Why did President Johnson advise southern states not to adopt the 14th amendment?

President Johnson encouraged the southern states not to ratify the 14th amendment. President Johnson had been on a collision course with Congress ever since he vetoed two bills of Congress passed to deal with the black codes. Johnson vetoed giving the Freedmen’s Bureau more power. This bill would have created courts to prosecute people who violated the rights of African-Americans. He also vetoed the Civil Rights Bill of 1866. This bill would have given citizenship to African-Americans that would have been protected by the federal government. President Johnson believed Congress had gone way beyond its authority in passing these laws. He felt these laws were illegal because the South had no say in developing these laws.

Thus, when the 14th amendment was proposed, Johnson hoped to make the mid-term elections of 1866 a referendum on the 14th amendment and the actions of the Radical Republicans. He hoped people wouldn’t elect Radical Republicans to Congress. Johnson had his own Reconstruction plan that he hoped would be implemented. It was more lenient on the South than the Radical Republican plan. However, Radical Republicans were elected in large numbers.

President Johnson felt the 14th amendment took away too much power from the former Confederate leaders. They weren’t allowed to hold office unless pardoned by a two-thirds vote in Congress. He also felt the amendment was drafted without the input of the southern states.

Congress and President Johnson clashed over many issues related to Reconstruction. One of those events was the 14th amendment.

What was missing from the Mother Paula's Pancake House files in the book Hoot? Why was this important to the plot?

In the book Hoot by Carl Hiaasen, one of the main conflicts is that Mullet Fingers (whose real name is Napoleon Leep)  is trying to stop construction on a Mother Paula's restaurant. He is trying to protect the burrowing owls that live on the property. His methods for stopping construction include vandalism. When Officer Delinko is called to investigate, he becomes a victim of the vandalism when Mullet Fingers spray paints the windows of his cruiser black.  

Roy becomes intensely curious about Mullet Fingers, the boy he sees running barefoot in chapter one. His curiosity attracts the attention of Beatrice the Bear (Beatrice Leep) who is Mullet Fingers' step-sister. She demands to know why Roy is interested in Mullet Fingers. She decides she can trust Roy with the truth. Her step-brother is a runaway. 

When Roy finds out about the owls on the construction site, he wants to help Mullet Fingers stop construction. However, he doesn't agree with Mullet Fingers' methods of vandalism. Mullet Fingers pulls up the survey stakes, places alligators in the portable toilets, and collects snakes to scare away the guard dogs on the property in an effort to stop construction. Roy wants to find a legal way to help the owls. 

With the help of his father, Roy learns that all construction sites are required to keep copies of environmental impact reports on the site. This report is missing from the Mother Paula's site. Both Curly and his supervisor Chuck Muckle deny the existence of the report. Roy finds a copy of the report at the courthouse. This document is what enables Officer Delinko to arrest Chuck Muckle. Roy explains the situation at the groundbreaking ceremony and wins the support of the townspeople and mayor. Construction of the restaurant on that site is stopped.

In the novel Fahrenheit 451, what events are included in the falling action?

The falling action of a novel takes place after the climax and involves the events that occur until the story comes to a resolution. There are a series of events that place after the climax when Montag kills Captain Beatty with a flamethrower. Immediately after Montag kills Beatty, he attempts to flee the scene but is stabbed by the Mechanical Hound before he can get away. Montag's leg is numb, and as he hobbles away from the scene of the crime, he retrieves the four books that he stashed behind a bush. Montag hears that he is now a fugitive after listening to his Fireman Seashell and walks into a nearby gas station. He plans on walking to Faber's house but has to cross the dangerous boulevard and avoid detection from police helicopters and a new Mechanical Hound. Montag nearly avoids being hit by a speeding car and makes his way across the street safely. On his way to Faber's house, he stops by Black's house, who is a fireman, and plants the four books in his kitchen. Montag calls in an alarm to Black's house, which buys him more time to escape. Montag finally arrives at Faber's house, where Faber tells him to travel down the river and to follow the railroad lines until he runs into a group of "hobo intellectuals." After Faber gives him a change of clothes to mask his scent from the Mechanical Hound, Montag heads towards the river. Montag reaches the river and travels downstream away from the city. After he floats ashore, he follows the railroad tracks until he spots a fire in the woods. He approaches a group of men, who introduce themselves as former professors and intellectuals. Granger, a former author and leader of the group of intellectuals, gives him a potion to change the chemical compound of his perspiration so the Mechanical Hound cannot track him. They explain to Montag that they practice a special technique to memorize entire books. Each of the intellectuals is responsible for memorizing various books until it is safe for them to copy the books for future use. Soon after, a nuclear bomb is dropped on the city. Montag and the intellectuals walk towards the rubble in hopes of rebuilding society.

Why does Crooks tell Lennie that George isn't coming back?

It is not stated why Crooks does this.  However, if we read the text carefully, there are a few clues. 

Crooks is the low man on the farm.  He is a black man in the midst of white men who are racist.  We get a sense of this racism in Candy's retelling of what happened one Christmas.  The men watched Crooks fight a white man for the amusement of the men.  Also the boss yells at Crooks as an outlet for his anger. 

In light of these points, Crooks is beaten down emotionally and socially.  So, when there is someone who is arguably lower, Crooks takes advantage of him.  The one who is abused takes delight in abusing.  There is one sentence that makes this point.

Crooks’ face lighted with pleasure in his torture. “Nobody can’t tell what a guy’ll do,” he observed calmly. “Le’s say he wants to come back and can’t. S’pose he gets killed or hurt so he can’t come back.”

In this world, there is a twisted sense of pleasure.  Crooks is an example of this point.  Fortunately, Crooks stepped back when he saw Lennie's anger. 

The Social Security Trust Fund could be made sustainable by any of the following solutions EXCEPT A. cutting benefit levels. B. increasing Social...

In order to figure out what the right answer to this question is, you need to know whether Medicaid is part of the Social Security program.  It is not.  Medicaid is not funded through the Social Security Trust Fund.

Social Security works by taxing workers and employers.  The money raised by these taxes is put into the Social Security Trust Fund.  That fund is supposed to be used to pay out benefits to people after they retire.

It would be possible to make the trust fund more sustainable by paying out less in the way of benefits.  This could be done by lowering benefits or by raising the retirement age so fewer people are getting benefits at any given time.  It would also be possible to make the fund more sustainable by taking in more in taxes.  This could be done by raising the tax rate or by raising the limit on earnings that are taxable (this used to be $90,000 but it is now $118,500).

So, the only option given here that would not help make the Social Security Trust Fund more sustainable is taking Medicaid out of the program as Medicaid is not funded by the program in the first place.

What is the Enlightenment?

