Is The Merchant of Venice a romantic comedy? If so, why?

The play is classified as a comedy, specifically a "Christian comedy," but it is not necessarily a romantic comedy. Normally the definition of a romantic comedy hinges on the story's use of comedy to somehow advance the romantic plot line. This play could possibly be performed in a way that emphasizes the humor in various situations. The scenes where suitors come to woo Portia and choose the wrong casket could be played for comedy. It is also possible for some of Antonio's friends, who are minor characters, to be portrayed in a comic manner. Gratiano is also a somewhat comedic character.

When we describe one of Shakespeare's works as being a romantic comedy, the comedy generally takes place within a familiar context, by way of a theatrical conceit common in the majority of his comedic works. These conceits include mistaken identity or disguise as a way to create confusion or deception in a way that somehow advances the romance. Portia dressing as a doctor of law could be interpreted in this way. In Bassanio's presence, she also refers to her husband and hints she'd be dismayed if he placed his friend's well-being over hers, as Bassanio claims he would do for Antonio. These parts of the courtroom scene can be done humorously, but the menace of Shylock's desire to kill Antonio in a violent manner seems to hint this play was not solely intended as a work of romantic comedy.

What were the careers of Leslie's parents?

Leslie's parents have the same career.  Both of her parents are professional writers.  

Despite both being writers, the subject that each of them writes about is quite different.  Mrs. Burke is a novel writer, and Mr. Burke writes about politics.  Both of them must be fairly prolific writers, because Jess is amazed that an entire book shelf is filled with their books.  Additionally, Leslie tells Jess that money is not a problem for her family, so the Burke books must be selling quite well.  

I would like to include a few extra details about Mrs. Burke.  She writes under a pseudonym.  The text says that Jess was confused when he saw "Judith Hancock" as the listed author, but he understood once he saw Mrs. Burke's picture on the back of the book.  

It was really something to see the shelf that had their books on it. Mrs. Burke was "Judith Hancock" on the cover, which threw you at first, but then if you looked on the back, there was her picture looking very young and serious.  

Lastly, Mrs. Burke is the more famous of the two writers.  

Who is the antagonist of this story?

An antagonist is a character (or group of characters) that opposes the protagonist either directly or indirectly. Edgar Allan Poe penned the story "The Cask of Amontillado" in 1846. The protagonist in this story is Montresor. The story is told from his point of view, as he describes his experience with his enemy, Fortunato. The story is a description of Montresor's plot of revenge, and his execution of this plot. Fortunato is the antagonist of this story. 

Montresor never gives details about what Fortunato did to antagonize him, but he does divulge that Fortunato has insulted him. In the opening lines of the story, Montresor explains: 

"The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as best I could, but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge. You, who so well know the nature of my soul, will not suppose, however, that I gave utterance to a threat. At length I would be avenged; this was a point definitively settled--but the very definitiveness with which it was resolved precluded the idea of risk. I must not only punish, but punish with impunity."

Montresor's family motto is "No one insults with impunity," meaning that no one will be able to insult them and get away unpunished. Although we don't know the specific nature of the insult, we know that Montresor has been offended and is not going to put up with it. He has bided his time, weaving an intricate plot of revenge in order to punish Fortunato for the wrongs he has committed against him. 

Identify three exciting events that took place before the climax of the novel To Kill a Mockingbird.

The Nighttime Raid: In Chapter 6, Jem, Dill, and Scout attempt to peek into the Radley home to get a look at Boo. However, Nathan Radley hears them and thinks that someone is trying to break into his home. The children have to run out of the yard and narrowly escape as Nathan Radley begins shooting in their direction.

Maudie's House Fire: In Chapter 8, Atticus wakes his children up in the middle of the night and tells them to stand in the Radley's front yard because Miss Maudie's house is on fire. Scout and Jem watch from a safe distance as the neighbors rally together in an attempt to save Maudie's possessions. The men narrowly escape from Maudie's home before the house eventually collapses.

The Mob Scene: In Chapter 15, Atticus travels to the Maycomb jailhouse to sit outside of Tom Robinson's cell as a precaution. The Old Sarum bunch then arrives to lynch Tom Robinson. Atticus refuses to leave, and Scout, who was hiding with Jem and Dill, runs into the middle of the group of men. Atticus then tells Jem to leave the scene and take Scout and Dill with him, but Jem refuses to leave his father in the dangerous situation. Fortunately, Walter Cunningham is able to see the situation from Atticus' perspective and tells the mob to disperse.

What are the rough ages of of the shepherdesses in The Faithful Shepherdess by Fletcher and Ford? Who is the oldest, youngest and in between?

This is an interesting and challenging question that can't be answered authoritatively, but the context of the play provides us with fairly reliable clues. Cloe, the lustful shepherdess, would appear to be be the oldest. She worries in Act I, scene iii that she is "too old." I would put Clorin in the middle, as she has spent time mourning her dead lover and living in a sacred grove by his grave. She has developed skills as a healer, indicating some maturity. This would leave Amoret as the youngest. The fact she is so innocent bespeaks youth, just as Cloe's lustfulness indicates age, and though Amoret says in Act IV, scene iv that she has been "wooed by many," she still comes across as younger and less authoritative than Clorin, who has spent time mourning the dead lover and developing her healing arts.

How do Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird and Sherlock Holmes in A Study in Scarlet show morality?

Both Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird and Sherlock Holmes in A Study in Scarlet demonstrate morality when humbly accepting not being given due credit for their deeds.

In To Kill a Mockingbird, though Atticus does not win his case, he challenges society's racist beliefs and the legal system's inadequacies. Many in the town are grateful for his efforts, including African Americans, Judge Taylor, and Sheriff Heck Tate; however, the majority of Maycomb's people remain stuck in their prejudiced ways and critical of his actions. We especially see their critical attitude when Scout reports how she is treated at school after the trial. She notes that the children are nice but distant and their attitude seems to be one handed down to them by their parents. Scout concludes that their parents' attitudes "must have been that neither [she nor Jem] could help having Atticus for a parent, so their children must be nice to [them] in spite of him" (Ch. 26). The townspeople's critical attitude towards Atticus's actions shows the townspeople refuse to find value in Atticus's accomplishment and, therefore, refuse to give him credit for having achieved anything other than make the town's African American citizens grumble. Though Atticus continues to be criticized for his good accomplishments, he does not allow the criticisms to affect him, as we see when he continues on with his daily life, even resuming his duties in the state legislature, showing readers he is humbly able to accept a lack of respect.

Similarly, though Holmes is the one who solves the case in A Study in Scarlet, Scotland Yard takes all the credit, as we see when Holmes hands Watson a newspaper article that only mentions Holmes's name in saying the murderer was captured in Holmes's rented rooms. Knowing Scotland Yard would take all the credit, Holmes very humbly and philosophically accepts credit being stolen from him when he says to Watson, "What you do in this world is a matter of no consequence. . . the question is, what can you make people believe that you have done" (Chapter 7).

Both Atticus and Holmes behave morally when they humbly accept other people's attitudes towards them.

What are the 24 things in the bunkhouse in Of Mice and Men?

Steinbeck describes the bunkhouse in the first paragraph of chapter two in his novella Of Mice and Men. It is typical of housing for farm laborers with eight bunks, a "black cast-iron stove," a table "littered with playing cards," boxes for the players and several other things such as personal hygiene items, combs, neckties, medicines and "those Western magazines ranch men love to read and scoff at and secretly believe." The bunkhouse table was in the center of the room and would have been where the men played cards. Other than solitaire, which George is repeatedly playing in chapters two and three, the men played euchre, a game which sometimes utilizes twenty-four cards from a standard deck (six cards from each suit). The perpetual playing of cards in these chapters tends to support Steinbeck's theme of luck and fate. Just as cards can sometimes be unlucky, so too his life. Unfortunately for George and Lennie, the ranch proves to be an unlucky place and events which take place there mark the end of the dream of owning their own farm. 

What does Odysseus reveal about his identity to the men in Book XXI?

Odysseus reveals his real identity to Eumaeus and Philoetius, his faithful servants, so that they will accept instruction from him about how he wants to exact his revenge on the suitors.  He instructs them to bring him his bow, tell the women to lock the doors in the hall, and to bar the gates so that no one can leave.  No matter what, he says, no one should come back in that room with him and the suitors.  

After this, Odysseus successfully strings his bow, something none of the suitors could do, and he cleanly shoots an arrow through the twelve ax handles.  All the while, he is still disguised as a poor beggar and so the suitors are absolutely incensed that he has succeeded where they failed.  It is in the next book that he and Telemachus slaughter the suitors (with Athena's help).

Where does Percival say the beast lives in the Lord of the Flies?

In Chapter 5, Ralph holds an assembly to discuss the importance of maintaining a signal fire and following through with tasks that are discussed during the meetings, such as working together to build shelters, relieving oneself in the proper location, and making sure that the coconut shells are filled up with water. After addressing the necessities, Ralph says, "We’ve got to talk about this fear and decide there’s nothing in it" (Golding 82). Ralph, Jack, and Piggy all agree that a beast doesn't exist and allow a littlun named Phil to weigh in on the discussion. Phil describes his terrible dream and Ralph confirms that the beast doesn't exist because Phil was only having a nightmare. Then, a littlun named Percival Wemys Madison is pushed into the center of the circle to address the assembly. He begins to weep uncontrollably and mutters something. Jack hears what he says before Percival passes out in the grass. Jack explains that Percival said the beast comes out of the sea. Maurice then comments, "Daddy said they haven’t found all the animals in the sea yet" (Golding 88). An argument then ensues among the boys and Simon fails to describe man's inherent wickedness which is actually the "beast." This issue regarding the nature of the beast is not concluded during the assembly.

What ideas of the Constitution were original?

The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution. They looked at a number of sources to develop the document. They wanted a federal government that had enough power to govern the people, but not too much power so that it could become abusive.

The Magna Carta was one document that was examined. In the Magna Carta, the nobles demanded that the King guarantee the people certain rights. The Magna Carta established the idea that the King doesn’t have unlimited power. While the King agreed to consult the nobles before making decisions, it did plant the idea that the King’s power could be limited. The Petition of Right was another document that was considered. The Petition of Right emphasized the idea that common people should have a voice in their government. The English Bill of Rights was a third document that was used. The English Bill of Rights guaranteed certain rights to the people. Free elections and protecting the rights of those who are accused of crimes are examples of rights people had.

