sarum friends" who kept the jury out so long. Jem realizes this means it was a Cunningham. Jem thinks this is odd because, as he says, “One minute they’re tryin‘ to kill him and the next they’re tryin’ to turn him loose… I’ll never understand those folks as long as I live.” Atticus adds that this Cunningham would be Walter Cunningham's double first cousin. 

Atticus tells Jem that he kept this Cunningham on the jury because any (white) man would go into the trial thinking about convicting Tom. In other words, it doesn't make that much difference who would be chosen for the jury because everyone in Maycomb has his own biases. Perhaps Atticus is thinking of Walter Cunningham's honesty. Atticus also might have also recalled how Walter decided to call off the mob that had come for Tom Robinson when he was being held in jail. If Walter has these moments of reason and honesty, maybe another Cunningham (i. e. the one on the jury) would as well. Atticus doesn't address this possibility but it might have crossed his mind. 

Which are the standard meridians of (a) Russia (b)Brazil (c) France (d) South Africa (e) Australia?

Unlike latitude which is defined by the rotation of the Earth, longitude is arbitrarily defined; we could have put the prime meridian wherever we wanted, and actually until an international conference standardized it at Greenwich different countries put it in different places.

The standard meridians are those which are at 15-degree offsets from that Greenwich prime meridian, and they are roughly aligned with the time zones because 360/15 = 24.

Russia has a whole bunch of them; all the meridians from 30 to 180 all pass through Russia, so its standard meridians are 30, 45, 60, 75, 90, 105, 120, 135, 150, 165, 180.

Brazil contains standard meridians -45 and -60.

France contains only the 0 standard meridian, the same one as Greenwich.

South Africa contains the 30 standard meridian.

Finally, Australia contains 120, 135, and 150.

What are the Romantic elements in Wordsworth's "She Dwelt Among the Untrodden Ways"?

William Wordsworth's "She Dwelt Among the Untrodden Ways" describes a young girl, Lucy, who lives in seclusion in the natural world. In this short poem, Wordsworth describes Lucy as an individual who shuns human community, but who also enjoys a strong connection with the natural world. 

Wordsworth employs many classic Romantic ideals in this poem. The most obvious is his preoccupation with nature. For the Romantics, nature was of the utmost importance, and many Romantic poems deal with dramatic landscapes and sweeping descriptions of wild beauty. While Wordsworth's poem is rather modest in comparison with many Romantic poems, his focus on nature is of vital importance here, as he emphasizes Lucy's dwelling as deep within the wilderness and far from society's influence.

Lucy's isolation touches on another important Romantic ideal: the importance of the self and individuality. The Romantics were obsessed with the self and sought time and again to reach a deeper understanding of the individual. Thus, Lucy's seclusion within the poem is important. The short poem is essentially an intense look at one person, an individual who is free from the confines of societal pressures. Thus, though her dwelling in the woods is somewhat melancholy, Lucy exemplifies the Romantic idealization of the self in isolation. 

For Ralph Waldo Emerson, conformity was not a desirable characteristic. Do you think there are times when conformity is desirable or even necessary?

Much of the main thrust of Ralph Waldo Emerson's "Self-Reliance" focuses on the importance of staying true to one's inner nature and rejecting societal pressures to conform. It is a radical statement of individuality, and it is often seen as an inspiring affirmation of independence. Despite the importance of self-reliance and individuality, however, it's possible to find some fault with Emerson's thinking and assert, on certain occasions, the importance of conformity.

Emerson provides many justifiable examples of how the pressure to conform harms the individual spirit. That said, society often depends upon conformity on a very basic level. Consider driving, for instance. The safety of all drivers on a highway depends upon everyone conforming to the same laws, such as those that dictate how drivers can turn and which side of the road people can drive on. If someone were to assert his individuality by driving in the wrong direction, he would run the risk of seriously harming, or even killing, other drivers. Thus, it's apparent that in a large society, it's important for all individuals to conform to certain laws and regulations that protect the safety of the masses as a whole, as refusing to do so could result in the infliction of unnecessary harm. This type of conformity is probably more basic than what Emerson discusses; in general, Emerson condemns more complex conformity that needlessly encourages everyone to act exactly the same as everyone else. Even so, it's important to take his message with a grain of salt, as basic conformity to rules and laws is often necessary for the safe functioning of a complex society. 

Let's just say eagles eat snakes. So what happens if eagles are removed from the food web? What would be the initial effect, and its explanation?...

In a food web, there are a number of food chains and each organism is part of multiple energy transfer chains. If one organism is removed from the food web, there would be instability for a while and then a new equilibrium would be achieved. 

In the present case, if eagles are removed from the food web (say by a disease or infection specific to eagles), their prey (snakes) will suddenly have one less major predator. This will cause an increase in the population of snakes. This increase in the snake population will last for a while. There are other predators of snakes as well and they will suddenly find an increase in food levels. This will cause an increase in their population. The prey of snakes, such as mice, will see a decrease in numbers. Ultimately an equilibrium will be reached between the predator and prey population and snake numbers will stabilize. 

Thus, food webs are much more stable systems as compared to food chains, which would have been severely impacted by the loss of organisms at one trophic level. For food webs, the initial effect is much larger than the long term effect.

Hope this helps.

In The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, what is the significance of the statement, "Anything that is essential is invisible to the eyes"?

The fox's secret, that "anything essential is invisible to the eyes," serves as a sort of "thesis" for the story. What this means, basically, is that seeing the "truth" of things requires insight and empathy, and that emotional truth is more essential that factual truth. St Exupery neatly demonstrates the problem through the pilot's drawings 1 and 2. Drawing No 1. really does look like a hat, and our failure to interpret it correctly puts us in the same place as the other "adults" the pilot dismisses. He finally spells it out for us, with drawing no. 2: what looks like a hat is really a snake swallowing an elephant. As readers, we are put in an uncomfortable position: we sympathize with the Pilot over the adults' lack of insight, but we (secretly) also feel a bit guilty ourselves, since we thought it was a hat too!

The Prince's problem -- how to understand the Rose -- is another case where the outside (how the Rose acts) is not the same as how the Rose really feels. The Prince learns that his ability to understand the Rose is connected to his experience of her. Although the Rose has told the Prince that she is unique in all the universe, on Earth he finds thousands of flowers that look just like her. Judging from appearances, the Rose would seem to be a liar, but what the Prince realizes is that none of them are her, because of the time he has spent with his Rose. In this way we can see that the truth of things is based on shared experience rather than what we see.

What does Hamlet stalling killing Claudius say about Hamlet's approach to revenge? Does his approach change the genre of the play from merely a...