"Dare to know! Have courage to use your own reason!"--German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1784)

The Enlightenment is a period in European history when philosophers encouraged the abandonment of knowledge that was acquired through religion and superstition. It called for the application of reason and logic to draw conclusions about the world. Placing a date on the beginning and end of the Enlightenment period is tricky, but the most important century for Enlightenment thought is the 18th Century.

The 1680's was an important decade for the Enlightenment. In a span of three years, Isaac Newton and John Locke published books that were important in establishing a basis for the use of reason and observation in understanding the world. Newton's work in physics and astronomy was groundbreaking while Locke applied reason in the realm of politics. The works of both would revolutionize how Europeans saw the world.

The Enlightenment of the 18th Century produced important books, inventions, scientific discovery, and revolutions in political thought. The American and French Revolutions were inspired by the Enlightenment.

Where is it found in Macbeth where Malcolm tests Macduff? (What act and scene?)

It is in Act IV, Scene 3 that Malcolm, son of Duncan, tests the nobleman Macduff. 

Realizing that his father, King Duncan, died because he trusted Macbeth, Malcolm has become skeptical and wary of others. For this reason, Malcolm seeks to ascertain that Macduff has not been sent by Macbeth; so, in order to test Macduff's loyalty to Scotland, Malcolm pretends to have many vices. Scene 3 opens with Malcolm and Macduff talking in private:

Macduff immediately declares his love for Scotland and the dire situation of the country in which

New widows howl, new orphans cry, new sorrows
Strike heaven on the face...(4.3.5-6)

But, Malcolm questions Macduff's sincerity by responding that Macduff was once one of Macbeth's favorites. He wonders aloud if Macduff wishes to betray him to Macbeth. Then, he asks Macduff why he has left his wife and child to come to England, seeking him. Macduff responds that Scotland is bleeding from the tyranny of Macbeth, and it needs Malcolm to take the throne as the son of King Duncan. Malcolm explains that he is merely trying to protect himself. Further, he describes his faults as worse than Macbeth's:

It is myself I mean, in whom I know

All the particulars of vice so grafted

That, when they shall be opened, black Macbeth

Will seem as pure as snow, and the poor state

Esteem him as a lamb, being compared

With my confineless harms. (4.3.51-56)

But, Macduff remains steadfast in his purpose and insists that Malcolm is the rightful heir and must return to Scotland. Convinced of Macduff's loyalty to his country, Malcolm reveals that he has only been testing him, and he promises to return.

What are the essential differences between the House and the Senate in the United States?

The essential differences between the Senate and the House are size, purpose and terms. The House is composed of 435 members, based on population. The Senate has 50 members, which is 2 from each state.  A term in the House of Representatives is 2 years, whereas the Senate has 6-year terms. The House has the responsibility of creating all spending bills and the impeachment process. The Senate gives "advice and consent" to treaties and is responsible for the trying of an impeached person.

The Senate has been using the filibuster to block legislation since the 1850s.  Because the Senate is considerably smaller than the House, they are the only chamber to maintain the ability to debate a subject as long as the Senator speaking feels necessary. The only way the Senate can end a filibuster was with "cloture," or a 2/3 majority vote used to end debate.  Cloture is almost impossible, so in 1975 that number was changed to 3/5 of the Senate, or 60 out of the 100 members.

A bill in question would go to a committee made up of both members, where the differences would be worked out. It would then be sent back to both Chambers for approval.  

Factors that influence how a member of Congress votes:

1. Constituency calls, emails, and letters from the electorate.

2. Personal feelings.

3. Information gathering.

4. The opinions of experts in the field.

5. Political ramifications.

In the play, Othello, who is Brabantio and why do Iago and Roderigo awaken him in the middle of the night ?

Brabantio is a Venetian senator and Desdemona's father. He is quite protective of her and has kept her from many suitors including Roderigo, who he has forbidden to ever visit his home again. Desdemona has fallen in love with Othello and has eloped with him.

Iago and Roderigo come to rouse Brabantio in the dead of night to inform him that Othello has abducted his daughter against her will and is abusing her at the very moment that they are talking to him. Their purpose is to demonize Othello so that Brabantio may use his authority to have Othello dismissed from his post as general and have him incarcerated. 

The reason for this vindictive and pernicious lie is that firstly, Iago is jealous of Othello's position since he has been appointed general of the Venetian army even though he is a foreigner and a Moor. Secondly, Iago has been loyal to Othello and has applied to be his lieutenant but Othello chose to appoint a Florentine, Michael Cassio, in the position. Iago resents this appointment since he believes that Michael has only book knowledge and lacks experience in battle, whilst he, Iago, possesses the right qualities for the post. 

In his attempts to obtain the position, Iago had also acquired the recommendations of three senators but these were ignored by Othello. Iago had promised that he would continue feigning loyalty to the general so that he may serve his turn upon him.  

Roderigo, who is besotted with Desdemona, is assisting Iago in his devious scheme in the hope of obtaining some advantage in his desire to woo her. Iago has promised that he would ensure Roderigo's success in this endeavor. The gullible Roderigo has now become putty in Iago's manipulative paws and pleases the malevolent schemer's every whim.

On their way to Brabantio's home, Iago instructs Roderigo:

Call up her father,
Rouse him: make after him, poison his delight,
Proclaim him in the streets; incense her kinsmen,
And, though he in a fertile climate dwell,
Plague him with flies: though that his joy be joy,
Yet throw such changes of vexation on't,
As it may lose some colour.

He obviously wishes to spoil both Brabantio's sleep and mar Othello's joy. He uses Roderigo to do his despicable work. Once Brabantio has been awoken, they will give him the frightful news about his daughter's kidnap. After Brabantio has heard their truly gross account of Othello's so-called crime, he is extremely upset, and passionately cries out:

Strike on the tinder, ho!

Give me a taper! call up all my people!
This accident is not unlike my dream:
Belief of it oppresses me already.
Light, I say! light!

As soon as Iago knows that Brabantio is convinced and has taken action, he takes his leave, unashamedly telling Roderigo that he should be seen as being in support of Othello in this matter so that suspicion does not fall upon him. Furthermore, he would be able to gain Othello's trust, thus giving him the opportunity to manipulate the unsuspecting general even more. Roderigo remains behind to provide Brabantio with more detail about Othello's supposed crime and where he can be found.

The two plotters are successful in their attempt to raise Brabantio's ire but fail to have the Moor punished since Desdemona later stands up for him and he is absolved of all guilt. Othello is then requested to leave for Cyprus where he has to fight off a possible invasion by the Turks.

A major theme in Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird is following one's individual conscience. Explain this and provide at least 3 specific...