The Founding Fathers also viewed the ideas of some of the leading thinkers of the 17th century. Baron de Montesquieu believed that people were able to govern themselves. He believed in the concept of separation of powers. In our government, there are three branches of government that have different jobs. No branch of government can do it all by itself.

John Locke was a thinker that the Founding Fathers studied closely. Locke believed that a government gets its power from the people. The job of government is to protect the rights of the people. There are certain rights that all people have and that can’t be taken away by the government. These include the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This view can be seen in the Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution.

While the Founding Fathers looked at other documents and considered the views of other philosophers, there are some parts of the Constitution that are unique. For example, the Great Compromise created a two-house legislature. In one house, there is unequal representation for each state. The larger states have more representatives than the smaller states. In the other house, there is equal representation for each state. Another example is the Three-Fifths Compromise. The Three-Fifths Compromise states that five slaves would be counted as three people when it came time to count the number of people living in each state.

Thus, while some ideas of the Constitution were drawn from other documents or from other philosophers, there are some aspects of the Constitution that are unique to it. Additionally, some of the ideas that came from other places had to be molded to fit our system of government as outlined in the Constitution.

What is some textual evidence about Macbeth's downfall in Macbeth?

According to renowned Shakespearean critic Harold Bloom, Macbeth is a tragedy of the imagination. Thus, Macbeth's downfall results from the horror and the hallucinations generated by his imagination.

From the beginning, Macbeth seems susceptible to his imagination that impels him toward the destruction of his better nature. First of all, despite Banquo's adjurations, Macbeth's imagination finds the predictions of the menacing "weird sisters" enticing, if not credible. Yet, while he is seduced by their predictions of his being king, he is also frightened as the nature of the witches seems menacing. Reality and fantasy, then, become equated in Macbeth's mind: "nothing is/but what is not."

In Act I, urged by Lady Macbeth to act upon the witches' predictions, Macbeth deliberates upon the act of regicide that his wife wishes him to commit. He can find no reason to murder this virtuous king, his lord and kinsman, other than his "vaulting ambition" that spurs him on. Therefore, he tells Lady Macbeth "We will proceed no further in this business" (1.7.33), but she attacks his manhood and Macbeth is spurred on to action. Yet, before he kills Duncan, Macbeth imagines a bloody dagger, "a dagger of the mind" (2.2.37), and he presages his future confusion between what is and "what is not."

Macbeth's imagination continues to dominate him so much that no sooner does he contemplate an ambition than he perceives himself having already committed the act that fulfills this ambition. Thus, he moves from one bloody act to another. And, the more bloody the acts that Macbeth commits, the more horrific his imagination becomes. In Act III, for instance, he speaks of "the affliction of these terrible dreams/That shake us nightly...(3.2.18-19). Indeed, Macbeth's imagination itself becomes bloody as blood is the main constituent in his mind. He believes that the blood he has already shed (i.e. Banquo's) will return for revenge against him: "It will have blood, they say: blood will have blood" (3.4.128).

Macbeth's doppelgänger, Lady Macbeth, suffers the same fate of hallucinations, sleeplessness, and paranoia. Nightmare haunts them both. In Act III, for instance, Macbeth plans the death of Banquo and Fleance, anxious about the predictions of the witches that Banquo will have sons who will become kings: 

We have scorched the snake, not killed it.

She’ll close and be herself whilst our poor malice

Remains in danger of her former tooth.

But let the frame of things disjoint, both the worlds suffer,

Ere we will eat our meal in fear, and sleep

In the affliction of these terrible dreams

That shake us nightly. (3.2.15-23)

Bloom contends that the witches "...place nothing in Macbeth's mind that is not already there" although they certainly influence him into yielding to this vaulting imagination of ambition. Further, his imagination creates a phantasmagoric realm so complex and horrific that it destroys the Macbeths.

In the end, Macbeth imagines that Birnam Woods moves, thus fulfilling the witches' predictions of his demise, and Macbeth becomes desperate as his mind is filled with wild imaginings. Macbeth tells Macduff that he is safe--"charmed"-- because he cannot be killed by any man born of woman. But, when Macduff informs him that his mother died before he was born and he was cut out from her womb, Macbeth curses,

Accursed be that tongue that tells me so,
For it hath cowed my better part of me. (5.8.17-18)

Thus defeated by his imagination that is terrorized by Malcolm's prophetic words, Macbeth informs Macduff, "I'll not fight with thee" (5.7.22), though he quickly changes his mind and is soon slain.

Who were Thomas Gage and William Howe?

These men were the British generals entrusted with the very difficult task of trying to stem the emerging rebellion in Boston between 1774 and 1776. Both were very experienced officers, but neither was able to quell the rebellion, though Howe would go on to command the British army during its successful campaign against New York. Gage was a military governor who was tasked with enforcing the so-called "Intolerable Acts," one of which placed Boston under martial law in 1774. It was Gage who ordered military detachments to Concord to destroy Patriot powder and weapons caches there, an act which led to the first open battles of the war at Lexington and Concord itself. Gage was held responsible for what was widely viewed as a debacle in Boston, and was removed from his command in 1775. He was replaced by William Howe, who had actually served under him during much of the crisis. Howe launched a campaign against New York, and later Philadelphia. He was removed from his command in 1778 due to his complicity in a series of blunders that led to the defeat of a large British force at Saratoga in 1777. 

Who were the Band of Merry Men in Robin Hood?

The Band of Merry Men refers to the group of men who accompany the outlaw Robin Hood in English folklore. All of these men were outlaws who gained access to the Band by displaying skills in shooting and weaponry, and they accompanied Robin Hood in stealing from the rich and aiding the poor. Different interpretations of the Robin Hood legend provide varying numbers of Merry Men, with some claiming there were over a hundred. Robin Hood could signal to the Merry Men that he was in danger by using a horn that he kept around his neck. The most famous member of the group and closest to Robin Hood was "Little John," born John Little. Other named members of the Band of Merry Men include Will Scarlet, Friar Tuck, and Much the Miller's son.

Why did Iran not come to the aid of Iraq during the Persian Gulf War?

Iran did not come to the aid of Iraq during the Persian Gulf War because the two countries were enemies at that time.  There were at least two reasons why they were enemies.

First, Iran and Iraq were enemies because they had fought a very bloody war in the recent past.  The Persian Gulf War happened in late 1990 and early 1991.  At that point, it had only been a couple of years since Iran and Iraq had ended their war.  The two countries fought a war that lasted from 1980 to 1988.  It would be very odd if a country would, only two years after ending a war, come to the aid of the country it had been fighting.

Second, Iraq and Iran had very different governments at this time.  Iraq’s government was a secular military dictatorship led by Saddam Hussein.  It was made up mainly of Sunni Muslims.  Iran’s government was a theocracy, made up mainly of Shia Muslims.  The two countries were divided both by their religious beliefs and by their type of government.  Even if the two had not just fought a war, it is not clear that Iran would have been eager to help Iraq in this war.

In the Persian Gulf War, Iran would not have had any reason to help Iraq as the two were enemy countries that had very recently fought a brutal war against one another.

How did the Canterville ghost suffer and who helped him in his redemption?

In "The Canterville Ghost," the ghost suffers as a result of his inability to frighten the Otis family. When the ghost first appears to the family, for example, and tries to scare them by rattling his chains, Mr Otis offers him some Tammany Sun Rising Lubricator. This reaction causes the ghost to feel angry and humiliated:

Never, in a brilliant and uninterrupted career of three hundred years, had he been so grossly insulted.

In another incident, the ghost comes face to face with what he thinks is another ghost. Terrified by the sight before him, the ghost flees the scene when, in fact, it is nothing more than a dummy made by Washington Otis and the twins.

As the ghost's humiliation continues, he seeks his redemption in the Garden of Death where he can rest undisturbed. To reach this place, he enlists the help of Virginia Otis at the beginning of Chapter Five because she is the only member of the family who has not insulted nor humiliated the ghost. She is kind-hearted and gentle by nature, making her the ideal person to pray for the ghost's forgiveness.

What are two important settings in The Midwife's Apprentice?

Two important settings from the novel were the dung heap and Jane's cottage.  When the story began, Alyce was a homeless girl who found warmth in a dung heap.  This setting was a place where "garbage and spoiled straw [were] piled up in a great heap" in the village.  Even though the heap of trash smelled awful, Alyce burrowed herself inside because the night was cold.  Jane, the midwife, found Alyce in the dung heap the next morning.  Meeting Jane changed Alyce's life, because she found a home and became the midwife's apprentice.

Another important setting was Jane's cottage.  The cottage had a fireplace, a hard packed dirt floor, and dusty "shelves packed with jugs and flasks and leather bottles."  Alyce moved into Jane's cottage when she became the midwife's apprentice.  She slept on the dirt floor and did chores and ran errands for Jane.  This was the first real home that Alyce could remember having.

What are finals? Do they enable a student to pass? In college, if a student passes his or her finals, does this mean they will be getting a...

Simply put, finals are final examinations, tests, in a course.  They can be given at the middle school, high school, college level, and graduate level.  Elementary schools can have them, although some do not.  How much they matter and what you obtain from them depends on how the teacher or professor sets up the course.  I will go over some of the variations.

As a teacher is setting up a course, the teacher can decide how much the final exam score will count toward a final grade. For example, the finals I give count for 15% of a student's grade. This means it is an important test, but a student could actually do poorly on a final and have enough other good grades, for quizzes, papers, participation, projects, or mid-term (half-way through the course) exams to be able to pass the course and receive credit for it.  In some graduate schools, for example, in law school, there is only one exam, the final exam, and the student must pass that to pass and receive credit for that course. 

Finals can be what is called "cumulative." This means that the final exam includes everything you have learned from the beginning of the course, all the way through the course.  A final that is not cumulative will be one on which you are tested on just the most recent material covered, toward the end of the course. Most finals are cumulative.  We want to know that the student has mastered everything from beginning to end.

Finals can come in many forms, just like any other tests taken in school. They can ask questions that require short essay answers, they can be multiple choice, or they can be true/false.  Some finals are "closed book," meaning that you do not have access to your notes or your textbook. Others are "open book," meaning you do have access, usually to the textbook and your notes, to help you answer the questions. Open book finals are usually more difficult than closed book exams because the focus is on seeing how you think, rather than on what you have memorized.  What kind of final a person has for a course is usually up to the individual teacher. 