I don't know that Hamlet has ever been merely a "revenge" play. While avenging his father's death is Hamlet's motivating impulse for the plot, the play has always been about the internal struggle Hamlet wrestles with, and the larger thematic implications that result.

Hamlet vows on several occasions to kill Claudius, and his determination seems sincere. He tells his father's ghost, "thy commandment [to kill Claudius] all alone shall live within the book and volume of my brain," and he promises that his "thoughts be bloody or be nothing worth." Nonetheless, he first decides to test the ghost's word by setting up the play-within-the-play, and later passes up the opportunity to kill Claudius while he prays, choosing not to "take him in the purging of his soul." This brings the ghost back to remind Hamlet to fulfill his "almost blunted purpose." Hamlet still does not act, instead choosing to procrastinate and make excuses.

What this says about Hamlet isn't so much about his "approach to revenge" as it is about his reluctance to murder his mother's lover. Oedipal interpretations aside, doing so would mean Hamlet would, in all likelihood, estrange himself from his mother, to whom he is deeply devoted. Worse, it would mean Hamlet himself would assume the throne and all its attendant responsibilities. Hamlet's a college student who wants to return to Wittenburg and resume his studies. The idea of ruling Denmark and filling the kingly shoes of his great father is probably pretty intimidating. Moreover, killing Claudius is an act Hamlet presumably has difficulty stomaching. He's only able to kill Polonius when he's hiding behind an "arras," where Hamlet doesn't have to face him. Murdering Claudius would most likely be a more intimate act, and one that the creative and romantic Hamlet may lack the willpower to commit. His contemplation of suicide in both of his early soliloquies suggests Hamlet may prefer to orchestrate his own death than his uncle's, so conflicted is he about his responsibility to his father and country.  

Ultimately, Hamlet doesn't kill himself, either. Instead, he feigns madness, orchestrates a play, toys with Ophelia's heart, aggravates Polonius, and duels Laertes. Hamlet, quite simply, doesn't know what to do. In spite of the obligation he has taken on, Hamlet seemingly lacks the resolve to fulfill it. Thus, the play is more about the existential questions he raises as he wrestles with his conscience: do our actions on earth even matter? Is death preferable to life? Are we merely waiting to become "clay [to] stop a hole and keep the wind away"? The revenge aspect of Hamlet is merely the vehicle by which Shakespeare introduces his larger and more far-reaching themes, and this is at least partly responsible for its timeless and enduring appeal. 

What are some suggestions for how I could write an essay about the occurrence of Caesar's death once he has referred to Olympus in Julius Caesar?

You could start off your essay by making a strong thesis statement about Caesar's belief that he is immovable after a number of the senators requested that he consider the repeal of Metellus Cimber's brother's banishment. Caesar was quite obstinate in this regard and refused to give an inch.

The second paragraph can discuss the importance of Caesar's allusion to Mount Olympus and how he wishes to emphasise the strength of his will by using this particular reference.

In your next paragraph, you may refer to the actual purpose of the conspirators in lodging this request. References can be made to the fact that they sought to approach him in order to commit whatever deed they had planned. Discuss the nature of that deed. This can lead into another one or two paragraphs which provide some background on the plot to assassinate Caesar and Cassius' role in this regard.

Discuss Cassius' criticism of Caesar and his frailties. Mention the contrast he draws between the general, himself and Brutus. Contrast this opinion with Caesar's vision of himself, especially with regard to what he tells Metellus Cimber in scene 1, Act 3 (lines 35-48).

In your penultimate paragraph, you can refer to the irony of Caesar's perception of himself in the light of what happens immediately after he pronounces the words stated in your quote and especially his remark to Brutus about his kneeling. 

The concluding paragraph may sum up the point that Caesar's perception and reality are an antithesis and how this perception is emphasised by his unfortunate and inopportune remark about Mount Olympus.

Briefly, then, the focus of your essay should be the dramatic, verbal and situational irony depicted in this scene.

In Call It Courage, what does Mafatu realize once he sees the island has a sacred place?

In Call It Courage, when Mafatu finds the marae, the Sacred Place, on the island, he knows that he has found a forbidden island, or motu tabu.

This realization can be found on p. 46 of the book. At this point, it is the first day that Mafatu has spent on the island and he is exploring. While exploring, he finds a long lava slide and decides to sled down it on a sled of leaves. At the bottom of the slide, he finds a trail that is too fine to have been “made by the feet of wild pigs (p. 46).” He walks along the trail and comes to the Sacred Place. Mafatu looks at the idol and then looks around its base. He sees burnt bones all over the platform. They are too large to be dog or pig bones so he realizes that they must be human bones. At this point (still on p. 46), we are told that

And then he understood. His heart congealed.  This was a motu tabu, a Forbidden Island.

What can you infer about Tom Walker from his reaction to the swamp and to his grisly discovery of the skull?

From his reaction to the swamp and the skull, we can infer that Tom Walker is not easily intimidated or swayed by public opinion and popular superstitions. We can also infer that Tom Walker has a rather apathetic outlook on life: the split skull has an Indian tomahawk lodged deep in it, but this fails to inspire much of a reaction from Tom. He is merely irritated at finding something that can't add to his wealth, and he kicks it away.

Any one but he would have felt unwilling to linger in this lonely melancholy place, for the common people had a bad opinion of it from the stories handed down from the time of the Indian wars; when it was asserted that the savages held incantations here and made sacrifices to the evil spirit. Tom Walker, however, was not a man to be troubled with any fears of the kind.

Earlier in the story, he takes a shortcut home through the swamp. Most people avoid the area, but Tom feels quite at home in the eerie surroundings. The text tells us that the swamp is thickly grown with giant pines and hemlocks, and this keeps the swamp in darkness even during the day. We are also told that the swamp is full of "dark and stagnant pools," "pits and quagmires," and is partly covered with "weeds and mosses." Beneath the green mosses lie a layer of "black smothering mud." Altogether, it isn't the kind of place most people would prefer to find themselves in.

As for Tom, his main focus is on increasing his personal wealth, so neither superstitions nor genocidal massacres inspire much emotion from him.

Why did Donald Trump just replace some members of his campaign staff?

From the outside, at least, it appears that Donald Trump has shaken up his campaign staff largely because he felt that they were trying to push him in directions he did not want to go.  He appears to want campaign staff who will be happy to let him simply be himself rather than trying to make him appear to be more “presidential.”

During the primary campaign, Trump succeeded through acting however he felt like acting.  He did not really follow the advice of any political professionals but, instead, said what he wanted to say and did what he wanted to do.  By doing so, Trump defeated all the other Republican candidates fairly easily and became the GOP nominee.