Following one's individual conscience means that a person disregards the popular views of society and chooses to make decisions based on what he or she feels is right. Sometimes life can be confusing when people say one thing is right, but deep down someone feels that those people are wrong. It takes a lot of courage to do or say things against what society says is right, but Atticus, Dolphus Raymond and Link Deas are great examples of doing just that. Atticus does his best with defending Tom Robinson when society says he should just throw the trial; Mr. Raymond lives an alternative lifestyle contrary to what people would like to see a white man doing; and, Link Deas stands up for Helen by giving her a job when the community wants to ignore her for being married to a man who went to trial for rape. 

Atticus best explains his conscience regarding the Robinson case to Scout as follows:

"This case. . . is something that goes to the essence of a man's conscience--Scout, I couldn't go to church and worship God if I didn't try to help that man" (104).

Next, Dolphus Raymond explains why he lives a life against the values of traditional, conservative white society:

"Some folks don't--like the way I live. Now I could say the hell with 'em, I don't cdare if they don't like it. I do say I don't care if they don't like it, right enough--but I don't say the hell with 'em, see?" (200).

Basically, Raymond is saying that he plays drunk to save his own and other people's consciences. He gives them a reason to understand why he lives alternatively--and that is by playing a drunk. So, he's living the way he wants to live, but also giving the community some relief from their own ways of thinking at the same time.

Finally, Link Deas gives Tom's widow, Helen, a job when many people in the community are ashamed to help her out. 

"But Tom was not forgotten by his employer, Mr. Link Deas. Mr. Link Deas made a job for Helen. He didn't really need her, but he said he felt right bad about the way things turned out" (248-49).

This shows Mr. Deas stepping up and listening to his conscience even though it might be against what others think he should do. 

Why was the Supreme Court against FDR's New Deal?

The relationship between Franklin D. Roosevelt and the courts was tenuous at best. One can imagine the frustration of the president with the popular success of his social reform programs being in peril because of the judicial branch. But such is the challenge of an American president according to the Constitution of the United States. The three branches must be in harmony for real reform to take place.

The issue at hand with regards to the Supreme Court and FDR was an age old question that politicians have bickered about since the dawn of the republic. That question regards what power the federal government should have over the states and the people. Roosevelt's attempt to utilize the federal government to provide relief and reform during the Great Depression was unprecedented in American history to that point. Both executive acts and the laws of Congress are subject to judicial scrutiny. It just so happened that the highest court in the land leaned towards conservative principals during Roosevelt's presidency. With regards to the issue of federal reach, conservatives believe in a small federal government presence. The Court felt that Roosevelt acted unconstitutionally with many of his signature programs and utilized judicial review to declare them illegal.

How did Britain take advantage of the British colonies in the French and Indian War?

The British took full advantage of the colonies during the French and Indian War. One way this was done was by using the colonists as soldiers in the British army. For example, George Washington was the leader in some of the battles the British fought against the French. The British colonists were also more committed to the cause for which they were fighting than were the French soldiers, many of whom were professional soldiers hired to fight in this war.

The British also used the location of their colonies to attack the French. The British colonies and the area ruled by France were right next to each other. The British were able to launch attacks from their colonies against the French in the Ohio Valley and in Canada. The British colonies were also easier to defend. Since the British colonies were on the coast, they could be defended easier. The French controlled more land, which was more difficult to defend.

One of the reasons for establishing colonies is to help a country in time of war. The British colonies were very helpful to the British war effort in the French and Indian War.

When and where was the author of The Twenty-One Balloons born?

Sine the 1947 novel Twenty-One Balloons does not concern an author, and is instead the tale of a retires schoolteacher, I assume you are asking about the author of the novel.

William Sherman Pène du Bois was born on May 9, 1916 in Nutley, New Jersey. Nutley was incorporated as a township shortly before du Bois' birth, having formerly been Franklin Township. He was born to a mother who was a children's fashion designer and a father who was a well known painter and art critic with a focus on landscapes and portraits. Du Bois spent his formative years in France, where he received an education at the Lycèe Hoche at Versailles before returning to Nutley and attending an American high school.

Why should Romeo and Juliet be encouraged to pursue a relationship together?

The reasons for encouraging Romeo and Juliet's relationship would depend on who you ask!

Friar Laurence, who greatly encourages Romeo and Juliet's relationship by marrying them, believes in the possibility that if these two are married, their families may cease their feud. When Romeo is banished from Verona, Friar Laurence advises him to go to Mantua and live there in safety- see Act III, Scene III. The Friar hopes that as long as Romeo runs away to Mantua, after some time, he may return safely to Verona and his marriage to Juliet may be made public. Friar Laurence thinks that once the Capulets have moved on from grieving Tybalt, they may be more open to the marriage and be willing to make amends with the Montagues.

Though Friar Laurence has a more "big-picture" reason for encouraging Romeo and Juliet's relationship, and believes it is for the good of the community, others have reasons more close to home. Nurse, for example, simply wants Juliet to be happy. Nurse has raised Juliet from infancy, sharing her bed, playing with her, feeding her, and is most likely the person who knows Juliet best. It is her dream to see Juliet in a happy marriage and, knowing how she feels about Paris, she is eager to help Juliet in her secret relationship. In Act II, Scene IV, she even goes to Romeo to arrange that Juliet will pretend to go to confession later that day so that they may marry.

If one were to ask Romeo and Juliet themselves, I think their reasons for pursuing a relationship are quite plain- they believe themselves to be in love and want to fulfill all that love is supposed to be. Juliet is facing the possibility of an arranged marriage to a man she does not like, and Romeo is fresh from heartbreak, so the two are probably putting some pressure on themselves to "succeed" at being in a relationship.

Compare the theme of betrayal between 'Death of a Salesman' and 'King Lear'.

This is a massive theme in each work, so I will just give you a quick sense of it. In King Lear, the king betrays his youngest daughter Cordelia by taking away her inheritance because she will not flatter dishonestly. Then later, his other two daughters betray him and take away everything he has. In the case of Lear the core of the betrayal focuses primarily on the mistakes that Lear himself makes. He allows his vanity to blind him to his daughters' treachery and fails to see the love of Cordelia until it is too late. The betrayal comes down to his own faults, since he allows it to happen through his foolishness.

In the Death of a Salesman, the betrayal is over values. Willy Loman betrays his values of honest connection, family, and affection for the vapid goal of being important, wealthy, and liked. He works constantly and stresses the boys with ideas of wealth and success. The best example is when he purchases stockings for his mistress that he has not purchased for his own wife. When his son discovers this he feels the full betrayal. His father values feeling like an important man more than values his own family.

This only scratches the surface, but it should be enough to help you get started.

What are the major conflicts involving the protagonist in Freak the Mighty?

The protagonist in Freak the Mighty is actually the amalgamation of two characters: Max and Kevin.  Kevin, of course, is the small, intelligent child with many birth defects who always puts himself into imaginary worlds in order to get by.  Max is the large, strong boy who has Kenny "Killer" Kane as a father and is always accused of having less than average intelligence.  Together they make up the protagonist: Freak the Mighty.  (The two create this term when Max puts Kevin on his back in order to escape their first small conflict against Tony's gang.)  Although there are many smaller conflicts in the book, the two major ones are discussed below.