It is important to understand that when you take a final in a course, you pass just that course and receive your credit for it.  In high school and in college, you could pass some courses and not others, and that would mean you would not get your diploma. Each school has its own requirements on how many and which courses you need to take to get a diploma. 

Finals are not something to make you anxious, honestly.  When you are in a course that has a final, if you do your work all along, your reading assignments, class discussions, and homework, you should be able to handle a final with no difficulty.  Also, eating a good breakfast and getting a good night's sleep go a long way towards doing better on exams.  It is those students who do not do their work all along, those who try to learn everything at the end by staying up all night, who are the anxious ones! 

In The Crucible, what did Abigail do that caused Danforth to stand agape?

Danforth can’t believe it when he hears Abigail stole Parris’s money and fled town on a ship.

Abigail is a very sneaky girl. She is responsible for the horrors of what happens in Salem because her lies get the ball rolling on the witch trials. Even after things get out of control, Abigail likes the attention and continues to milk it. She pretends bewitching is happening.

When Hale questions her integrity, Abigail flails around screaming at the ceiling.

Hale: I believe him! Pointing at Abigail: This girl has always struck me false! She has —

Abigail, with a weird, wild, chilling cry, screams up to the ceiling.

Abigail: You will not! Begone! Begone, I say (Act 3)!

Paris tells Danforth that his niece has “vanished.” She didn’t just vanish; she stole everything he had and left him penniless. She is hardly a paragon of virtue, but they based their trials on believing her and this news shocks Danforth.

Parris: Excellency, I think they be aboard a ship. Danforth stands agape. My daughter tells me how she heard them speaking of ships last week, and tonight I discover my — my strongbox is broke into. He presses his fingers against his eyes to keep back tears (Act 4). 

Danforth calls Parris a “brainless man.” Parris seems to think the witch trial game is over. He tells Danforth that Andover has “thrown out the court” and is no longer interested in pursuing people for witchcraft. He talks of riots in Andover, but Danforth won’t hear of it. 

Danforth truly believes in witch trials, and loves the power his authority gives him. He comes in excited and ready to banish the devil, and his enthusiasm never wanes. He doesn’t seem to understand he is being led around by the nose by a girl with other agendas.

How does technology influence conformity in Fahrenheit 451?

The relationship between technology and conformity is an important one in Fahrenheit 451. The novel takes place in an imagined vision of the future where people are constantly surrounded by video screens blasting television shows as well as always hearing voices and news through their seashell ear pieces. All entertainment is sanctioned by the government, and writing and books forbidden.

The result is that all the information people consume comes from the systems of power that already exist. While our society has freedom of the press and you can pick up any number of books, documentaries, or other media from libraries that may contradict, critique, or enforce our society's beliefs, the same is not true of the world in Fahrenheit 451. By controlling the media that the people in that world consume, the power systems ensure that everybody will continue to conform.

All the media the characters of the book consume is concerned with distraction. The seashell ear pieces are loud and constantly on, rarely giving people time to think original thoughts. It's difficult to be an individual person when you don't have the ability to think outside what's being fed to you; at the end of the book, it's only the characters who have actively sought out forbidden literature that are able to break free of their society.

Similarly, the video screens function as entertainment and control. The citizens of this society engage with the films because they're entertaining, but they also encourage belonging. Characters like Mildred want to please the people in the films, which are interactive, making them even more appealing and important.

The society in Fahrenheit 451 prioritizes technology in their society as being the most important thing, with writing being forbidden. State-sanctioned entertainment means that characters aren't exposed to anything that might challenge their perspective, enforcing their emphasis on conformity. While it might not seem like entertainment could have that profound of an effect, when your access is restricted to alternative thoughts, especially with their thoughts being interrupted by the seashell ear pieces.

The way that technology influences conformity here is indirect--they're not using any kind of magical power or brainwashing techniques, but rather subtle technologies to keep people from thinking freely. When people can't think freely, they're less likely to question or challenge the dominant systems of power, making them docile, malleable citizens that conform to their society's wishes.

Why were Jews and Christians separated in Shakespeare's time, and how was the separation delineated in society?

During Shakespeare's lifetime (1564-1616), there were few to no Jews in England. The record of Jews living in England goes back to 1070, but Jews were expelled from England by Edward I in 1290. Even before Edward's Edict of Expulsion, Jews were treated differently than other people in England. They were subjects of the king, not of lords, and Jews often worked as money lenders during medieval times because the church did not allow money lending. This profession was one of the few open to Jews, and the king often taxed them heavily because he did not have to go through Parliament to collect taxes from Jews.

Unfortunately, Jews were disliked for being money lenders, and this situation resulted in a great deal of anti-Semitism across Europe. Jews were associated with the devil and with false ideas (such as the idea that they used the blood of Christian children in their Passover matzah). These types of anti-Semitic ideas are referred to as "blood libels." Many Jews were required to wear badges or identifying signs. When they were expelled from England, many Jews went to France or Poland. Oliver Cromwell readmitted Jews into England around 1657, though a very small number of Sephardic Jews came in the years between 1270-1657. Shakespeare was unlikely to have known a Jew personally, though some of his characters, such as the Jewish money lender Shylock in The Merchant of Venice, are described in a way that some critics consider anti-Semitic.

The separation of Jews and Christians was often delineated through the creation of Jewish ghettos. Jews had to live in particular areas of cities. For example, the Jewish ghetto in Rome goes back to 1555. It was created by Pope Paul IV in the worst part of the city, which was flooded by the Tiber River. Jewish ghettos in many European cities became densely packed to the point of overcrowding, as Jews were not allowed to live outside the ghetto. In England, Jews did not live in an official ghetto but were crowded into the East End (in London) and specific areas in other cities. In addition, Jews were often forced to wear badges or special types of clothing that identified them as Jewish in a debasing manner. 

Why did Helen Keller say "I am filled with wonder when I consider the immeasurable contrasts between the two lives which it connects" (Ch 4)? What...

Helen is describing her life before and after her teacher Anne Sullivan came as two different lives. 

Helen Keller was born with sight and hearing, but lost them at a very young age.  This made her life very dark and difficult during her early childhood.  Anne Sullivan taught her the names of things and how to read and write.  This was a remarkable difference. 

Hellen describes the first time she met Anne Sullivan.

I felt approaching footsteps. I stretched out my hand as I supposed to my mother. Some one took it, and I was caught up and held close in the arms of her who had come to reveal all things to me, and, more than all things else, to love me. (Ch. 4)

Hellen describes two different lives because before Annie Sullivan came to teach her, she lived a life of darkness and ignorance.  Her parents did the best they could, and Helen was very smart, but they could not teach her to talk or read in the traditional way.  The world was very closed-off to her.

Anne Sullivan wasted no time in starting to teach Helen words.

The morning after my teacher came she led me into her room and gave me a doll. … When I had played with it a little while, Miss Sullivan slowly spelled into my hand the word "d-o-l-l." (Ch. 4)

Through determination and creativity, Anne Sullivan managed to get through to her young student.  She had to help the Kellers overcome many bad habits of indulging and babying Helen.  Helen made great strides very quickly, even though she had never been able to learn before.  When Anne finally succeeded in teaching Helen the word for “water,” it opened the floodgates for many other words, including “teacher.”  Helen was very happy.  She had the gift of language.

In the novel Hoot by Carl Hiassen, why is Roy suspended from riding the bus?

In Chapter 1 of Hoot, Roy is riding the bus to school on a Monday morning. An older boy named Dana is bullying Roy by smashing his face against the bus window and squeezing Roy's head with his fingernails. As Roy's face is pressed to the glass of the window, he sees a boy running barefoot outside the bus. Filled with curiosity, Roy watches as the boy gracefully speeds off and away down the street and through several private yards. Throughout the week at school, Roy continues to think about the running boy. We later learn that this boy is known as "Mullet Fingers."

In Chapter 2, Roy is riding the bus and sees the running boy again, and this time makes a move to leave the bus to follow him. He is stopped, however, when Dana grabs the back of his shirt. When Dana does not let go, Roy punches him in the nose and runs off the bus. He now runs both in flight from people chasing him and in pursuit of the running boy.

Later on, Roy meets with the vice-principal regarding his fight with Dana on the bus. The bus driver did not see that Dana instigated the fight, so only Roy is being punished. Roy's punishment is a two-week suspension from riding the bus. He also has to write an apology letter to Dana.

Why is it important for Joel Salatin to process his chickens at his farm?

It is important for Joel Salatin to process his chickens at his own farm because of his conviction that invasive government oversight is a threat to sustainability and the clean food movement. Joel's reasons are 'economic, ecological, political, ethical, and even spiritual.' He sees himself as a food crusader, a sort of modern day Martin Luther, the Catholic monk who nailed his ninety-five theses to the door of a Wittenberg Church in 1517. In fact, Joel hypothesizes that many independent-minded farmers will continue to emerge as part of an alternative food system that challenges the behemoth food production industry.

Joel is convicted that the continued growth of an alternative food industry will lead to a 'diversified food economy.' A diversified food economy will certainly strengthen the integrity of the food production industry; therefore, any shock resulting from famines, droughts, and livestock diseases can be absorbed quickly and easily without an undue interruption to food supply.

In processing his own chickens, Joel feels that he can do his part in sustaining the local economy. For example, he sometimes hires his own neighbors to help process his chickens. The local participation leads to greater education for the community about humane slaughtering practices, organic farming, and clean food. Because Joel does not raise chickens on a large scale, he and his neighbors do not have to work six days a week to process the poultry. The multinational food producers, on the other hand, hire migrant workers who are required to work back-breaking hours for low pay.

Because Joel only has to process a few times a month (rather than every day), he and his workers have time to reflect on the job they are doing and to be as 'careful and humane as possible.' By processing his own chickens and selling them to customers straight from his farm, Joel believes that he is preserving the integrity of his operation. With this transparency, customers can see with their own eyes whether the chickens are being processed humanely or not. Unfortunately, because of government regulations, Joel must process his beef and pork at state-approved facilities.

In processing his own chickens, Joel is also fighting back against the USDA, which he believes is being used by the 'global-corporate complex to impede the clean food movement.' In his eyes, 'centralized production, centralized processing, and long-distance transportation of food' is responsible for 'an epidemic of food-borne illness' in the United States, and he aims to do his part to put a stop to it.