After he became the nominee, many Republican leaders (both in and out of government) expected Trump to “pivot” toward the general election.  They expected him to, as most candidates do, start saying more things to appeal to moderates and to undecided voters.  They expected him to act more like a serious presidential candidate and less like a loose cannon who would say whatever came to mind.  One of the main people who was trying to get Trump to pivot was Paul Manafort.

Today, Manafort has been replaced at the head of Trump’s campaign (he has not been officially replaced, but observers believe that this is the actual effect of Trump’s move) by a man named Stephen Bannon.  Bannon runs a website that has been strongly pro-Trump.  He has urged Trump to stop trying to be “presidential” and to stop doing things to try to cater to moderates and to the people who donate big money to the GOP.  Instead, he wants Trump to be very combative and to continue acting like he did during the primaries.

Observers believe that Trump has made this change because he just wants to behave like he did during the primaries.  He apparently believes that he can win the general election in that way because that is how he won the primaries.  By making this change, he seems to be rejecting the advice of Manafort and other such advisors and going with people who will agree with his own instincts.

`y = x^(2/x)` Use logarithmic differentiation to find dy/dx

 For the given problem:` y = x^(2/x)` , we apply the natural logarithm on both sides:

`ln(y) =ln(x^(2/x))`

Apply the natural logarithm property: `ln(x^n) = n*ln(x)` .

`ln(y) = (2/x) *ln(x)`

Apply chain rule  on the left side since y is is function of x.

`d/dx(ln(y))= 1/y *y'`

Apply product rule:` d/(dx) (u*v) = u'*v + v' *u` on the right side:

Let `u=2/x` then `u' = -2/x^2`

    ` v =ln(x)` then` v' = 1/x`

`d/(dx) ((2/x) *ln(x)) =d/(dx) ((2/x)) *ln(x) +(2/x) *d/(dx) (ln(x))`

                                `= (-2/x^2)*ln(x) + (2/x)(1/x)`

                              ` =(-2)/(x^2ln(x))+ 2/x^2`

                          ` = (-2ln(x)+2)/x^2`

The derivative of `ln(y) = (2/x) *ln(x) ` becomes :

`1/y*y'=(-2ln(x)+2)/x^2`

 Isolate y' by multiplying both sides by (y):

`y* (1/y*y')= ((-2ln(x)+2)/x^2)*y`

`y' =((-2ln(x)+2)*y)/x^2`

Plug-in `y = x^(2/x) `  on the right side:

`y' =((-2ln(x)+2)*x^(2/x))/x^2`

Or `y' =((-2ln(x)+2)*x^(2/x))*x^(-2)`

   `y' =(-2ln(x)+2)*x^(2/x-2)`

   `y' =(-2ln(x)+2)*x^((2-2x)/x)`

   ` y' =-2x^((2-2x)/x)ln(x)+2x^((2-2x)/x)`

`    y = -2x^((2-2x)/x) (lnx-1)

What is the effect of James's many references to Daisy's prettiness in so few pages?

There are a number of references to Daisy's prettiness in the span of a few pages. The use of such a literary maneuver impresses upon us Winterbourne's first distinct feelings about Daisy. He thinks of her as innocence personified; to him, Daisy embodies a virginal wholesomeness that is set off to perfection by her fresh, wholesome beauty.

The effect of so many references to Daisy's prettiness is that our attention is drawn to her physical attractiveness ad nauseam. The effect is simultaneously cloying and intriguing.

The young girl's eyes were singularly honest and fresh. They were wonderfully pretty eyes; and, indeed, Winterbourne had not seen for a long time anything prettier than his fair countrywoman's various features—her complexion, her nose, her ears, her teeth.

James's use of repetition causes us to question his reasons for doing so, and he doesn't disappoint in providing the answer. In the story, he demonstrates the difference between American and European views of female virtue. In noticing Daisy's fresh beauty and all-embracing openness, Winterbourne becomes filled with questions about American female honor.

He questions whether Daisy's outward freshness hides the taint of promiscuity:

He thought it very possible that Master Randolph's sister was a coquette. . . Certainly she was very charming, but how deucedly sociable! Was she simply a pretty girl from New York State? Were they all like that, the pretty girls who had a good deal of gentlemen's society? Or was she also a designing, an audacious, an unscrupulous young person?

The European view of overly-friendly young women is that they must be "coquettes," whose only aim is to ensnare men in their debauchery. Ultimately, Winterbourne concludes that Daisy doesn't exactly fit the picture of an ideal "coquette." She is pretty, but she is also unassuming and chaste in her conduct. In the end, he decides that Daisy is just a "pretty American flirt," not one of those "dangerous, terrible women."

The repetitive description of Daisy's prettiness is a literary device that highlights the theme of differing European and American prejudices regarding the outsider, female virtue, and class hierarchies.

Who was the first child to show up when Ralph blew the conch in the novel Lord of the Flies?

In Chapter 1, Ralph spots a shiny object in the lagoon but isn't sure what it is. Piggy quickly points out that Ralph is looking at a valuable conch shell. Piggy suggests to Ralph that he use the conch to call the others. Ralph proceeds to blow as hard as he can into the conch which makes a loud, booming noise. Piggy then spots a short boy who seems to be six years old, walking down the beach about a hundred yards away. When the boy reaches Piggy and Ralph, Piggy helps him onto the platform. Ralph continues to blow the conch while Piggy asks the boy his name. The little boy tells Piggy his name is Johnny, and he politely sits down on the platform and waits for the other boys to show up. Golding describes Johnny as a well built innocent littlun at the beginning of the novel. He is also the smallest boy on the island next to Percival.  

How can I write a thesis statement for "Ex-Basketball Player" by John Updike?

Thesis statements are hard. You have so many thoughts and ideas, but you have to boil it down to a single statement.  With "Ex-Basketball Player" a thesis could go a variety of ways. On one hand, the poem is depressing. Flick was once a great, well-known player. Now he is only able to bounce inner tubes around. On the other hand, the poem shows readers that Flick is apparently making the best of things. I think that is a bit of a stretch though. I would focus your thesis on the depressing themes of the poem. 

I recommend a thesis that begins with an incomplete clause about one idea and finishes with another idea, because it forces you to write about both topics. For example:

Although many gifted athletes assume that their abilities ensure lifetime greatness, "Ex-Basketball Player" shows readers that the fall from greatness is a long and common fall.

That particular thesis even allows you to use real life examples of famed athletes that didn't quite live up to the hype. 

What does Scout do in the beginning of the book, and how does she learn from it?

In Chapter 3, Scout beats up Walter Cunningham Jr. because she feels he embarrassed her in school. Jem breaks up the fight and invites Walter to their house to eat. When Walter puts syrup all over his food, Scout makes a big deal about it and Walter is embarrassed. Cal takes her into the kitchen and scolds her: 

Hush your mouth! Don’t matter who they are, anybody sets foot in this house’s yo‘ comp’ny, and don’t you let me catch you remarkin’ on their ways like you was so high and mighty! Yo‘ folks might be better’n the Cunninghams but it don’t count for nothin’ the way you’re disgracin‘ ’em—if you can’t act fit to eat at the table you can just set here and eat in the kitchen! 