The first conflict of note is that of Freak the Mighty vs. Kevin's deformity.  The two combat this issue through the creation of their dual character, "Freak the Mighty."  For example, as Max and Kevin try to escape from Tony D. and his gang (which is one of the smaller conflicts in the book), we can see the creation of the dual character of Freak the Mighty.  Max puts Kevin on his back in order to help him get around.  Together (with Kevin's brain and Max's brawn), the two escape Tony D. and do many things.

Another important conflict of note is between Freak the Mighty and the villain of the novel.  I would call this conflict Freak the Mighty vs. Max's father.  The darkness of Kenny "Killer" Kane envelopes the entire novel, but comes to a head near the end when Kenny kidnaps Max on Christmas Eve.  With the help of both Loretta Lee (who cuts Max free) and Kevin (who squirts Kenny with "acid"), Max is freed from his predicament.  As a result, Kenny "Killer" Kane is put back in jail where he belongs.

Using a dictionary, look up the word “apocalypse.” How does this term and all its various meanings and related notions apply to pages 205-273...

Ordinarily, asking about apocalyptic conditions in Zeitoun would relate to the destruction of the city of New Orleans, but asking about this in regards to the portion of the book in which Abdulrahman is imprisoned brings up a different set of issues. The word "apocalypse," which in Merriam-Webster's dictionary is defined as "a sudden and very bad event that causes much fear, loss, or destruction," can best be related to this portion of the book by discussing the ideas of how, after a disaster like Katrina, the ruling powers will often resort to Draconian measures to restore the social order, which is dominated by fear.

In order to placate the fears of those after Hurricane Katrina, perfectly legitimate members of society, like Abdulrahman Zeitoun were placed in prisons described like this:

"Chain-link fences, topped by razor wife, had been erected into a long, sixteen-foot-high cage extending about a hundred yards into the lot. Above the cage was a roof, a freestanding shelter like those at gas stations. The barbed wire extended to meet it."

These quickly constructed cages seem to be necessities in post-apocalyptic worlds to suppress any violence or anything that might interfere in the ruling powers' attempt to regain control.

In this real-life case, Abdulrahman, Nassar, and Todd did not evacuate the city when ordered to. These men became non-people. They lost all rights and all ability to communicate to the outside world. American laws, like the right to trial, were abandoned in favor of indefinite internment.  

In conclusion, the best way to apply the word "apocalypse" in this book is to discuss the authoritarian treatment of the people remaining in New Orleans as "post-apocalyptic."

How can I define and analyze the concept of "dreams" in the novel The Great Gatsby?

When defining and analyzing the concept of dreams in The Great Gatsby, it's important to consider a character's perspective. However, whichever character you ultimately choose can lead to deep analysis. 

• Gatsby: In essence, Gatsby's dream is to relieve his past by recapturing Daisy Buchanan's heart and starting things over - just like they were before. Whether he was actually in love with Daisy, his idea of Daisy, or the past is certainly up for debate based on how he speaks of her throughout the novel. His dream is iconically symbolized by the green light at the end of his dock. Beyond representing the American Dream filled with opportunity, it mirrors Gatsby's own struggle of obtaining his dream. While he's so close, his ultimate goal (Daisy) is just across the bay. The idea of Gatsby being so close plays out in other facets, too, such as how he attempts to fit in with the "old" money, but eventually fails. 


• Daisy: On the other hand, Daisy's concept of dream ultimately leads to Gatsby's downward spiral. She craves social status, money, and attention - the very same reasons she married Tom instead of Gatsby in the first place. While Tom delivers on social status and money, ever so briefly, Gatsby provides her attention (even though she's clearly attracted to his money, as well). This leads to the rekindling of their love affair, but their relationship really never had a chance of working out because of Gatsby's "new" money status. She returns to Tom for his money and Gatsby suffers the consequences. 

What is the analysis of the play Antigone?

Among the many notable elements of Antigone that might be discussed in analyzing the play, we might look at (1) the essential and highly important thematic differences between the characters of Antigone and Creon and (2) some similarities in theme between Antigone and Oedipus Rex. 

Antigone vs. Creon

There are many differences in perspective between Antigone and Creon, but they spring for the most part from a single well. While we might at first think that the main difference between the two has to do with Antigone's dead brothers Polynices and Eteocles, the principal difference is instead related to a larger, philosophical outlook.

Antigone wants to bury Polynices because that is what the gods decree as the right thing to do. Creon wants to leave the body of Polynices to rot, unburied, because he places a higher value on the state (on politics, on government, and on his own position therein) than on the decrees of the gods.

This issue animates the central conflict of the play as Antigone goes to great lengths, even sacrificing herself, to fulfill the duties demanded of her by the gods.

...you see me now, the last

Unhappy daughter of the line of kings,

Your kings, led away to death. You will remember

What things I suffer, and at what men's hands, 

Because I would not transgress the laws of heaven.

Creon refuses to see the folly of his ways and claims repeatedly that his choices are made with the integrity of the state in mind. Thebes, for Creon, is more important than the rites of the gods. 

This division is an interesting one. In the context of a Greek tragedy, the question of which figure is acting rightly probes a deep question regarding the extent to which special circumstances, political exigencies or complex times might remove individuals from their religious obligations.

Translating the question at its face into today's terms is actually rather straight-forward: Is there ever a time when a person's religious beliefs can be validly subordinated to the needs of the state? Or, is there ever a time when the needs of the state can validly be subordinated to the religious beliefs of an individual? 

The question is far from simple, which is perhaps one reason that the play is so thorny in its complexity and so fascinating in its themes. 

Spending some time analyzing the specific differences between Antigone and Creon may yield some interesting insights into what ideas these characters stand for in the narrative in light of the civic/religious schism we are looking at here. 

Oedipus Rex and Antigone

These two plays hinge on the fault of hubris in man. Both Oedipus and Creon attempt to place themselves before the gods, judging that they can determine the best course of action regardless of soothsayers' advice, prophecies and the like. 

In choosing to escape his prophesied fate, Oedipus acts on a deeply rooted pride (hubris) and ultimately he suffers for this choice. 

Creon may attempt to justify his decisions with political discourse but he too is punished for failing to give the proper credence or respect to the decree of the gods.

The final chorus of Antigone could very well stand as the final words for Oedipus Rex as well, speaking again to the dangers of human hubris in a Greek world commanded by gods. 

There is no happiness where there is no wisdom;

No wisdom but in submission to the gods. 

Big words are always punished, 

And proud men in old age learn to be wise. 