How does Shakespeare use Act 3 in A Midsummer Nights Dream to prove Lysander's statement "the course of true love never did run smooth" to be true?

Events become zany in Act III, the high point of the play's comedy, as love potions enter in and mix-ups occur. A little magic on the part of Puck puts an ass's head on Bottom, and a love potion dropped in Titania's eyes causes her to fall in love with the ass-headed Bottom. She's really in love with Oberon, but it will take this diversion for her to give up the Indian boy who has caused her quarrel with Oberon and get her back together again with her true love.

This is also the Act where Puck mistakenly puts the love juice into Lysander's eyes instead of Demetrius's, so that when Lysander wakes up, he falls in love with Helena. Comic mayhem ensues: Hermia can't understand why Lysander, who a few hours ago ran away with her out of love, now despises her and loves Helena. Meanwhile, Helena thinks Lysander's love language is all a joke, meant to mock her. When Oberon uses a love potion to ensure Demetrius will fall in love with Helena, as he meant from the start, the comedy gets even zanier: Helena now thinks she is being mocked by both men pretending to be lovesick, while Hermia is furious and jealous, and the two men are ready to fight over Helena. In none of these cases is true love running smooth. Lysander is no longer in love with Hermia, Helena doesn't believe either man is in love with her, Hermia is confused and the men are at each other's throats.

To what extent does the reader feel the presence of Arthur Miller in The Crucible?

The reader can feel the presence of the play's author, Arthur Miller, in the frequent expository passages that occur in the first act.  In fact, after the description of the setting, Miller begins to give us background on both Reverend Parris and the Puritans in general.  He even already begins to show how the story of the witch hunts in Salem hundreds of years ago remain relevant and, indeed, has parallels in modern America. 

Further, after the Putnams arrive, Miller provides background information about them, including information regarding Thomas Putnam's "vindictive nature" and the fact that he and his daughter are so instrumental in making accusations.  Such passages as these help us to understand who Miller blames for the tragedies that follow.  In addition, Miller interjects to describe John Proctor.  This introduction, especially, allows readers to understand the changes that Miller makes to the real-life people on whom characters are partially based, or at least for whom they are named.  Proctor, for instance, is in his mid-thirties in the play, but the real-life John Proctor was in his sixties.  Likewise, Miller's introduction of Francis and Rebecca Nurse portrays them as largely sympathetic figures, especially compared to the angry and vindictive Putnams. 

Similarly, Miller introduces Reverend Hale and Giles Corey, again, to help us understand who they are, what motivates them, and how guilty or guiltless they may prove to be, at least for Miller.  These interjections cease after the first act is over, but Miller has made his position known on those characters who require more than just their own words to make them truly known to us.

What is the central idea of the poem "A Walk Along the Beach" by Frank Finale?

The central idea of the poem is expressed most succinctly in its last line:

Spread the love... The peace will follow... 

Throughout the poem, the speaker focuses on the beauty of nature that he is surrounded by. He uses his walk on the beach and the wonderful and exhilarating sights and sounds that he experiences as a metaphor for the beauty of life. He relishes all that is beautiful and takes great pleasure in describing whatever he senses. The repetition of the definite article, 'the' at the beginning of most of the lines emphasises the effect the natural wonders he is surrounded by has on all his senses.

The speaker is enthralled by the feel of the sun's warm glow on his skin, the vision of sunlight reflected on the ocean, the sound made by the waves, the touch of sand on his bare feet and the sensation of wind blowing through his hair. These sensations are invigorating and pleasurable. The speaker is literally intoxicated by the wonder of it all. It is as if he has achieved nirvana for he is fulfilled and happy. He says that his walk on the beach and experiencing all these wonderful sensations make him realise that being alive is a beautiful thing. 

The speaker metaphorically equates life with beauty. He accentuates this statement by preceding and ending it with an ellipsis, making it stand on its own. It is clear that the speaker loves life and everything beautiful about it. In the final line he asks the reader to circulate this love since peace will naturally follow and this is the essence of the poem.

`arcsinx + arcsiny = pi/2 , (sqrt(2)/2, sqrt(2)/2)` Use implicit differentiation to find an equation of the tangent line at the given point

`arcsin(x) +arcsin(y) = pi/2`

First, take the derivative of both sides of the equation using implicit differentiation.

`d/dx[arcsin(x) + arcsin(y)] = d/dx (pi/2)`

`d/dx[arcsin(x)] + d/dx[arcsin(y)]=d/dx(pi/2)`

Take note that the derivative formula of arcsine is

• `d/dx[arcsin(u)] = 1/sqrt(1-u^2)*(du)/dx`

And the derivative of a constant is zero.

• `d/dx(c) = 0`

Applying these two formulas, the equation becomes

`1/sqrt(1-x^2) *d/dx(x) + 1/sqrt(1-y^2)*d/dx(y) = 0`

`1/sqrt(1-x^2) *1 + 1/sqrt(1-y^2)*(dy)/dx=0`

`1/sqrt(1-x^2) + 1/sqrt(1-y^2)*(dy)/dx = 0`

Then, isolate `(dy)/dx` .

`1/sqrt(1-y^2)*(dy)/dx = -1/sqrt(1-x^2)`

`(dy)/dx = -1/sqrt(1-x^2)*sqrt(1-y^2)/1`

`(dy)/dx = -sqrt(1-y^2)/sqrt(1-x^2)`

Then, plug-in the given point to get the slope of the curve on that point.  The given point is `(sqrt2/2,sqrt2/2)` .

`(dy)/dx = -sqrt(1- (sqrt2/2)^2)/sqrt(1-(sqrt2/2)^2)=-1`

Take note that the slope of a curve at point (x,y) is the slope of the line tangent to that point.  Hence, the slope of the tangent line is

`m = (dy)/(dx) = -1`

Now that the slope of line that is tangent to the graph of function at `(sqrt2/2,sqrt2/2)` is known, apply the point-slope form to get the equation of the line.

`y-y_1 = m(x- x_1)`

Plugging in the values, it becomes

`y - sqrt2/2=-1(x - sqrt2/2)`

`y-sqrt2/2=-x + sqrt2/2`

`y = -x+sqrt2/2+sqrt2/2`

`y = -x + (2sqrt2)/2`

`y = -x + sqrt2`

Therefore, the equation of the tangent line is `y = -x + sqrt2` .

In The Watsons Go to Birmingham, what are the strengths and weaknesses of the Watson family?

One of the great strengths of the Watson family is that they have a great sense of humor and can laugh together. For example, during the cold spell in Flint, Michigan in Chapter One, the dad starts talking "Southern-style" and making fun of Momma's former beau, "Hambone Henderson" (page 4). His sense of humor, and Momma's humorous replies, keep the family laughing and take their minds off the cold. The dad even makes the family's lack of money funny at times. For example, when their 1948 Plymouth starts up (this car is fifteen years old in 1963), the dad says, "the Great Brown One pulled through again!" (page 6). His humor makes everyone cheer, so he is able to turn their tribulations into camaraderie. 

The weaknesses of the family is that Byron often makes life difficult for them, and Byron does not always support his family. For example, when Byron's mouth gets stuck on a frozen mirror, Kenny says, "If it had been me with my lips stuck on something like this he'd have tortured me for a couple of days before he got help" (page 13). Bryon does not always support his siblings, though they support him, and he even tries to beat Kenny up with his friend, Buphead. While the Watson parents are very loving, they don't know how to handle Byron, and they are often inconsistent in discipling him. Momma threatens Bryon to stop lighting paper on fire, but when Joetta cries, Momma lets Byron off the hook (page 43). As a result, Byron starts lighting fires again, endangering the entire family. Eventually, Momma has to threaten to burn Byron to make him stop lighting fires. Later, the Watson parents decide to take Byron to Momma's mother in Birmingham because they realize they just can't handle him. Byron's difficulty create a strain on the entire family, and they don't always know how to respond consistently and effectively. 

`int_0^1 (dx)/(x^2 + 1)^2` Evaluate the integral

First find the indefinite integral:

`int (dx)/(1+x^2)^2=int (1+x^2-x^2)/(1+x^2)^2 dx = int (dx)/(1+x^2)-int (x^2 dx)/(1+x^2)^2.`

The first summand is `arctan(x),` for the second apply integration by parts:

`u=x,`  `dv=(x dx)/(1+x^2),` so `du=dx` and `v=-1/2 1/(1+x^2).`

So  `int (x^2 dx)/(1+x^2)^2=-1/2 x/(1+x^2)+1/2 int (dx)/(1+x^2) = -1/2 x/(1+x^2)+1/2arctan(x).`

Thus the indefinite integral is  `1/2(x/(1+x^2)+arctan(x))+C,`

and the indefinite integral is  `1/2(1/2+pi/4-0-0)=1/4+pi/8.`

What are examples of metaphor, simile, foreshadowing, and personification in "The Most Dangerous Game"?

Like most pieces of literature, Richard Connell's tale of adventure, "The Most Dangerous Game," contains elements of foreshadowing and figures of speech such as metaphor, simile and personification. There are three good examples of foreshadowing in the beginning of the story. Foreshadowing is when there are hints and clues about what will happen later in a story. First, the fact that the island which the yacht passes seems to have a sinister reputation and is labeled "Ship-Trap Island" foreshadows the fact that the owner of the island is sociopathic murderer who hunts men. Second, the discussion between Rainsford and Whitney on board the yacht over whether animals feel fear and pain foreshadows Rainsford's later experience on the island when he is a "beast at bay." Third, the pistol shot which causes Rainsford to fall off the yacht foreshadows the future hunt between Rainsford and Zaroff.

Metaphors abound in the text of the story. A metaphor is a comparison of two unlike things. One of the most important metaphors which reoccurs is Rainsford and Zaroff being compared to various types of animals. The hunting of men is also compared to a "game" by Zaroff. The following metaphors are in order as they appear in the story:

• "Outdoor chess!" Zaroff compares the future hunt of Rainsford to the board game which requires mental skill. 


• "He was in a picture with a frame of water, and his operations, clearly, must take place within that frame." The island is compared to a picture within a frame.


• "I have played the fox, now I must play the cat of the fable."


• "Even so zealous a hunter as General Zaroff could not trace him there, he told himself; only the devil himself could follow that complicated trail through the jungle after dark." Rainsford compares Zaroff to the devil. A fitting comparison because Zaroff does indeed track down Rainsford.