When Cal says Scout's folks might be "better than" the Cunninghams, she means they have a bit more money and are more educated. Cal is trying to teach Scout that she should be respectful of others regardless of their education or income levels. In the novel, this is Scout's first lesson about the differences in social class. 

During Scout's first days at school, she repeatedly tries to correct Miss Caroline. In fairness, Scout is only trying to help. She tries inform Miss Caroline that Walter can not accept a handout. Miss Caroline doesn't know this nor does she know the special arrangement allowing the Ewell children to basically do whatever they want. In Chapter 3, Scout recalls a lesson Atticus taught her: 

Atticus said I had learned many things today, and Miss Caroline had learned several things herself. She had learned not to hand something to a Cunningham, for one thing, but if Walter and I had put ourselves in her shoes we’d have seen it was an honest mistake on her part. We could not expect her to learn all Maycomb’s ways in one day, and we could not hold her responsible when she knew no better. 

This lesson of considering the perspectives of others ("putting yourself in another's shoes") is repeated throughout the novel. 

If light travels at approximately 5.9 trillion miles per year, is it safe to assume that objects and events assumed to be many light years away may...

Q:

If light travels at approximately 5.9 trillion miles per year, is it safe to assume that objects and events that are many many light years away may have been transformed into something else and are no longer there? If some event transpired 11,000 light-years away, would the light from it take 11,000 years to arrive here?

A:

In short, yes, it is possible that light that is visible in the night sky on Earth originated in stars that no longer exist. The speed of light limits the rate at which light information from astral objects can reach Earth. Perhaps the most illustrative example of this time limit is the sun. It takes about eight minutes and twenty seconds, on average, for light from the sun to reach Earth. If the sun were to suddenly disappear, this means that it would still be visible from Earth for another eight minutes and twenty seconds before it became apparent that it was gone. 

When we see objects in the night sky, we are actually looking at photons emitted from them (stars) or reflected off them (planets and asteroids). Because these photons can travel no faster than the speed of light, what you see in the night sky is a "snapshot" of those rays of light at the time that they were emitted or reflected. In other words, yes, light from an event that hypothetically took place 11,000 light-years away from Earth--that is, assuming that it was able to reach Earth in the first place--would indeed take 11,000 years to reach here, since light takes one year to travel one light-year.

Explain the meaning and irony behind Puck's statement: "Lord, what fools these mortals be!"

Puck calling mortals fools is ironic because he is the one causing them to act foolish and because the fairies Titania and Oberon also act very foolish.

There are a couple of reasons that Pucks’s condemnation of mortals is ironic.  First of all, he is the one causing a lot of the foolishness.  The people he is anointing cannot control their behavior.  It is a result of a magic spell. So Puck is laughing at people for acting just the way he is forcing them to act.

PUCK

Then will two at once woo one;
That must needs be sport alone;
And those things do best please me
That befal preposterously. (Act 3, Scene 2)

However, the other aspect of the people being fools has nothing to do with magic.  Love makes people do foolish things, as the play demonstrates.  The irony is that the mortals are not the only ones acting foolish.  Titania and Oberon certainly engage in their share of foolish behavior.  They fight and make up, and they drag the whole forest into their mayhem.

Titania and Oberon fight over their jealousies.  Oberon is jealous about the changeling Titania has. He is also jealous because he thinks she has something for Theseus and Titania is jealous because she thinks he has something for Hippolyta .

TITANIA

These are the forgeries of jealousy:
And never, since the middle summer's spring,
Met we on hill, in dale, forest or mead,
By paved fountain or by rushy brook,
Or in the beached margent of the sea,
To dance our ringlets to the whistling wind,
But with thy brawls thou hast disturb'd our sport. (Act 2, Scene 1)

Titania’s mood is not good for the forest.  I would consider her behavior foolish, and Oberon’s too.  They both kept pushing each other’s buttons, even though as fairy king and queen their behavior affected the entire forest.

In the end, foolishness abounds in this play for both mortals and fairies.  Magic or not, people in love sometimes act in ways that make no sense.  Jealousy can hit anyone, mortal or not.

What is the right to access information?

I am assuming that you are asking about the right to access government information.  This is a matter of federal and state statutes.

The federal statute that allows and restricts access to information is the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). It applies strictly to federal bodies, Congress, for example, the Department of State, and  various federal agencies such as the Federal Aviation Agency or the Centers for Disease Control.  Many people misunderstand this and try to seek FOIA information from state agencies, but this statute is completely inapplicable to those.  As a general proposition, the statute allows the public access to most government documents, with exceptions carved out for areas such as national security, personal privacy, and the federal enforcement of law. For example, if the United States Attorney General's office is investigating someone suspected of a crime, information on that is likely to be protected, since the investigation could be compromised by the release of information about it.  Many citizens and reporters do make FOIA requests, and the overwhelming majority of requests are granted or partially granted, but there is always a backlog of requests to process.  Reporters often use these for their own investigative reporting.  This is an important aspect of a democratic government, the idea that the workings of government of the people should be transparent to the people.

Each state has its own statute that controls what state records are accessible to the public. In Pennsylvania, as an example, the statute is called the Right to Know Act, and a special office has been set up to deal with all the requests that come in, the Office of Open Records.  There is "a presumption of openness" in the statute, and all state agencies, offices, and departments are subject to it, as well as local government bodies.  The exceptions are much like those of the FOIA, although national security is not generally at issue, since that is not the function of state government.  Personal information such as social security numbers or law enforcement information that would harm an investigation are exempt. Whatever state a person lives in, if he or she seeks records from the government, the state statute must be reviewed to see if the records are actually accessible. 

I should also note that these statutes actually control the release of records, not precisely "information."  The FOIA and the Right to Know Act do not compel anyone in the government to answer questions, for instance, either in writing or orally. 

When Anne tells Peter she believes "that people are really good at heart" what does this statement tell you about Anne's character in The Diary of...

This statement shows that Anne looks for the good in people and tries to be optimistic about the world. 

Despite everything terrible that is happening around them, Anne still believes that people are basically good.  This is a remarkable statement to make.  Anne is hiding from the Nazis, and she constantly hears about suffering and death.  Yet, she is still able to have a positive viewpoint on human nature. 

ANNE. We're not the only people that've had to suffer.  There've always been people that've had to ... sometimes one race ... sometimes another ... and yet ...