In following this line of analysis, you might focus on the character of Creon in Antigone and look for examples of pride and rash decisions. If you are familiar with Oedipus Rex and would like to fully pursue this thematic connection, you might compare Creon's reasonable attitude and good advice to Oedipus in Oedipus Rex to his uncompromising and dictatorial attitude in Antigone. 

The particular about-face that Creon's character undertakes from one play to the other is telling in the context of an analysis of hubris as a theme in each play.

In addressing just Antigone, you might still look to make comparisons between Creon and other characters, identifying wisdom and folly as they are highlighted in the play in connection to humility and pride. 

What is an example of person vs technology in Lois Lowry's The Giver?

When the word "technology" is used, we generally think of TVs, computers or phones. We don't think of medicine as technology, but it is. The term "medical technology" has been surfacing within the last decade, in fact, and this certainly can be applied to the society seen in Lois Lowry's The Giver. The best example of the use of medical technology is found in the form of a pill that everyone must take daily after they hit puberty. Jonas first learns about the pill after a dream he has that causes him to experience sensual feelings called "stirrings". The conflict of "Person vs. Technology" comes into play when Jonas reports his stirrings and his mother gives him this pill to suppress them. 

"Then, in the same way that his own dwelling slipped away behind him as he rounded a corner on his bicycle, the dream slipped away from his thoughts. Very briefly, a little guiltily, he tried to grasp it back. But the feelings had disappeared. The Stirrings were gone" (39).

The above passage clearly describes Jonas's instincts fighting against the pill he has just taken. Essentially, the medical technology wins over the person's natural desire to feel sensuality. As a result, people do not desire or prefer one person over another; therefore, dating and pairing off does not occur and the government can control the education and growth of family units. Later on, The Giver teaches Jonas about the society's desire to maintain what they all "sameness," and this pill is one of the ways they accomplish it.

Why does Montag remember the dandelion in Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury?

In Part Three of Fahrenheit 451, Montag is resting in a barn after fleeing the Mechanical Hound in the city. As he thinks about Clarisse, he thinks of the dandelion because she is "the girl who knew what dandelions meant" when they are rubbed under the chin. For Montag, the dandelion is symbolic of his brief relationship with Clarisse because she made him realise that he was not truly happy nor in love before he met her. 

Montag also thinks of the dandelion because, in this moment, it represents his hope for the future. As he lies in the barn, for example, he daydreams and constructs an ideal world in which Clarisse never disappeared and he had a person he could rely on. With so much at stake, Montag is understandably nervous about what will happen next:

This was all he wanted now. Some sign that the immense world would accept him and give him the long time needed to think all the things that must be thought.

In this time of uncertainty, then, the dandelion provides a comforting memory and some optimism for the future. 

Why did George stop being cruel to Lennie?

In Chapter 3, George is telling Slim how he and Lennie travel together. This is odd according to Slim because it is rare. Usually, these types of workers traveled alone, moving from job to job as the opportunities arose. George explains that when Lennie's Aunt Clara died, Lennie just tagged along as George went to work. George admits that he used to play jokes on Lennie simply because he could. But George realized that Lennie would often not even realize a joke had been played on him. Lennie would do anything George would tell him. George even admits to beating Lennie up and Lennie would never retaliate. Then George tells Slim about the time he told Lennie to jump into the Sacramento River to make some other guys laugh. Lennie jumps in and nearly drowns. George pulls him out and thanks George for saving him. George felt so bad that he stopped pulling these kinds of jokes on Lennie. 

"I turns to Lennie and says, ‘Jump in.’ An’ he jumps. Couldn’t swim a stroke. He damn near drowned before we could get him. An’ he was so damn nice to me for pullin’ him out. Clean forgot I told him to jump in. Well, I ain’t done nothing like that no more." 

George adds that Lennie is a nuisance but they have gotten used to each other. George still yells at Lennie but this is the only way he knows to keep Lennie from getting into trouble. The other, mostly unsaid, reason that George is kinder to Lennie than he used to be is the friendship between the two of them. Without Lennie, George might become like most of the other traveling workers they have seen. George notes that there is a tendency for such workers to "get mean." 

"I seen the guys that go around on the ranches alone. That ain’t no good. They don’t have no fun. After a long time they get mean. They get wantin’ to fight all the time." 

What were the two ceremonies that Mr. Hooper directed on the same day that he began to wear the veil?

First, Mr. Hooper officiates at a funeral service for a young woman.  There, his veil was "an appropriate emblem," because it, too, seems solemn and somber and thus matches the mood of the funeral.  Also, black is a color often associated with death and mourning, so it is appropriate for that reason as well.  One old superstitious woman thinks that, as he leaned over the deceased girl and the veil fell slightly away from his face so that the girl could have seen his face if she were alive, the body of the dead girl actually shuddered.

Next, Mr. Hooper officiates at a wedding ceremony.  The presence of the veil here seems completely inappropriate and incongruous to the occasion.  The sight of it makes the "bride's cold fingers" quiver "in the tremulous hand of the bridegroom, and her deathlike paleness caused a whisper that the maiden who had been buried a few hours before was come from her grave to be married."  In short, Mr. Hooper's veiled face fairly terrifies the young couple and casts a pall of gloom over the entire proceedings.  Finally, he catches sight of his own reflection and is so overcome with its horrors that he drops his wine and runs out into the night.

What connection does Gorge Orwell have to his theme in Animal Farm?

Animal Farm is a brilliant satire of the Stalinist era of the USSR. Author George Orwell had a personal connection to this theme. Orwell (whose real name was Eric Arthur Blair) considered himself a democratic socialist, but he did not believe that Stalinist Russia was truly concerned with promoting democratic socialism. Rather, he believed that the Soviet Union was little more than a dictatorship based on Stalin's personality cult. He wanted to demonstrate--through an animal fable--that the Soviet Union was not truly Marxist.

Moreover, he wanted to show that Joseph Stalin was not a man socialists should idolize or emulate. This was especially important to Orwell, because many people in Great Britain (Orwell's nation of residence) were fond of Stalin and because Great Britain was allied with the Soviets during the early part of World War II.

How does Jonas's development in The Giver contribute to our understanding of the theme - individual -vs- the community?

At the beginning of the book and through more than half of it, Jonas is a obedient and unquestioning member of his community. He is also very community-minded, in the sense that he fully understands everyone's actions contribute to the community's efficiency and success as a whole. Every member of the community has this same mindset. There is very little room in the community for individual thought or expression. Whatever individuality is allowed, is fairly minimal. Community members are encouraged to participate in a sharing of feelings each evening with their families and sharing of their dreams each morning. Obviously each of these would be individual; however, we also get the impression these ceremonies help keep the community in line. For example, in Chapter Five when Jonas shares his dream about Fiona, he inadvertently reveals that he has begun the "stirrings" and he is promptly put on pills to suppress them.