• "The Cossack was the cat; he was the mouse."


• "Following the trail with the sureness of a bloodhound came General Zaroff."


• "Even as he touched it, the general sensed his danger and leaped back with the agility of an ape."

Connell also employs several similes in the weaving of his story. A simile uses like or as to make a comparison between two unlike things or ideas. Again, these are in the order they appear in the text:

• "The revolver pointed as rigidly as if the giant were a statue."


• "'They indicate a channel,' he said, 'where there's none: giant rocks with razor edges crouch like a sea monster with wide-open jaws.'"


• "He flattened himself down on the limb, and through a screen of leaves almost as thick as a tapestry, he watched."


• "Rainsford's impulse was to hurl himself down like a panther, but he saw the general's right hand held something metallic—a small automatic pistol."


• "Rainsford did not want to believe what his reason told him was true, but the truth was as evident as the sun that had now pushed through the morning mists."


• "He tried to wrench it back, but the muck sucked viciously at his foot as if it were a giant leech."

Personification is when human qualities are given to a non-human subject:

• "The sensuous drowsiness of the night was on him."


• "...on three sides of it cliffs dived down to where the sea licked greedy lips in the shadows."


• "An apprehensive night crawled slowly by like a wounded snake." Not only does this sentence contain personification, it also has a simile.


• "Across a cove he could see the gloomy gray stone of the chateau."

What is a lesson Miss Maudie teaches Jem and Scout in Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird?

One of the most important lessons Miss Maudie teaches the children in Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird is to see the world more optimistically, especially to see the results of the trial more optimistically.

The day after the trial, Miss Maudie invites the children into her home for cake in order to cheer them up. Jem especially feels gloomy because he thinks no one in the town but his father tried to help Tom Robinson, and now the whole town is against his father even though Robinson was clearly shown to be innocent during the trial. Miss Maudie comforts Jem by explaining more people helped Robinson than he realizes, including the African-American community, Sheriff Heck Tate, and even Judge Taylor who appointed Atticus to defend Robinson intentionally. Normally, a case like Robinson's, doomed to failure, would have gone to Maxwell Green, the lawyer with the least experience.

Miss Maudie further teaches the children to see things more optimistically when she points out how long the jury had been out. She explains that, as she waited for the Finches to come home, she thought to herself that no one but Atticus could have kept a "jury out so long in a case like that" (Ch. 22). She further states she had thought to herself, "[W]e're making a step--it's just a baby-step, but it's a step" (Ch. 22). After this lesson, Jem, as well as the other children, is able to better understand and appreciation what Atticus had accomplished.

`r = 7.5% , t = 20` Find the principal P that must be invested at a rate r, compounded monthly, so that $1,000,000 will be available for...

The formula in compounding interest is

`A = P(1 + r/n)^(n*t)`

where

A is the accumulated amount

P is the principal

r is the annual rate

n is the number of compounding periods in a year, and

t is the number of years.

Plugging in the given values, the formula becomes:

`1000000=P(1+0.075/n)^(n*20)`

Since the r is compounded monthly, the value of n is 12.

`1000000=P(1+0.075/12)^(12*20)`

Simplifying the right side, it becomes

`1000000=P(1+0.00625)^240`

`1000000=P(1.00625)^240`

Isolating the P, it yields

`1000000/1.00625^240=(P(1.00625)^240)/1.00625^240`

`224174.18=P`

Therefore, the principal amount that should be invested is $224,174.18 .

Please explain the significance of the year 1491 had as it pertains to the history of the United States.

1491 is the last year before Columbus arrived in the Caribbean, thus launching a long series of European explorations in the New World.  Charles C. Mann's book 1491 describes the importance of this year in early American history.  Before Columbus, native groups in the Americas had a very elaborate culture.  They actively practiced agriculture using companion planting and selective forest burning techniques that have become popular in recent years.  The native groups in this country also had expansive trade networks--there are conch shells from the Gulf of Mexico found in burial sites in New England.  Finally, the Aztec Empire controlled most of Mexico and Central America through trade, war, and tribute.  Historians are quickly growing to appreciate the world that existed before Columbus, as there has long been a bias that has stated that American history really began with the coming of Europeans.  The field of history that studies Pre-Columbian societies is rapidly growing.  

What is the name of the biggest mountain in the world?

You would think that this would be an easy question to answer, but it actually takes a little thought. While Mount Everest is generally celebrated as the world's tallest peak, it really depends on how you look at it.

Mount Everest is 29,029 feet above sea level. From that standpoint it is the world's tallest mountain. It is also the most famous mountain. Annual treks to the top often make the news, and more than 400 climbers have died in their efforts to conquer the peak.

However, there is another mountain in Hawaii called Mauna Kea. Mauna Kea is an island mountain that stands 13,796 feet above sea level. Mount Everest is over 15,000 feet higher above sea level. But, since Mauna Kea is a mountain in the ocean, you have to measure its height from the ocean floor. When you do that, Mauna Kea is actually about 33,000 feet tall, which makes it about 13.6% taller than Everest.

Since Mauna Kea is mostly underwater, we don't hear too much about it—nobody tries to scale underwater mountains; it wouldn't be possible, so it loses the romantic, adventurous appeal of Everest.  

What is the importance of the title in an essay?

The degree to which the title of an essay is significant depends on the audience and rhetorical situation of the essay. If you are writing clickbait for the web, the title should be outrageous and startling to draw clicks, but for more sober genres, a title is less crucial.

The main thing that a title does is give potential readers a sense of the basic subject matter and approach of the essay so that they can judge quickly whether they wish to read it or not. For example, an essay titled "Best Foods for Your Cat" would appeal to people who own cats but not to people who do not own cats. 

For academic essays, your instructors read your essays as part of their jobs, and thus whether those essays interest them or not is not an issue. Instead, the only really important thing about your essay title is that it is in title case and clearly indicates the focus of your paper. If your essay has a title suggesting that you will be discussing flower imagery in Hamlet, and you actually talk about plants in Macbeth for most of the essay, you may have points deducted for lack of focus. 

An astronaut has a mass of 80.0 kg. How far away from the center of the Earth would he need to be in order to have one half his weight on Earth?

According to the Universal Law of Gravitation, two bodies of masses m1 and m2, separated by a distance of "d," will attract each other with a force given by the following equation:

F= Gm1m2/d^2

Let m1 and m2 be the masses of the astronaut and the Earth and d be the distance between them. When the astronaut is on Earth's surface, the distance d = radius of Earth.

Let us say that the distance at which the astronaut will have half the weight he would on Earth's surface is d'. At this distance, the force of attraction would be half its original value.

Thus, F' = F/2 = Gm1m2/d'^2 = 1/2 (Gm1m2/d^2)

That is, d'^2 = 2d^2 

or d' = `sqrt(2)` d ~ 1.414 d

Thus, the astronaut will have to be about 1.414 times away from his position on Earth's surface for his weight to be half. Since the average radius of Earth is about 6,371 km, the astronaut will have to be about 9010 km away from the center of Earth.

Hope this helps. 

How does the theme of inhumanity take place within the story of Animal Farm? What specific actions of the animals make them inhumane?

The basic inhumanity of the animals in Animal Farm is that the pigs perpetrate the same unfairness that caused them to overthrow Mr. Jones in the first place. For example, although the pigs declare that everyone is equal, they quickly establish their dominance early on and deprive the other animals of a fair share of the farm's resources. While the pigs claim most of the resources, the other animals do the hard work. This system of exploitation is very similar to what the humans practiced on the farm, but it has not improved under the pigs' leadership.

When the animals complain, the pigs use fear and the animals' common hatred of the past to excuse their inhumanity. As Squealer tells the animals:

"Milk and apples (this has been proved by Science, comrades) contain substances absolutely necessary to the well-being of a pig. We pigs are brainworkers...Do you know what would happen if we pigs failed in our duty? Jones would come back!" (page 14).

The pigs' inhumanity is that they perpetrate the evils of the past by knowingly manipulating the other animals through fear. 

One of the most potent examples of the way in which the pigs are inhumane is their treatment of Boxer, an unfailingly hard-working horse who gives endless hours of work to improve the farm. After he can no longer work, he is carted off by a glue maker and never seen again. Boxer, despite trying, cannot read, so he doesn't understand his fate (as he can't read the side of the truck). His illiteracy makes him easier to manipulate and, despite his loyalty, he is sent off the "knacker's" (page 47). This fate is what the pigs had warned Mr. Jones might have in store for Boxer, but they wind up instituting Mr. Jones's harsh system of treatment while pretending that they are helping the animals live a better life. They also take advantage of other animals' weaknesses, such as manipulating Boxer because he can't learn to read. 

Can you help me think of an idea for my level 3 question about Phantom of the Opera?

Level 3 questions are generally thought-based questions that ask the reader to draw the material together thematically (as opposed to level 1, or fact-based questions, and level 2, or inference-based questions). Some questions you might consider are the following:

• How does Erik represent Christine's darker, more evil self? How does he embody her deepest dreams and desires?


• What is the religious symbolism of Christine (a Christ-like figure, as her name implies, who redeems the Phantom) and of Erik (a dark figure of the underworld)? What are the book's larger religious messages?


• In The Phantom of the Opera, the company is producing Faust. How is Faust similar thematically to what is happening in The Phantom of the Opera? Which character in Phantom is most like Faust?


• How does the author humanize the figure of Erik in the end?


• What does Christine's vacillation between Raoul and Erik symbolize, and what does it suggest about her character and desires? 

What are six common features of religion?

Many scholars have attempted to provide comprehensive yet concise descriptions of what is common to all religions. I think that Huston Smith, a Doctor of Religious Studies, has best summarized the features of religion without some sort of bias or favoritism towards a particular tradition. He describes these features as the following:

First, religion offers explanations. Who are we? Why are we here? What do we do now? Religion seeks to answer big questions like this as well as questions about more minute aspects of life. Religious explanations often cover topics like eschatology—what happens after death or at the "end of the world"—and cosmology—how the world (or universe) is organized and how it came to be. 

Second, there is a sense of mystery in religion. Some faiths explicitly address the sense of mystery (as in Catholicism) while others may be more subtle (as in Buddhism.) As humans, our experiences and understandings are finite by the very nature of what it is to be a human being. Religion is empowering for many in that it transcends the finite boundaries of human experience and offers a means for negotiating that which we cannot know.