PETER. That doesn't make me feel any better! (Act 2, Scene 4)

Anne tells Peter that she feels like the world goes through phases, just like people do.  As a young adult, Anne has experienced many phases for herself.  She seems to think that the world needs to grow up.

In essence, Anne feels that she can find good in the world by taking comfort in the good things that people do.  She feels that for all of the bad she has seen, she has seen a lot of good.

When I think of all that's out there ... the trees ... and flowers ... and seagulls ... when I think of the dearness of you, Peter ... and the goodness of the people we know ... Mr. Kraler, Miep, Dirk, the vegetable man, all risking their lives for us every day ... (Act 2, Scene 4) 

Peter’s perspective is that they did not get their chance, like their parents did.  They did not really get to live.  He is more pessimistic.  He does not believe things will end well, and is not so quick to see the good in people. 

Anne died young, but the perspective that she wrote about in her diary has served as an inspiration for many people since.  In the bleakest of circumstances, Anne could believe that people are good at heart.  If she could, maybe we can.

Which type of cloud is associated with days of light, continual rain?

The nimbostratus cloud is the continuous rain cloud. The cloud is a low level group and rises up to about 2,000 meters. The cloud consists primarily of water droplets, but may contain ice particles if the surface temperature is cold enough. These clouds are dense enough to block out the sun and may include additional cloud types underneath the nimbostratus layer such as stratus fractus clouds. They range in color from medium to dark gray. The nimbostratus cloud has no definite base and is usually along the front of a weather system.

Nimbostratus clouds typically form by the thickening of altostratus clouds through compaction of layers. Once the altostratus clouds become thick and compacted with water droplets, the weight of the cloud sinks from 2,000-5,400 meters to below 2,000 meters. Nimbostratus clouds may also form from cumulonimbus clouds when wind patterns sheer the higher elevation of the cumulonimbus, above 5,400 meters.

What Does Montresor accomplish by praising Luchesi as a good judge of wine?

Edgar Allan Poe's short story, "The Cask of Amontillado," is the tale of Montresor describing his revenge upon Fortunato, who insulted him. His family motto is "Nemo me impune lacessit," which is Latin for "no one insults with impunity." To accomplish his revenge, he plans to lure Montresor to the catacombs that lie beneath his house. In these catacombs, where the bones of his dead ancestors repose, he keeps a wine collection. He intends to lure Montresor to the lowest depths of these vaults and wall him in, burying him alive, where his cries for help will never be heard. 

In order to lure him to the vaults, Montresor finds the inebriated Fortunato at carnival. The story is set in Italy. Montresor describes Fortunato as a man worthy of respect, but Montresor finds his weak point and exploits it. This is one thing Montresor accomplishes by praising Luchesi. 

"He had a weak point, this Fortunato, though in other regards he was a man to be respected and even feared. He prided himself on his connoisseurship in wine. Few Italians have the virtuoso spirit. For the most part their enthusiasm is adopted to suit the time and opportunity--to practice imposture upon the British and Austrian millionaires. In painting and gemmary, Fortunato was, like his countrymen, a quack--but in the matter of old wines he was sincere." 

When Montresor greets him at carnival, he tells him he has received a cask of Amontillado and has his doubts about whether it is genuine. He tells Fortunato he has paid the full Amontillado price and asks Fortunato to come and see if he's been swindled. In order to entice him to come, he tells him he could ask Luchesi instead since Fortunato is presently engaged. This pricks Fortunato's pride, which is Montresor's intention. Fortunato says that Luchesi is no expert and agrees to go with him. 

As they venture into the vaults, Montresor continues his offers to consult Luchesi instead. He is toying with his victim like a predator toys with his prey. This is the second thing he accomplishes by praising Luchesi.  When Fortunato begins coughing, Montresor feigns concern and offers to go back in order to save his guest's health. He says:

"We will go back. Your health is precious. You are rich, respected, admired, beloved; you are happy, as I once was. You are a man to be missed. For me it is no matter. We will go back. You will be ill, and I cannot be responsible. Besides, there is Luchesi--" 

Montresor knows that Fortunato will continue at the threat of consulting Luchesi instead. He has no true concern for Fortunato, as he is about to kill him. 

In Jerry Spinelli's Stargirl, what are Kevin's character traits?

Kevin is Leo's friend and host of the high school's interview show called Hot Seat. He is a typical Mica Area High School student because he conforms to the norms and unspoken rules of what is accepted and expected at school and in town. Kevin is also one who would not want to rock the social boat negatively for himself, but he's not afraid to do it for Stargirl when he suggests having her as a guest on his show. In addition, Kevin is a good friend to Leo, but he doesn't feel very comfortable around Leo and Stargirl when they start dating because the whole school shuns her. When Leo asks Kevin about it in chapter 18, Kevin says the following:

"People blame her. For the team losing. For our undefeated season going down the toilet" (98).

Kevin still sits with Leo at lunch, but Leo feels that his friend might also blame Stargirl. Because of the shunning, Stargirl stops wearing prairie dresses and starts going by "Susan," which is her real name. It is only after Stargirl changes that Kevin feels more comfortable hanging out with the couple again. Therefore, Kevin is a static character because he remains the same type of person throughout the book. He represents the thoughts and feelings of the student body, but he is also supportive of his best friend Leo. He never changes his mind about Stargirl, nor does he do anything more than be a good friend to Leo.

How does Atticus explain his decision to have allowed Mr. Cunningham to sit on the jury in Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird?

In Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, it was not actually Mr. Walter Cunningham who served on Tom Robinson's jury, but it was one of the Cunninghams' family members from Old Sarum. Atticus explains to Jem in Chapter 23 that he had decided not to strike the Cunningham from the jury because he had a hunch the Finches had earned the Cunninghams' respect the night of the lynch mob.

According to Atticus, the Cunningham on the jury was the one person who kept the jury out for hours without a decision, whereas normally the jury would have been back within a matter of minutes for a case like Robinson's. The Cunningham had at first wanted to acquit Robinson, but the other jury members convinced him otherwise. Atticus further explains that the reason why the Cunningham had wanted to acquit Robinson is because the Cunninghams are a very loyal clan:

Once you earned their respect they were for you tooth and nail. (Ch. 23)

Atticus had suspected he had earned the Cunninghams' loyalty the night of the lynch mob because Scout had reminded Walter Cunningham of his humanity, who then broke up the lynch mob. Scout had reminded Walter Cunningham of his humanity by speaking kindly of his son and by speaking compassionately of his entailment, telling him Atticus had once said he and Mr. Cunningham would face the entailment together and "ride it out together" (Ch. 16). After that, Mr. Cunningham had remembered just how much he is indebted to Atticus and how much he respects him; therefore, Mr. Cunningham had broken up the lynch mob, and his family member on the jury had become willing to defend Atticus by acquitting Robinson.