As Jonas begins to receive memories and learn more about the world before Sameness, he naturally begins to think more independently. He becomes frustrated and angry by rituals and people in his community that he never would have questioned or been upset by before. He notices that there are real disadvantages to to the world they live in now, but he still feels obligated by his position and feels there is no way out of the community. It is not until he witnesses the video of the release that he realizes he cannot stand to be in the community any longer. He and the Giver decide to help him escape. In spite of their detailed planning, Jonas changes it at the last minute when he finds out that Gabriel is scheduled for release the next day. Jonas then does the most individual and independent thinking he has done for the entire book and decides to leave that night. This is a decision made against the community. It is an individual decision and is made for individual reasons.

As readers we want to believe the community is a good place at the beginning, but we quickly feel something is wrong. It is a little too perfect and a little too uniform and very controlled. So, Lois Lowry is subtly sending the message that acting as a community without questioning the reasoning for the group decisions can be dangerous. She then develops Jonas as someone who becomes one of the only individuals and our hero, thus encouraging us to root for him and for thinking for one's self!

Describe Carlson from "Of Mice and Men."

Carlson is an insensitive ranch hand who Steinbeck uses in opposition to George. While George shoots Lennie out of sympathy and fear of what others might do to Lennie, Carlson disposes of life without regard to the consequences or sorrow that result. For example, Carlson encourages Candy, an old ranch hand who has lost one of his arms, to kill his dog. Carlson says,"Whyn't you get Candy to shoot his old dog and give him one of the pups to raise up? I can smell that dog a mile away. Got no teeth, damn near blind, can't eat. Candy feeds him milk. He can't chew nothing else" (Chapter 3). Carlson argues that the dog should be shot because the old animal is suffering, but his motives are selfish, as the dog's smell offends him.

When George shoots Lennie at the end of the novel, he does so to protect his friend, and George clearly suffers with his conscience as a result. This act is very different than Carlson's selfish suggestion that Candy have his beloved pet killed. After the dog is shot, Carlson meticulously cleans his gun, and therefore George and Lennie both know about the gun and where it is kept.

George later kills Lennie with Carlson's gun. Steinbeck writes at the end of the book about George, "He reached in his side pocket and brought out Carlson’s Luger; he snapped off the safety, and the hand and gun lay on the ground behind Lennie’s back." George's murder of Lennie is symbolically connected to the murder of the dog, as George uses the same gun to carry out his act, but George is motivated by love, not by selfishness, as Carlson was in suggesting that Candy's dog be shot. 

What are some examples of authority figures being ignored and how they are ignored in West Side Story?

In the musical West Side Story there are few adult characters present to represent "authority" figures. Because the plot focuses mainly on issues that are being faced by the younger characters, the adult characters are scripted as either comic relief or just ineffective people. As such, they are ignored by the younger characters who have bigger matters with which to concern themselves. The adult characters are Officer Krupke, Lieutenant Schrank, and Doc the drugstore owner. 

One example of authority characters being ignored or disrespected occurs in the very first scene of Act I. Officer Krupke and Lieutenant Schrank arrive right after a fight has taken place and question the boys in the Jets gang about what has just happened. The Jets give them smart-alecky comments rather than straight answers, even referring to Schrank as "buddy boy". After Krupke and Schrank forbid them to fight any further with the Sharks and leave the scene, various Jets boys mock the things that the two men had just told them. At last Riff, the leader of the Jets, gathers his gang together and incites them to plan what he hopes will be a decisive battle against the Sharks. This is in direct opposition to what Krupke and Schrank just told them to do.

Another example of an authority figure being ignored is in scene six at Doc's Drugstore. Doc tries to make all the kids leave, telling them that it is curfew time. Baby John, A-rab, and Snowboy explain that they are there to hold a war council with the Sharks to decide on weapons for their upcoming rumble. Doc starts to protest against this dangerous plan, but is repeatedly interrupted by Action, who explains why he thinks that Doc and all the other men in Action's life just do not understand what young people are like. Doc tries to make the point that their deadly desire to rumble with the Sharks is going to destroy them, but he is continually contradicted. In spite of his warnings, the war council is held and the rumble is planned. Later in the same scene Tony is alone with Doc, and Doc expresses his fear about Tony's involvement with Maria as well as the upcoming fight. But in spite of this Tony does not change his plans or behavior.

In The Great Gatsby, what excuse does Myrtle use to see Tom?

In Chapter 2, when Myrtle agrees to see Tom, Nick asks him if George (Myrtle's husband) ever objects to Myrtle going out. Tom explains that Myrtle tells George she is going to visit her sister in New York. Evidently, this is her excuse each time she goes to be with Tom. Tom arrogantly claims that George has no idea about the affair. "He's so dumb he doesn't know he's alive." 

George will eventually discover that Myrtle has something going on, and perhaps he had suspicions of this early on. He always appears despondent and tired. In Chapter 7, when Daisy, Gatsby, Nick, Tom, and Jordan go into the city, the latter three stop at George's garage. Nick observes and reveals that George has come to this discovery that his wife is perhaps having an affair. George even claims that he will be taking Myrtle out west. He evidently wants to get away from his depressing garage in the Valley of Ashes, and more importantly wants to get Myrtle away from the man she's been seeing. By this point, George still doesn't know who it is. In fact, he will never know that it is Tom. By the end, he concludes that it is someone else. 

What motivation does the mother have for allowing MeiMei to get out of doing chores in "Rules of the Game"? Is the mother justified by making...

Waverly gets out of her chores because she is practicing for chess tournaments and her mother takes a lot of pride in her success.

There’s a difference between feeling pride and showing it.  Waverly (called Meimei, meaning little sister) says that it is against the Chinese culture to be proud, but her mother likes to show off her chess ability.  Their status in the community is greatly increased by Waverly’s amazing chess success.

Waverly and her brothers got a used chess set from a charity for Christmas, and it fascinated Waverly.  She practices and plays harder and harder opponents, eventually entering in tournaments.  She becomes quite the neighborhood celebrity.

I attended more tournaments, each one farther away from home. I won all games, in all divisions. The Chinese bakery downstairs from our flat displayed my growing collection of trophies in its window, amidst the dustcovered cakes that were never picked up.

As Waverly gets better and better at chess, her mother begins to let her focus on it.  When local businesses start sponsoring her in national tournaments, Waverly’s mother decides that her brothers should do her chores for her so she can concentrate on chess.  Her brothers are not happy with this new arrangement.

"Why does she get to play and we do all the work," complained Vincent.

"Is new American rules," said my mother. "Meimei play, squeeze all her brains out for win chess. You play, worth squeeze towel."

Waverly’s mother is impressed with her dedication and achievements, but always pushes her.  No matter what Waverly does, it is never enough.  Her mother wants more and more.  She believes that you get soft if you don’t keep pushing yourself.