Often times this negotiation occurs by way of ritual—the third feature of religion. Rituals are prescribed, repeated behaviors with desired and intended outcomes. Ritual and habit are somewhat similar in that they are repeated behaviors which offer a sense of comfort. Where ritual differs from habit is that ritual is understood to be in accordance with some supernatural force and it is carried out with specific intentions. 

Ritual can give way to tradition, and may even transform through tradition. For example, the Christian baptism stems from the Jewish mikveh. The mikveh is used for ritual immersion (or bathing) in order to be spiritually pure. When Jesus Christ was baptized, he was undergoing a form of mikveh initiating him into the Priesthood. Today, most Christians are baptized to initiate them into the faith either by immersion or a sprinkling of holy water. Notice how this tradition began with total bodily immersion and an intent of marking someone as spiritually pure and has since transformed into only requiring a sprinkling of water to mark someone as of a particular spiritual identity.

All religions have a sense that there is a right way to live and act, and if we do this, we reap some sort of spiritual benefit. In Christianity, this is often called grace, and this is the term Smith uses. However, I feel using the term "grace" is Christo-centric and seems to exclude religions which do not employ a concept of God. Some other examples of "being right with all that is" would be the concept of dao in Daoism (Taoism) and kamma (or Karma) in Buddhism.

Finally, all religions have a sense of authority in regards to religious matters. In some cases, the people with religious authority are priests who undergo years of training and education to fulfill their role. In other faiths, emphasis is placed on an internal authority and personal understanding of how to live in the world.

In "Contents of the Dead Man's Pocket" by Jack Finney, how does Tom force himself to concentrate?

In Jack Finney’s short story “Contents of the Dead Man’s Pocket,” Tom Benecke uses a number of techniques to force himself to concentrate as he retrieves his paper from the ledge high above Lexington Avenue.

After he goes out the window, and begins to move across the ledge, he realizes he has to move without putting much thought into his actions.

He simply did not permit himself to look down, though the compulsion to do so never left him; nor did he allow himself actually to think. Mechanically--right foot, left foot, over and again--he shuffled along crabwise, watching the projecting wall ahead loom steadily closer.

At one point, he forces himself to breathe deeply and methodically while his body shook with fear. After he gained control of his breathing, he knew that he would have to put his fear deep in the recesses of his mind. He simply stopped thinking, and forced himself to move along the ledge.

By a kind of trick--by concentrating his entire mind on first his left foot, then his left hand, then the other foot, then the other hand--he was able to move, almost imperceptibly, trembling steadily, very nearly without thought.

After he gained control of his breathing, Tom forced himself to concentrate on the motion of his body, while compartmentalizing his fear deep in his mind.

Is "The Yellow Wallpaper" crime fiction? If yes, what was the crime?

"The Yellow Wallpaper" by Charlotte Perkins Gilman is not an example of crime fiction or a crime story.

First, one should note that crime fiction is a genre defined by far more than the simple occurrence of a crime. Although crimes occur in many novels and plays, including Crime and Punishment, Oedipus Rex, and Hamlet, these are not considered crime stories because the main focus of the stories is not on the crime itself or its solution, but on the characters and society being portrayed, whereas in crime fiction, such as the stories about Sherlock Holmes, the focus is purely on the crime and its solution. Also, crime fiction is by its nature plot-driven. "The Yellow Wallpaper" is a character-driven story focusing on the mental deterioration of the protagonist, not action.

Next, there is no evidence of a crime. While the rest cure imposed on the protagonist is barbaric by our standards of mental health care, it was actually quite expensive (somewhat of a sacrifice for the family) and considered humane in its period. The protagonist's imagining a woman trapped behind the wallpaper is a hallucination that also serves as a metaphor for the protagonist's own state of mind, not some actual Gothic horror. 

The GCF of three numbers is 6 and their LCM is 900. If two of the numbers are 36 and 60, find the other number.

Hello!

Denote the unknown number as `x.` Factor the given numbers into primes:

`36 = 2^2*3^2,`  `60 = 2^2*3*5,`  `6 = 2*3,`  `900 = 2^2*3^2*5^2.`

The `GCF(36,60)=2^2*3=12,`  not `6.` Therefore to have `GCF(36,60,x) = 6,` `x` must have `6` as its factor, but not have `12` as its factor.

Further, the `LCM(36,60)=2^2*3^2*5=180.`

The given `LCM(36,60,x) = 900 = 180*5,` so `x` must have one more factor of `5` than `60,` i.e. it must have a factor of `5^2 = 25.`

This way we know that `x` must have `6*25 = 150` as its factor, so `x = 150*y,` and `y` must be odd. From the other hand, `x` must be a factor of its multiple `900,` so y must be a factor of `900/150=6,` and not so many variants remain.

Actually they are `y=1,` `x=150` and `y=3,` `x=450.`

There are two possible answers: 150 and 450 (not counting -150 and -450).

What is Hamlets plan, and what excuse does he give for putting on the play before he takes his revenge?

Hamlet wants to ascertain that Claudius is, in fact, responsible for the murder of his father. The plan is to reenact, through the play, a scene that is more or less identical to the way (according to the ghost) King Hamlet was murdered by Claudius. Hamlet hopes that Claudius will react in such a way as to confirm his suspicions. "The play's the thing," he tells himself at the end of Act II, "wherein I'll catch the conscience of the King." He even tells Horatio to watch his uncle, saying that 

If his occulted guilt
Do not itself unkennel in one speech,
It is a damned ghost that we have seen...

So Hamlet says he wants to be absolutely certain that Claudius is guilty of the crime before he seeks revenge. It is a bit of an elaborate scheme, and one that is certainly in keeping with his rather roundabout way of avenging his father's death. It is pretty obvious at this point in the play that Hamlet is still grappling with the morality of seeking revenge. But the plot works exactly as Hamlet hoped--the King is horrified by the scene, and even leaves, ending the play. Hamlet and Horatio both witnessed the King's reaction, and leave convinced that he was, in fact, the murderer. Even then, however, Hamlet still finds a reason to forestall revenge--in the next scene, he encounters the King on his knees in prayer, and fears that his soul might go to heaven if he is murdered while praying.

What is the mood in John Green's The Fault in our Stars?

The Fault in Our Stars, written by John Green, tells the story of two teenagers who meet at their cancer support group. Sixteen-year-old Hazel has had thyroid cancer for several years and has come to terms with her mortality and her place in the world. Hazel is quite mature for accepting her fate, but her mother also thinks that she has become depressed. (Hazel thinks depression is a side-effect of knowing you will die.) One day when Hazel is attending support group, she meets seventeen-year-old Augustus, who is recovering from osteosarcoma. She thinks he is pretentious and a little obnoxious, but funny and charming at the same time. Hazel and Augustus forge a bittersweet friendship after Augustus pretends to smoke a cigarette-- he tells Hazel that he likes the metaphor of holding the killing-thing (the cigarette) but not giving it the power to kill you (by lighting it) as a means of having some power in his own mortality. 

From the very beginning, we can sense that this story is bittersweet. It is depressing to think or know that someone will die, to know that we, ourselves, will die. For that reason, the mood or tone of this book is often sorrowful or full of grief.

Hazel and Augustus have two different approaches to reconciling the knowledge of their morality. For Hazel, she is comforted by knowing that everyone will die someday. Augustus does not appreciate that sentiment as much, but feels that he can at least make the most out of his time while he is still alive. Augustus wants to make the most out of his, and Hazel's, time as friends by offering to use his "wish," granted by an organization for children and teens with cancer, to take Hazel to meet her favorite author. When the two travel to Amsterdam and enjoy the beautiful city, a fancy dinner, and meet this author, the story is really hopeful. Hazel and Augustus know that they have cancer and decide to do this ambitious and happy thing not as a way of denying their health status but in spite of it. They want to show cancer who's boss! 

Sadly, their trip is not all they hoped for. When they meet Hazel's favorite author to ask him their pressing questions, they find out he is a miserable drunk. Hazel and Augustus storm out, disappointed that he was not who they expected, but proud of themselves for accomplishing what they had set out to do. What's more, they had grown closer to each other during the journey and fallen in love. 

All throughout the book, sorrow, grief, and joy are interwoven to create a heart-wrenching and very real narrative. Life is never made up of only happy things or only terrible things, and John Green has done an excellent job of showing this. It is quite sobering. Even when Augustus dies from a relapse of cancer, Hazel cherishes his memory and that which he taught her about how to let go and make the most of the time she has.

What type of "evidence" is being collected from those that are suspected of wrongdoing in the play The Crucible?

In Act Two, Ezekiel Cheever arrives at the home of the Proctors in order to arrest Elizabeth Proctor for witchcraft.  She's been accused by Abigail Williams, who pulled a needle out of her stomach earlier that day and claimed that Elizabeth's spirit had pushed it in.  Cheever, therefore, asks Elizabeth to turn over any "poppets" or little rag dolls in her possession, and when he sees the poppet Mary Warren, her servant, had made and given to her, he is appalled to find a needle pushed into its belly.  This is considered very compelling evidence against Elizabeth, despite the fact that Mary Warren admits to placing the needle there for safekeeping.  

Further, Hale asks about John Proctor's spotty church attendance, citing the fact that he's been there only 26 times in 17 months, as well as the fact that his youngest child is unbaptized.  Hale also asks the Proctors if they can list all Ten Commandments; Elizabeth answers with certainty, John wavers.  When he forgets one, Hale says that "Theology [...] is a fortress; no crack in a fortress may be accounted small."  Such things could very well be held against the Proctors in court, and so Hale advises them to go to church and get their son baptized.

In addition, the biggest piece of evidence the court has against Martha, Giles Corey's wife, is her husband's statements about how much she likes to read, the fact that she puts her books away when he asks about them, and his claim that he could not pray when she was in the house.

Finally, Mary Warren tells the Proctors about how Sarah Good claimed in court that she wasn't cursing when she was turned away empty-handed by Mary Warren; she said she was saying her commandments.  However, when she was asked to recite them, she could not name one.  This is also taken as evidence of her guilt in witchcraft.

Do you see any positivity in Night that foreshadows Wiesel's willingness to fight for peace, or did he turn cruel during his experience?

The "positivity" in Night is seen in Eliezer's sensitivity to human suffering.