What is the conflict in "The Bass, the River, and Sheila Mant"?

W. D. Weatherell's short story "The Bass, the River, and Sheila Mant" is about a fourteen-year-old boy who develops a crush on a seventeen-year-old girl named Sheila Mant. 

Sheila is clearly out of his league. She is older, beautiful, and has captured the attention of an Ivy League rowing team. This causes an internal conflict on the part of the narrator. Should he ask her out? Here's how he describes his feelings about that conflict:

It was late August by the time I got up the nerve to ask her out. The tortured will-I's, won't I's, the agonized indecision over what to say, the false starts toward her house and the embarrassed retreats--the details of these have been seared from my memory.

Another internal conflict develops later as the narrator must choose between Sheila and the magnificent bass he secretly caught while on the date. He chooses Sheila, a decision he will soon regret.

You would expect to see an external conflict between Sheila and the narrator, since their date wasn't particularly successful. But Weatherell isn't as interested in the conflict between them as he is in the conflict that takes place inside the narrator. When Sheila goes home with another guy in his Corvette, the narrator doesn't object.

Weatherell resolves the internal conflict in the story's final paragraph, as the narrator comes to a personal realization:

Before the month was over, the spell she cast over me was gone, but the memory of that lost bass haunted me all summer and haunts me still. There would be other Sheila Mants in my life, other fish, and though I came close once or twice, it was these secret, hidden tuggings in the night that claimed me, and I never made the same mistake again.

What was Johnny's condition after the fire in The Outsiders?

Johnny is injured so badly that he succumbs to his injuries and dies.

Of the three boys who were injured in the fire, Johnny was in the worst condition. He was badly burned when part of the barn fell on him. Pony was told about his injuries by the man who took him to the hospital, who Pony initially thought was a schoolteacher. 

He burned one arm pretty badly, though, trying to drag the other kid out the window. Johnny, well, I don't know about him. A piece of timber caught him across the back — he might have a broken back, and he was burned pretty severely (Chapter 6).

At the hospital, Pony sees Johnny and Dally brought in on stretchers. Dally is cursing out the nurses, but Johnny is unconscious. His face is not burned, but his injuries are worse than they appear. Johnny looks “very pale and still and sort of sick.”

When they finally get an update on Johnny's condition, it turns out to be as bad or worse than they had expected:

He was in critical condition. His back had been broken when that piece of timber fell on him. He was in severe shock and suffering from third-degree burns. They were doing everything they could to ease the pain, although since his back was broken he couldn't even feel the burns below his waist (Chapter 7).

There is nothing that can be done for Johnny. The greasers are able to visit him, even though they are not family, because the doctors realize they are Johnny's real family. Johnny refuses to see his mother.

After the rumble, Pony and Dally go back to visit Johnny.  They are just in time. Johnny tells Pony to stay gold and dies. Dally runs off, horrified and plagued with grief. He was not as badly injured as Johnny, but he later robs a grocery store and runs at the cops, essentially committing suicide.

How does the setting help develop the main character in the story "There Will Come Soft Rains" by Ray Bradbury?

I'll start with the setting of this story in broad detail. The story takes place in Allendale, California. The year is 2026. That year doesn't sound all that far off right now, but Bradbury published the story 76 years before that date. In other words, the time setting of this story is nearly a century in the future. 76 years from right now would be 2092. With the pace of current technological growth in the world, I can barely fathom what homes might be like in that future.  

That's what Bradbury was going for with his setting. His setting helps sell the possibility and probability of his main character. The main character is the house itself. The house is so smart and self-sufficient that it is capable of operating completely on its own. It doesn't need humans. The house is capable of waking people up, making breakfast, and cleaning up. In fact, the house is even capable of disposing of dead bodies. As the fire begins in the house, readers get a sense that the house can feel. There is a frantic pace to the house's actions.  

The house shuddered, oak bone on bone, its bared skeleton cringing from the heat, its wire, its nerves revealed as if a surgeon had torn the skin off to let the red veins and capillaries quiver in the scalded air. Help, help! Fire! Run, run!

The above quote nicely illustrates the frantic pace and fear of the house. What I also like about the above quote is how it describes the house in human biological terms. The house has bones and a skeleton. It has nerves, skin, veins, and capillaries. The house is alive. In order to sell that kind of concept to readers about a home being alive and intelligent, the story has to be set in the future. Readers can look at current technological innovations, and they can then imagine what those things might look like in the future. A living house with a personality that loves and fears makes sense in the future.

What kinds of public amenities were separate for people of different races?

The United States had legalized segregation for many years. During this time, there were a series of laws known as the Jim Crow Laws that created separate facilities for blacks and for whites.

For a period of time, segregation existed in almost all aspects of society. The Plessy v Ferguson Supreme Court case legalized this segregation. This specific case dealt with railroad cars. Homer Plessy sued because he had to sit in the railroad car reserved for African-Americans. The Supreme Court ruled that this was legal as long as the facilities were equal. This was known as the “separate but equal” doctrine.

Other aspects of public life that were separated by race included drinking fountains, schools, seating sections on buses, restaurants, and bathrooms. It wasn’t until the 1950s and the 1960s that this began to change. The Brown v Board of Education case in 1954 made this concept illegal in public schools. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended segregation in public facilities.

The struggle to deal with segregation has been a long and difficult process.

In The Giver, when do you realize what release means?

The reader realizes what release means when Jonas’s father releases the newborn twin. 

Release is actually mentioned early on in the book, but we have no idea what it really means at first.  We are told that it is very serious, but not what is actually happening when someone is released.  We are also told the occasions for release. 

For a contributing citizen to be released from the community was a final decision, a terrible punishment, an overwhelming statement of failure. (Ch. 1) 

Release of the elderly is commonplace.  Release of people who break three rules or commit major infractions is less common, but does clearly happen.  When the jet pilot accidentally flies over the community, he is released for his error.  Jonas lets us know that this is a serious thing.  Jonas himself does not really seem to know what is happening. 

Jonas learns about release of the elderly, but he does not get many details.  He hears about a man named Roberto’s Ceremony of Release.  They told his life story and then he just walked off.  Jonas has no idea where he goes, and the old person who tells him about it, Larissa, does not know either.  She just knows that the Old never return. 

The third occasion when someone is released is the release of a newchild.  A newchild is a baby who is less than a year old.  All births in the community are planned.  There are no actual parents.  Children are created and born to birthmothers.  If a newchild does not meet the required growth parameters, he or she is released at the end of a year.  All other children are given to families at the Ceremony of One. 