Waverly eventually gets sick of her mother’s attention and yells at her for showing her off all of the time.  This opens a great schism between her and her mother that is very difficult to close.  In her own way, her mother was doing what she thought was right, and was trying to show her daughter support.

There probably is not that much value to focusing on chess instead of chores, unless the chores take up a lot of time.  In making Waverly’s brothers do her chores, her mother might have inspired resentment.  However, this was also a way to reinforce the value of hard work.  It sent a message to Waverly’s brothers that you get special considerations when you are the best at something.

What is a symbol in The Hoosier School-Master by Edward Eggleston?

In literature, symbols are objects, characters, circumstances, or events which contain a deeper meaning in terms of the plot.

In The Hoosier School-Master, one literary symbol stands out clearly: the inimitable bull-dog, which comes to represent the tenacity Ralph Hartsook must exemplify if he wishes to survive as the new school-master of Flat-Crick. Accordingly, Ralph is warned about his chances of lasting out the winter by the most powerful trustee on the school board, Jack Means.

Jack also owns a bull-dog, Bull, a ferocious creature who presents an intimidating threat to anyone courageous enough to come within distance of its jaws. Throughout the story, the bull-dog is a symbol of tenacity and unwavering determination. Bud Means, Jack's oldest son, is a bully, one of the 'untamed and strapping youths' of Flat Crick. Like a bull-dog, he 'thrashed the last master' and ran him out of town. However, Bud's unflagging persistence in intimidating Ralph is unsuccessful. The new school-master refuses to submit to systematic pressure; he realizes that he has to be even more tenacious than his student if he wants to keep teaching.

Indeed, Ralph refuses to be cowed by Bud's persistent challenges to his authority; yet, instead of resorting to physical violence to hold his own, Ralph tries to appeal to Bud's pride and sense of honor.

"You won't thrash me, though," said Ralph.

"Pshaw! I 'low I could whip you in an inch of your life with my left hand, and never half try," said young Means, with a threatening sneer.

"I know that as well as you do."

"Well, a'n't you afraid of me, then?" and again he looked sidewise at Ralph.

"Not a bit," said Ralph, wondering at his own courage.

"Why a'n't you afraid of me?" he said presently.

"Because you and I are going to be friends."

"And what about t'others?"

"I am not afraid of all the other boys put together."

"You a'n't! The mischief! How's that?"

"Well, I'm not afraid of them because you and I are going to be friends, and you can whip all of them together. You'll do the fighting and I'll do the teaching."

Although Ralph finds his challenges increasing in scope as he immerses himself into the daily routine of teaching, he vows that he will never give up. He will be as tenacious and determined as Bull, the bull-dog, when he takes hold of something.

He thought that what Flat Creek needed was a bulldog. He would be a bulldog, quiet, but invincible. He would take hold in such a way that nothing should make him let go.

Indeed, the whole town soon comes to realize that, even though the fledgling school-master is no fan of 'lickin' and larnin,' (corporal punishment), he possesses 'a heap of thunder and lightning in him.' It is this fiery persistence to succeed that captures Mirandy Means' attention:

Mirandy had nothing but contempt for the new master until he developed the bulldog in his character. Mirandy fell in love with the bulldog.

Interestingly, Mirandy's mother is equally persistent in her machinations to snag the eligible bachelor teacher for her daughter. Like a bulldog, she has her heart set on having Ralph for a son-in-law, and she does everything she can to win him over.

The symbol of the bulldog continues as the story progresses.Three problems soon occupy the attentions of our school master: he must figure out how he can win Hannah's love without inflaming Bud's jealousy, continue to cement his authority in the classroom without resorting to physical violence, and resolve his precarious position in the wake of the robbery without implicating himself. If you refer to Chapter Seven, you will see once again how the symbol of the bulldog comes into play. This symbol of dogged determination is a pervasive element throughout the story.

It is astonishing how much instruction and comfort there is in a bulldog. This slender school-master, who had been all his life repressing the animal and developing the finer nature, now found a need of just what the bulldog had. And so, with the thought of how his friend the dog would fight in a desperate strait, he determined to take hold of his difficulties as Bull took hold of the raccoon. Moral questions he postponed for careful decision. But for the present he set his teeth together in a desperate, bulldog fashion, and he set his feet down slowly, positively, bulldoggedly.

Can you think of any multiple choice questions for The Giver, chapters 17-23?

We have a The Giver tutor online right now to help you!

To chat with a tutor, please set up a tutoring profile by creating an account and setting up a payment method. If you initiate a chat, please note you will be charged $0.50 a minute for tutoring time.

Water has a high specific heat because it has strong __________________.

Water has a high specific heat due to the strong polarity between its bonds.

Specific heat is the amount of heat required to increase the temperature of one gram of a substance by one degree Celsius.

Water is very polar. Polar substances are covalently bonded substances that contain partially positive and negative charges. The partial charges within a polar substance are the result of electronegativity differences between the atoms that share the bond. Electronegativity is the likelihood that an atom will attract a pair of bonded electrons. Amongst all of the elements on the periodic table, electronegativity ranges between approximately 0.7 to 4.0. Some periodic tables contain electronegativity values of each atom. The electronegativity difference between two atoms forming a bond can be used to determine the type of bond that will be formed between the two atoms, as identified below.

Electronegativity differences of less than 0.5 = nonpolar covalent

Electronegativity of 0.5 – 1.6 = polar covalent

Electronegativity difference of 2.0 or more = ionic bond

However, if there is a large electronegativity difference between two atoms but there is symmetry within the compound, then that compound will not display polarity. This is the reason why carbon dioxide (CO2) is not considered to be polar.

Hydrogen has an electronegativity of 2.1 and oxygen has an electronegativity of 3.5. Therefore, the electronegativity difference is 1.4. Thus, water is very polar. The polarity between water compounds results in a type of intermolecular force called a hydrogen bond.

Temperature is a measurement of the average kinetic energy of the particles within a substance. Kinetic energy is the energy of movement. Thus, in order for the temperature of a substance to increase, the particles that make up the substance need to gain kinetic energy and increase in movement.

Water has a high specific heat capacity because the heat added to water is initially used to overcome the hydrogen bonds. It is only when these bonds are broken that the water molecules begin to move freely. It is then that the kinetic energy of the molecules begins to increase, increasing the water’s temperature.

How does going to Cutler's Tavern alter Lyddie's perspective of herself in Lyddie?

Lyddie begins to think of herself as a slave after being sent to work in the tavern.

Lyddie is not happy about being sent to work at the tavern.  One day she was on the farm with her brother Charlie, and the next day she was sold into servitude to pay the family’s debts. Lyddie blames her mother.  Since her youngest daughter was born, her mother was depressed and mentally unstable. 