There is much in Night that can foreshadow Wiesel's future commitment to human rights.  Throughout Night, Eliezer shows a high level of sensitivity to the pain that people experience.  As a result, we see someone who pays attention to the cries of human suffering, something that Elie Wiesel did throughout his adult life.

Eliezer pays very close attention to how people suffer in Night.  He is direct in describing how Moshe the Beadle wept because no one listened to him. He is pointed in recreating the night that Madame Schachter was beaten on the train because she kept on screaming that she saw "fire."  In both of these situations, Eliezer pays attention to how people suffer and the indifferent reactions others have to such pain.

When Eliezer enters Auschwitz-Birkenau, he is aware of what he sees around him.  In the poem, "Never Shall I Forget," Eliezer bears witness to his first night in the camp.  His sensitivity to what he experienced can be seen in lines such as "Never shall I forget the small faces of the children whose bodies I saw transformed into smoke under a silent sky" and "Never shall I forget those moments that murdered my God and my soul and turned my dreams to ashes."  Eliezer's attention to how human cruelty can personally transform the the individual is another example of how he displays a sensitivity.  It is a quality that foreshadows the advocacy that was so much a part of his adult life.

Eliezer's sensitivity to life in the camps prevents him from being indifferent. He displays this when he talks about the hanging of a five year old boy or in how Rabbi Eliahu's son betrayed his father.  When he speaks of how people forgot to recite the Kaddish for Akiba Drumer or when he details how the son lied about his father so he could steal his bread, Eliezer speaks for those who lost their voices because of Nazi cruelty.  Eliezer applies this to himself when he speaks of his father's death:  "No prayers were said over his tomb. No candle lit in his memory. His last word had been my name. He had called out to me and I had not answered."  Eliezer displays a wide scope of emotional understanding.  Through his example, morally acceptable behavior is rooted in an insistence on speaking for as many voices as possible and accepting responsibility when that standard is not reached.  This is a part of the narrative that foreshadowed what he would do once he left the camps.

Eliezer is not cruel in Night.  He does not take the form of the barbarism around him.  It is very difficult to suggest that his drive for survival makes him a bad person. Rather, in Night, we see that Eliezer pays attention to the pain that other people experience.  He displays a heightened sense of care towards other peoples' narratives.  He recognizes that validation of voice is the only way one can counter a reality based upon the exertion of cruelty and infliction of human suffering. These qualities foreshadow the man that Eliezer would become, a towering paragon of defending and preserving human rights around the world.

What is the mood in the poem "To a Waterfowl" by William Cullen Bryant?

The mood of William Cullen Bryant's "To a Waterfowl" is contemplative and reverent. In the opening stanza, the speaker asks the bird where it goes at sunset. In the next, he observes that a hunter would be unable to harm it. In the third stanza, the speaker speculates on places the bird might go. In the fourth stanza, the speaker states that a "Power," presumably divine, guides the bird. The fifth stanza observes that the bird is protected and sustained on its long journey, and the sixth predicts that the bird will find a new home among its companions at the end of its journey. In the second to last stanza, the bird has disappeared from view, but the speaker knows he has learned a lasting lesson from it. The final stanza reveals the lesson: the same "Power" that guides the bird will guide him through his life as well. It is a poem about faith in God being affirmed in nature, so the mood is reflective.

Write a short note on Achilles' anger.

The rage of Achilles is a central theme in the Iliad. Homer begins the story by asking the muse to tell him the story--not of the Trojan War--but of Achilles' rage.

Rage - Goddess, sing the rage of Peleus' son Achilles,
murderous, doomed, that cost the Achaeans countless losses,
hurling down to the House of Death so many sturdy souls,
great fighters' souls, but made their bodies carrion,
feasts for the dogs and birds,
and the will of Zeus was moving toward its end.

Homer blames Achilles for the loss of countless Greek lives, and this blame is justified. Achilles rages at Agamemnon for stealing his concubine, and in his rage he refuses to fight against the Trojans. Achilles was the most powerful Greek warrior, so his absence from the battlefield (and the compassion of the goddesses who sympathized with him) resulted in the deaths of numerous Greek soldiers.

Later on, Achilles does fight, but not until his dear friend, Patroclus, dies in combat at the hands of Hector. Once again, Achilles rages, but this time he directs his rage toward Hector. He kills Hector, but he does not behave honorably afterwards. You see, revenge never satisfies one the way he believes it will. Achilles was still angry, so he desecrated Hector's dead body, debasing himself in the process.

The US exited WWII with an enormous debt level, but was able to reduce it in the following decades. Which of the following enabled that to happen?...

The best answer to this question is Option B.  Option A is also a possible answer, but I would argue that Option B is better.  The other two options are definitely not correct.

Option C cannot be true because US defense spending did not continually drop over the decades after WWII.  Spending did of course drop right after WWII, but it went back up and stayed relatively high (though not as high as during WWII) because of the Cold War.  Since spending did not constantly drop, this cannot have caused the reduction in the debt.

Option D is not correct because this commission did not exist until the 1990s.  This means it could not have caused the debt to drop.

Option A could be the correct answer.  As you can see in the link below, tax revenues did go up in the years after WWII.  This would have helped cause the debt to go down.  However, I would say that Option B is the better answer.  Tax revenues were able to go up in large part because of economic growth.  Because people and companies made more money, they were able to pay more in taxes.  The economic growth caused the tax revenues to increase.  Because of this, I think that Option B is the best answer.

In what ways are the characters in story "The Lottery" differentiated from one another?

The characters in "The Lottery" are not well rounded but are only types of people who would be found in any small American town. They are differentiated mainly by sex and age. There are little boys, adolescent boys, older men, and one old man called Old Man Warner. There are no little girls described, but there is a group of young adolescent girls who include Nancy Hutchinson and several of her friends. Most of the adult females in the story seem to be around the same age as Tessie Hutchinson, and all are typical farm wives. Two men who are differentiated by their roles in the story are Joe Summers, who is in charge of the lottery, and Harry Graves, who acts as his assistant. A man named Clyde Dunbar is differentiated from the rest of the characters by the fact that he is laid up at home outside of town with a broken leg. These characters are not brought out with any depth. They are all "types." Most readers will recognize them as people they have known at one time or another. 

Here is a complete list of the characters in the approximate order of their appearance in "The Lottery":

Bobby Martin
Harry Jones
Dickie Delacroix
Mr. Martin
Baxter Martin
Joe Summers
Harry Graves
Old Man Warner
Tessie Hutchinson 
Mrs. Delacroix
Clyde Dunbar
Mrs. Dunbar
Horace Dunbar
Jack Watson
Steve Adams
Allen (a last name)
Anderson
Bentham
Clark
Mr. Delacroix
Harburt
Bill Hutchinson
Jones
Mrs. Adams
Overdyke
Percy
Don
Eva
Bill Hutchinson, Jr.
Nancy Hutchinson
Nancy Hutchinson’s unnamed school girlfriends
Dave Hutchinson
Mrs. Graves

How can we look at "The Necklace" from a feminist perspective? What does it say about women?

A feminist critique of "The Necklace" would argue that Madame Loisel is the victim of a patriarchal society. Because she is a woman, her life is controlled by men and she lacks the ability to do anything other than be the dutiful wife of a middle-class clerk. French society at the time was decidedly hierarchical, and women of Madame Loisel's background languished toward the bottom of that hierarchy. Because of her plight, she becomes bored and yearns for something else in her life. She dreams of being wealthy and living a life of luxury. For Madame Loisel, it is essential that she escape her mundane existence. Controlled by her husband, she is at the mercy of his decisions. To his credit, Monsieur Loisel is a caring husband who recognizes his wife's unhappiness, so he secures tickets to a fancy ball being held at the "Ministerial Mansion." Loisel hopes this night out will help ease his wife's melancholy.

In her groundbreaking contribution to feminist theory, The Feminine Mystique, Betty Friedan posits that women such as Madame Loisel (Friedan deals with American suburban housewives) suffer from what Friedan labeled "housewives syndrome." Women afflicted with this "syndrome" aspire to something more in their lives and feel stifled by the monotony of their current situations. Therefore, it could be argued that Madame Loisel viewed her attendance at the fancy ball as a turning point in her life. For once, she was dazzling and exciting. All the men wanted to dance with her. This one-time experience as the life of the party clashed with her otherwise ordinary life trapped in her comfortable home as a clerk's wife.

When the party is over and her husband brings her shabby coat to cover her shoulders, Madame Loisel recoils and flees the scene. This is when she loses the necklace. From a feminist point of view, it might be argued that Madame Loisel was purposefully careless with the necklace because she could not accept a return to the tedious normalcy of her previous life. Her loss of the necklace is an expensive rebellion against that life. Faced with her new situation, Madame Loisel actually rises to the occasion. She seems to experience an epiphany in her new life as a poverty-stricken woman striving to makes ends meet for her and her husband. De Maupassant writes,

Mme. Loisel experienced the horrible life the needy live. She played her part, however, with sudden heroism. The frightful debt had to be paid. She would pay it.

Ironically, it takes the loss of everything to bring out the best in Madame Loisel. In the end, she is proud of her accomplishments in paying back the debt, and this simple pride leads her to speak to Madame Forestier. That the necklace was fake seems only a whim of chance and ultimately only the vehicle which led Madame Loisel to discover a genuine existence in her struggles to meet the goal of paying back the debt.

What is the importance of marketing intermediaries in modern marketing?

The question pertains to the importance, which is to say the role, of marketing intermediaries in modern marketing.

Marketing intermediaries fulfill an information role and a logistics role. They create value by adding efficiency to marketplaces for goods or services which are inherently “many-to-many” in nature. That is, most markets have many suppliers, and many consumers. It may be inefficient for every supplier to establish contact with and interact directly with every consumer. Likewise, it may be cumbersome for every consumer to contact every supplier directly in making and implementing a buying decision.

Let’s look first at the information role. Consumers need information about product features, cost, and availability in order to make a buying decision. Intermediaries can add value by bringing this information together from a variety of suppliers in a common format which enables quick comparison and decision-making by consumers. Suppliers need information about demand, who wants what and where, in order to plan production. Intermediaries can offer this information by virtue of their ability to view the market as a whole, that is, across demand for all similar products rather than just how much is being demanded at the moment from a particular supplier. Finally, the information role can include a trust or verification aspect. Intermediaries can have the objectivity to appraise a buyer’s ability to complete a transaction (e.g. what realtors do in “qualifying” buyers). They can provide their own ratings and evaluations of competing products, and offer advice to buyers as to which supplier’s offering will best meet their needs.