We learn about the release of newchildren through Jonas’s father.  He is a nurturer, which means he cares for the newchildren.  He has a newchild that he does not want to release named Gabriel.  He gets special permission to take Gabe home at night, and then to give him an extra year of nurturing.  This is very rare, but it is allowed. 

One day, Jonas’s father tells him that newborn twins are about to be born.  If they are identical, one will be released.  Jonas’s father is not happy about this, but no one takes it too seriously.  Jonas thinks that release means that the newborn twin who is released will go off somewhere, to Elsewhere.  He has no idea it means the baby will be killed. 

Jonas asks The Giver about release, and his mentor tells him that he has the right to view any ceremony.  Jonas is surprised to learn that the release was filmed.  The Giver shows it to him.  He is shocked when he sees his father give a tiny newborn a lethal injection through his forehead. 

He killed it! My father killed it! Jonas said to himself, stunned at what he was realizing. He continued to stare at the screen numbly. (Ch. 19) 

His father then puts the baby in a box and dumps it into a garbage chute.  Jonas is stunned.  He heard that his predecessor, Rosmarie, asked to be released.  The Giver tells him she injected herself.  She committed suicide.  Jonas cannot believe that his perfect community regularly and callously commits murder.

In Macbeth, how does Macbeth show commitment?

Macbeth is committed when he shows that he is willing to do just about anything to hang on to the power and status he gained when he killed Duncan.  The Weird Sisters told Banquo that he would never be king but that he would father kings; his descendants, then, would rule.  This angers Macbeth because he doesn't like to think that he went to all this trouble to make royalty out of someone else's children.  He says, 

To be thus is nothing,

But to be safely thus. Our fears in Banquo

Stick deep, and in his royalty of nature

Reigns that which would be feared. (3.1.50-54)

Macbeth feels that it isn't worth being king unless he feels secure in his position; he cannot relax.  Therefore, he determines to kill both Banquo, so he can never have more children, and his living son, Fleance, so that he can never reign or produce heirs of his own.  It's hardly admirable commitment, but Macbeth is committed to holding on to power nonetheless.  Further, he is willing to do more yet in order to retain his power, telling his wife, "We are yet but young in deed" (3.4.150).  In other words, he feels that they have a great deal left to do to secure their throne from threats.

Is Macbeth relevant to young people today?

The destruction within ambition is one reason that Macbeth is relevant to younger people today.

There are many times when ambition can be seen as solely good.  Ambition is what fuels careers.  It aids in professional advancement.  Young people might perceive ambition as a necessity to start their paths towards happiness. Macbeth is a significant work for young people because it shows that excessive ambition contains darker elements.  For example, Lady Macbeth's insistence on her husband committing evil deeds shows the dangers within unlimited ambition.  The consequences of such choices are evident as Macbeth embraces greater moral depravity. The play becomes a study in what happens when there is no check on ambition.  Macbeth insists that individuals must develop an internal mechanism to limit such desire.

Young people could find this relevant.  In a sense, Macbeth is like a "young" person because he fails to see the darker side to his actions. On many occasion, young people cannot comprehend the full scope of their actions. In reading about Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, young people see how something originally seen as purely good can possess malevolent elements.  In this way, the need to fully reckon with the consequences of individual actions is how Macbeth can be relevant to young people today.

How does Harper Lee present such themes as racism, social inequality, prejudice, innocence, youth, the coming of age, and morality and ethics in To...

In Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, the theme concerning racism is most obviously expressed through the town's reaction to Tom Robinson's arrest and trial.

Author Lee reveals that, due to racism, many Southern white people of Maycomb hold the prejudiced belief that, as Atticus describes in his closing remarks to the jury, "all Negroes lie, that all Negroes are basically immoral beings, that all Negro men are not to be trusted around our women" (Ch. 20). Due to such beliefs, Robinson's jury declared him to be guilty despite all evidence showing how impossible it was for him to have committed the crime. Specifically, evidence in court revealed that Mayella had been bruised in her right eye, and only a left-handed attacker facing her would have been able to cause such an injury; Robinson has been crippled in his left arm and left hand since childhood. He is so crippled that he was unable to even place his left hand on the Bible when saying the oath before taking the witness stand.

Lee's theme concerning social inequality is further seen in Maycomb's relations with its African-African citizens. Maycomb is a racially segregated town, with the African-American population confined to living in what is called the Quarters, meaning what was once the slave quarters during the days of slavery. African Americans are also not entitled to education, leaving them to learn to read and write on their own and to work in only the blue-collar labor force as field hands and domestic servants.

Why does Willy both defend and criticize Biff in Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller?

The love/hate relationship between Willy and Biff stems from three events that changed the perception that the men had of one another:

1. uncovering who each of them really is


2. ending their sham dynamics and


3. realizing the difference between their fantasies versus their reality.

Willy saw in Biff both his future dreams and his shattered dreams. Biff was the source of Willy's hopes and possibilities. When Biff was no longer Willy's symbol of success, Willy's former admiration transformed into rejection. All is further complicated by the fact that, regardless of it all, they are still father and son.

How it all began

From the very beginning of the play Death of a Salesman, the audience can perceive that there is an inner conflict between the character of Willy Loman and both of his children. This becomes evident when Biff tells his brother Happy about his father, Willy:

"Everything I say there's a twist of mockery on his face. I can't get near him."

The problem between Willy and Biff started when the latter was 17. Willy adored Biff, who had grown up to become  a good-looking, tall, athletic, and witty teenager. Willy relished basking in the light of his very popular son, who represented everything that Willy believed in. He saw in Biff someone who, at a very early age, had accomplished the earmarks of the American Dream, according to Willy. 

Biff was

• well-liked


• popular


• admired


• handsome


• successful

Willy loved so much to vicariously mesh himself into Biff's persona that he transferred all of his views of life, and of himself, onto his son: In Willy's eyes, Biff was basically a better, perfected, much more successful version of himself.

In turn, Biff loved and admired his father; at least, he admired the version of his father that Willy presented to him--someone who is also well-liked and very successful.

However, all of this imagery and mutual admiration was over once Biff discovered that Willy cheated on Linda, Biff's mother. His view of his father, and the persona of the fatherly hero that Biff once held so true, shattered him enormously. As such, he refused to continue being a part of the dyad that once were Willy and Biff. Biff goes away, leads an unsuccessful and unfulfilling life, and becomes everything that Willy feared and dreaded.

As such, Willy now sees Biff as a defector, or a traitor, of what could have been a great alliance. Biff is a failure of the American Dream. He is no different than Willy--the difference is that Willy insists on living in a fantasy world.

Willy has an unhealthy type of fixation with success; one which is entirely shallow and superficial. Hence, rather than exploring ways to mend the relationship with Biff and see how his son could be happier, he rejects Biff's lifestyle and takes it as a direct attack on his own dreams.