The logistics role comes in when an intermediary takes responsibility for obtaining output from a variety of suppliers and delivering it to buyers as they order. They can add efficiency by aggregating related products in one place, allowing multiple but related items to be ordered and delivered together (e.g. industrial supply warehouses). Also, they may add efficiency simply by concentrating warehouse and transport technology and capacity, allowing individual suppliers to focus on creating their products and not internally duplicating logistics functions.

Finally, it is worth noting that the ability of web-based technology to aggregate and disseminate information has dramatically changed the structure, and in some cases the very existence, of market intermediaries.

`cosh^2(x) = (1+coshx)/2` Verify the identity.

`cosh^2(x) = (1+coshx)/2`

proof:

LHS=>

`cosh^2(x)=1+sinh^2(x) `

`=1+[(e^x-e^-x)/2]^2 `

`=1+(1/4)[(e^x-e^(-x))]^2] `

`=1+(1/4)[e^(2x)+e^(-2x) -2e^x e^(-x)] `

`=1+(1/4)[e^(2x)+e^(-2x) - 2] `

`=1+(1/4)[2(e^(2x)+e^(-2x))/2 -2]`

on taking 2 common and cancelling, we get

`=1+(1/2)[(e^(2x)+e^(-2x))/2 -1] =1+(1/2)[(e^(2x)+e^(-2x))/2 ] - (1/2)`

`= (1/2)+(1/2)[(e^(2x)+e^(-2x))/2 ]`

`= (1/2)+(1/2)[cosh(2x)]`

`=(1+cosh(2x))/2`

but RHS=>`(1+coshx)/2`

so LHS not equal to RHS

If Tom Robinson had been found not guilty, would Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird have been more powerful or less powerful?

In To Kill a Mockingbird, if Tom Robinson had been found not guilty, a completely different message would have been conveyed, making the novel less powerful.

Author Harper Lee uses her book to take a very honest look at racism in the South. Her message was that change needs to be made in order to create true equality for all and that, during the time period in which the book was written, which was 1960, the South was making very tiny little baby steps towards change. Portraying the South as making tiny little baby steps is a very honest reflection of the changes occurring while very honestly stating that many more significant changes still need to be made. Had Robinson been acquitted by the jury, Lee would have been sending a very overly optimistic, dishonest message that significant changes in the South were on the horizon. Lee's much more honest message is far more effective, making it the far more powerful message and storyline.

We best see Lee's message in Miss Maudie's words of wisdom to the children the day immediately after the trial. In an effort to try to cheer the children up, especially Jem, Miss Maudie invites the children over for cake and shares her wisdom. One thing she reminds the children of is the number of people who strove to help Robinson, including the African-American community, Sheriff Heck Tate, and Judge Taylor who purposefully appointed Atticus to defend Robinson rather than Maxwell Green. She further reminds the children that it "was no accident" that Atticus was given the case, whereas the youngest attorney, Maxwell Green, would have automatically been given any cases doomed to lose since he "needed the experience" (Ch. 22). Due to the number of people who were willing to help Robinson, who understood they needed to do all they could to at least try to ensure Robinson had a fair trial, Miss Maudie is able to see that Maycomb is making tiny steps in progress towards creating a more just society. Miss Maudie reflects on the tiny steps Maycomb is making in her following comment to the children:

I waited and waited to see you all come down the sidewalk, and as I waited I thought, Atticus Finch won't win, he can't win, but he's the only man in these parts who can keep a jury out so long in a case like that. And I thought to myself, well, we're making a step--it's just a baby-step, but it's a step. (Ch. 22)

Through Robinson's trial and voices like Miss Maudie, Lee shows us honestly that, while a great deal more progress needs to be made, the South is at least undertaking a tiny bit of progress already.

How do I write an essay about "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" by T.S. Eliot?

You could focus on the examination of the central character of the poem. The poem's importance lies in the fact that Eliot depicts a prototypical man of his time by presenting us with the character of Alfred Prufrock. This character, who is the epitome of modern man, is emotionally paralyzed, hopeless, alienated, lonely, indecisive and awkward. He is the man of contradictions; he demonstrates a desire to change his life for the better, yet he is unable to do it because he feels he is "not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be." He believes that he is not a hero of any sort; instead, it is implied that he is the victim of the time he is in, the time of moral decay and emotional paralysis, which Eliot wanted to describe to us.

Alfred Prufrock wants to take a walk with an unspecified "you" through the tawdry streets (presumably London streets):

Let us go, through certain half-deserted streets,

The muttering retreats

Of restless nights in one-night cheap hotels

And sawdust restaurants with oyster-shells:

Streets that follow like a tedious argument

Of insidious intent...

The streets evoke images of moral decay, squalor and wickedness. As the poem continues, we become aware that Alfred Prufrock lives in the world where scenes of superficiality and banality are predominant. For example, in his mind he views women talking about the famous Renaissance painter Michelangelo. This scene is replayed in his mind, which suggests that people in Prufrock's world engage themselves in repetitive and monotonous actions, exemplified by women's meaningless chatter about art.

Prufrock never finds the right time to deal with his biggest concern -- he is terrified of talking to his love interest because his mind is fixed on too many preconceptions about the possibility of failure and how other women could see him:

They will say: “How his hair is growing thin!”)

My morning coat, my collar mounting firmly to the chin,

My necktie rich and modest, but asserted by a simple pin —

(They will say: “But how his arms and legs are thin!”).

Alfred suggests that he is already labeled and classified in the minds of other women, so he believes that his effort to make the next move would amount to nothing more than rejection:

 And would it have been worth it, after all...

If one, settling a pillow by her head

               Should say: “That is not what I meant at all;

               That is not it, at all.”

The poem is a depiction of the emotional paralysis, banality, and hopelessness of the time Eliot lived in. Eliot's modern man is disheartened, incomplete, and unfulfilled. So, we may view this poem as Eliot's attempt to criticize the world he lived in and encourage change.

What are some examples of viruses?

Viruses are small infectious agents that hijack host cell's replication machinery to replicate inside a living host cell. Unlike bacteria (another infectious agent), it is debatable whether viruses are considered a form of life or not due to the fact that they miss key 'properties of life' - those typically observed for typical living cells. For instance, viruses only replicate within the host - by using the host's DNA replication machinery; and uses the hosts' metabolic processes, which they also lack. This is still, however, debatable. Viruses have their own genetic material and are able to undergo natural selection.

There are different types of viruses, and classifications also vary. They can be classified according to morphological form or type of genetic material transmitted. Various morphologies include helical, icosahedral, prolate, envelope, and complex. The chickenpox virus has a lipid envelope. The adenovirus that infects humans is icosahedral. The Zika virus is both icosahedral and enveloped.

The genetic material also varies - they may carry RNA or DNA, and these can be double-stranded or single-stranded. Single-stranded types can be the sense or anti-sense strand.

• dsDNA - examples include adenovirus, herpesvirus
  


• ssDNA - include parvovirus
  


• dsRNA - reoviruses, nonpathogenic for humans but have been used as model for viral study


• (+)ssRNA - sense-strand, rhinovirus, causes colds.


• (-)ssRNA - anti-sense, rhabdovirus, rabies.


• ssRNA-RT -sense-strand, retrovirus (they have DNA intermediates reverse-translated from RNA) - example is Rous sarcoma virus that causes sarcoma.


• dsDNA-RT - hepadnavirus
  

---short answer

There are a lot of viruses that infect hosts ranging from bacteria (bacteriophages) to humans. Some are nonpathogenic to humans but are relevant for research (protein expression in insect cells, for instance, or in studying the general life cycle of viruses). Some, however, are highly known for infecting humans. Dengue virus is an example, or more currently the Zika virus. HIV has also plagued the human race causing AIDS.

Where are the scattered oaks mentioned in the story located?

Washington Irving begins this short story by describing its setting. Some miles from Boston, Massachusetts, there is a deep body of water. It ends in a wooded swampland, which has different trees on each side of the water. On one side, level with the water, there is a "beautiful dark grove." On the other side, the land rises at an angle from the swampy water into a "high ridge on which grow a few scattered oaks of great age and immense size." 

The "scattered oaks" can be found on an elevated bank on one of the sides of the swamp, not far from the swamp itself.

Captain Kidd's treasure is buried under one of these huge trees. The treasure is under the devil's protection, and cannot be taken by anyone without his permission. The devil tells Tom Walker about the treasure to tempt Tom's greed and convince him to come into his (the devil's) evil service. 

`coth^2(x) - csc h^2(x) = 1` Verify the identity.

`coth^2(x) - csc h^2(x) =1`

Take note that hyperbolic cotangent and hyperbolic cosecant are defined as

• `coth (x) = (e^x+e^(-x))/(e^x-e^(-x))`

• `csc h^2(x) =2/(e^x - e^(-x))`

Plugging them, the left side of the equation becomes

`((e^x+e^(-x))/(e^x-e^(-x)))^2 -(2/(e^x - e^(-x)) )^2=1`

`(e^x+e^(-x))^2/(e^x-e^(-x))^2 -2^2/(e^x - e^(-x))^2=1`

`(e^x+e^(-x))^2/(e^x-e^(-x))^2 -4/(e^x - e^(-x))^2=1`

`((e^x+e^(-x))^2-4)/(e^x - e^(-x))^2=1`

Then, simplify the numerator.

`((e^x + e^(-x))(e^x + e^(-x)) - 4)/(e^x- e^(-x))^2=1`

`(e^(2x)+1+1+e^(-2x) - 4)/(e^x- e^(-x))^2=1`

`(e^(2x)+2+e^(-2x) - 4)/(e^x- e^(-x))^2=1`

`(e^(2x) - 2 +e^(-2x)) /(e^x- e^(-x))^2=1`

Factoring the numerator, it becomes

`((e^x - e^(-x))(e^x-e^(-x)))/(e^x- e^(-x))^2=1`

`(e^x - e^(-x))^2/(e^x- e^(-x))^2=1`

Cancelling common factor, the right side simplifies to

`1=1`

This verifies that the given equation is an identity.

Therefore,  `coth^2(x) - csc h^2(x)=1`  is an identity.