Why does Helen find the garden to be a source of comfort in The Story of My Life, Chapter 1?

During the early years of Helen Keller's life, she lived in a small house on the family's property with her parents.  This tiny house "was called 'Ivy Green.'"  Beside the house was an "old-fashioned garden[, which] was the paradise of [her] childhood."

When Helen lost her sight and hearing at a young age, her life changed dramatically.  She found solace in nature despite the challenges of not being able to see and hear.  Helen used her remaining senses of touch and smell to enjoy the beauties of the garden.  Young Helen "used to feel along the square stiff boxwood hedges, and, guided by the sense of smell, would find the first violets and lilies."  

Helen often became angry and frustrated because of her disabilities.  She wanted to communicate like everyone else, but she could not.  At times, she would throw temper tantrums to express her frustration.  Sometimes she escaped her rage by finding comfort in hiding her "hot face in the cool leaves and grass" in the garden.  Helen could recognize the different types of flowers by their scent and by how they felt.  She found joy in the many flowers in the family garden.  Helen especially loved the roses.

There were many reasons why Helen loved the garden and found comfort in it.  She was naturally drawn to nature.  She could use the senses that she still had, such as touch and smell, to explore the intricacies of the garden.  The garden was a place where she could escape.

How does Ravi think it would feel to be "the winner in a circle of older, bigger, luckier children"?

Ravi thinks that winning the hide-and-seek game is the most thrilling and wonderful thing that he could possibly imagine.

Ravi can't even begin to describe how awesome winning would be.

To defeat Raghu—that hirsute, hoarse-voiced football champion—and to be the winner in a circle of older, bigger, luckier children—that would be thrilling beyond imagination.

The thought of winning and the feelings that it would bring are "beyond imagination." That means no matter how great Ravi imagines winning might be, winning will be better than that. He believes that winning will earn him respect and adoration from the other children.

Ravi is desperate to experience that win over Raghu. He is willing to endure for many hours in order to secure his victory. Ravi's hunger for the win is why he stays in the shed for so long. He must be in there for hours. The children rush out of the house sometime during the afternoon heat, and they immediately begin playing hide-and-seek. Ravi hides in the shed, and he doesn't come out until twilight.

Unfortunately for Ravi, the feelings that he has when he wins are indeed beyond his imagination. Ravi never once imagined that his victory would earn him disdain, but that is what it brings to him. 

"Stop it, stop it, Ravi. Don’t be a baby."

In The Great Gatsby, Myrtle says of her sister, ''She's said to be very beautiful by people who ought to know.'' What does this statement say about...

This comment by Myrtle, Tom's mistress, to Nick in Chapter II of The Great Gatsby (Fitzgerald) is meant to persuade him to go up to the apartment, where he can meet her sister Catherine. What I find interesting about your question is how similar my response would be if someone were asking this about a story taking place in 2016. Even Myrtle, from the wrong side of the tracks, understands that every society has arbiters of taste, and they are not people who live on the edge of a valley of ashes and over a garage. This is still true today. While Myrtle could never have articulated this, the fact is that she understands very well that Nick, a member of the upper class, is unlikely to take her word for it that Catherine is beautiful, not so much because she is a biased sister, but more because she senses Nick will find her own tastes beneath him—which he does, pitilessly detailing the furnishings of the apartment when he goes upstairs and sees it. Even now, whom do we allow to be our arbiters of taste? It seems it is often the rich and famous who set some standard of beauty that many feel they fall short of. There is probably some aesthetic ideal the Western world can agree upon, but that is not what Myrtle is speaking of—and neither is Fitzgerald.  

There seems to be a pervasive theme of "light vs. dark" that is symbolic of religious good and evil. Try to find at least one example of this in...

When the narrator eventually makes it to the Araby bazaar, he notices that half the lights are out in the gallery. He listens to the English girl flirting with the men at her booth; he hears one of them accuse another of lying. Again, he remarks on the "dark entrance to the stall." Finally, the narrator wanders away from her stall, and he finds that the main part of the hall is totally dark now. Looking up into the pitch black, he says, "I saw myself as a creature driven and derided by vanity; and my eyes burned with anguish and anger." In this way, then, sinfulness does seem to be tied to darkness. Vanity is a sin, and the narrator realizes that his hopes that the world would somehow make way for his feelings for Mangan's sister were, indeed, vain. He seems, in this moment, to lose his innocence, a state of maturity also associated with sinfulness, and because he's standing in the darkened hall, the darkness is ultimately tied to this loss.

What are different types of participant observation? What are advantages and disadvantages of each type?

Participant observation is a method of data collection used often in qualitative research, especially the field of cultural anthropology. The goal is to gain detailed knowledge of people through observation and involvement in the daily activities of the participants, usually over an extended period of time.

Types of participant observation are categorized based on the degree to which the researcher becomes involved with the subjects. In non-participatory observation, the researcher has no direct contact with those observed. An advantage of this method is to limit the researcher’s influence on the subjects, but a disadvantage is not being able to establish rapport or ask questions. Less extreme is passive participation in which the researcher limits interaction, acting principally as a recorder. This method has similar advantages and disadvantages as those mentioned above. In moderate participation, the researcher balances involvement with participants and objective distance to strike a balance between these advantages and disadvantages.

You may find the document linked below helpful for more detail on the topic.

In active participation, the researcher becomes a member of the group. This method has the advantage of allowing the observer to fully comprehend the subject matter from an insider’s perspective. However, this level of involvement increases the chances of researcher bias. With complete participation, a researcher is a member of the group being studied before the research begins. This level of participation especially risks the researcher losing objectivity.  

In general, participant observation has the disadvantage of the observer influencing people’s behavior, leading to flawed data. Additionally, the observer’s own biases can skew observations and interpretations. Triangulation (gathering data from multiple sources or observers) can help ensure that data is valid.

Why does Brent build the whirligigs?

The answer comes in the third chapter, “The Afterlife.” Brent had been driving drunk when he caused the car accident that killed Lea Zamora. Amazingly enough, he wasn’t sentenced to jail time or a stint in a detention center. Instead, during a mediation session with Lea’s mother, Brent was asked by Mrs. Zamora to atone for his crime by building four versions of Lea’s favorite wooden toy, a whirligig. Such devices have arms that whirl when the wind blows. She asked him to build them in tribute to Lea and to install them in the four corners of the country: Washington, California, Florida, and Maine. She provided a Greyhound bus ticket good for forty-five days and a camera to take photos of each whirligig. Brent’s parents thought this was a ridiculous request. But Brent warmed to it and accepted the challenge. It would give him time away from the awful memories hanging around back home in Chicago. The trip would give him time to think and to figure out what direction his life should take from this point forward.