Lyddie compares herself to a slave because she has no choice but to work in the tavern.

Once I walk in that gate, I ain't free anymore, she thought. No matter how handsome the house, once I enter I'm a servant girl‐no more than a black slave. She had been queen of the cabin and the straggly fields and sugar bush up there on the hill. But now someone else would call thetune. (Ch. 3)

Lyddie is strong-willed and independent.  She never wanted to be beholden to anyone.  Now she has to work for someone else, and has no say in what happens to her.  It makes Lyddie angry and depressed.  She wonders how her mother could do something like this to her.

Although her family was poor, Lyddie feels like she could have taken care of herself. 

It didn't matter that plenty of poor people put out their children for hire to save having to feed them. She and Charlie could have fed themselves‐just one good harvest‐‐one good sugaring‐‐that was all they needed. And they could have stayed together. (Ch. 3)

Being separated from her family also bothers Lyddie.  Her mother had taken her sisters, but at least she still had Charlie.  Having a job that is not of her choosing makes Lyddie feel trapped, and she misses her family.

At the Tavern, Lyddie is given a new dress and boots.  She prefers her old homespun dress.  To Lyddie, the dress is just another badge of slavery.  Her old clothes are simple, but they are hers.  Lyddie takes great pride in her independence.

I'm writing my final and I need to write an argumentative essay regarding any piece of literature of my choosing. I decided to choose the Hunger...

I believe this topic is an argumentative one—it just depends on how you phrase it. When writing argumentative essays, I have always found it helpful to come up with a debate question of sorts (or really just a yes or no question) that could have as an answer the topic of the paper. So, for your situation, the debate question you could be trying to answer might be something like: Is there social significance in The Hunger Games? (or) Is Suzanne Collins trying to comment on today's society by means of her novel, The Hunger Games?

For either of those questions, your argument would be: Yes, there is social significance (or) Yes, she is trying to comment on today's society. And to back up your claim, you compare those examples from the book to examples in today's society: the big brother government is like our government's large presence, or something to that effect.

I have found that you can make pretty much any topic an argumentative one if you word it right.

A lifecycle assessment (LCA) was conducted to compare 31 gallon steel and plastic (HDPE) fuel tanks for cars. This question is only about the...

First, we must use the scrap rate to calculate the amount of material needed to manufacture each type of tank. Then we multiply the amount of material needed by the primary energy of materials and manufacture, which are given to us in MJ/kg.

For steel:

`(21.92 kg)/(1-0.189) = 27.03 kg`

of steel needed to manufacture one tank. Now, multiplying by the primary energy of materials and manufacture (which are summed first for convenience):

`27.03*(33.5+2.7)=978.5 MJ`

For HDPE:

`(14.07kg)/(1-0.017)=14.31 kg`

Then multiplying the energy of manufacture and materials:

`14.31*(80.94+14)=1359 MJ`

So we can see that the energy costs to produce the HDPE plastic tank are actually quite a bit higher than the energy costs to produce the steel tank, despite the fact that the plastic tank weighs about half of the steel tank. 

How does Julie survive in a challenging environment in the book Julie of the Wolves?

There is one very simple explanation as to how Julie survives in the challenging environment of the Alaskan tundra:  she uses the "old ways" of the Eskimo to overcome fear.

Fear becomes easy for Julie to overcome as soon as she begins the concentration on survival.  For example, Julie is smart enough to take necessities with her on her journey:  matches and her ulo knife.  Unfortunately, Julie does lose her way, but she immediately builds a sod hut in order to find shelter.  Julie's next order of business in regards to survival is food.  It is this aspect of survival that makes Julie cling to the wolves she meets.  Julie is extremely patient while observing them and is eventually able to determine how to submit to the lead wolf, Amaroq (by laying belly-up).  

Because Julie easily reverts to the "old ways" of the Eskimo people that she knows so well (because of her years living with Kapugen in the seal camp), survival is possible. Remembering her father's advice always serves Julie well.  This memory is another method of survival.  Very importantly, Kapugen's advice is coveted when Julie comes upon the pack of wolves which will eventually become her family:

Wolves are brotherly. ... They love each other, and if you learn to speak to them, they will love you too.

I am having trouble with a paper. The subject is intertextuality and the novel is Borges' Ficciones. I am having trouble understanding what his...

The first thing that will help you in writing about Borges' Ficciones is understanding that it is not a novel. The book is a collection of short stories ("fictions") written over a period of nine years (1935-1944). These are not meant to be read as a coherent narrative.

The style of many of Borges' stories is dense, allusive, and cerebral, often tackling complex philosophical issues. Ultimately, his choice to write in this style was a personal preference; he could have chosen a different literary style, but this was the one that appealed to him or came naturally to him.

The way intertextuality functions in in his works is related to his situation as a writer. Borges' life and writing are located at the intersection of the sophisticated literary culture of Europe and the nascent literary culture of the New World.

Borges was born in 1899 to a family that was embedded in the formation of Argentina as a country, but also well educated in European culture with a vast library of English as well as Spanish books. The young Borges was fluently bilingual in English and Spanish by the age of nine. The family moved to Switzerland in 1915, and Borges lived in Europe until 1921. He began his literary career after his return to Argentina. 

Borges' writing often struggles, in a condensed and lapidary style, to make sense of how to relate sophisticated European ideas to Argentinian folk or regional culture. Intertextuality allows him to bring elements of both cultures into his stories in a very condensed way. Rather than having to flesh out both cultural situations, he can use references to previous texts to invoke their presence.  “Tln, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius” and “The Circular Ruins” both, for example, evoke a mysterious unknown land (like the remote regions of Patagonia in southern Argentina) and how it poses an intellectual challenge similar to the imaginary lands constructed in the philosophy of Bishop Berkeley (the empty forest in which a tree falls). 

Borges also sees the nature of literature as intertextual. We are always using words and ideas that have been used by other writers and which come burdened with the ways they have been used in the past. Borges, in Ficciones, states this in the following quotation:

A book is not an isolated being: it is a relationship, an axis of innumerable relationships.

Who was worse, Assef in The Kite Runner or Rasheed in A Thousand Splendid Suns?

The answer to this question is a matter of opinion, although that is not to say there is much to recommend in either Rasheed or Assef. Both are misogynists and bullies.

In A Thousand Splendid Suns, Rasheed ignores the pleadings of his wife, Mariam, when she begs him not to disgrace her by taking another wife. However, the lustful Rasheed proclaims that he should be given a medal for marrying the fourteen-year-old Laila; after all, Mariam would finally get some household help and they would be able to take pride in saving a defenseless teenager from the streets of Kabul and the brothels of Peshawar. With this sly rationale, Rasheed forces Mariam to acquiesce to his wishes.

As a character, Rasheed has no redeeming qualities; he is abusive to both his wives, he regards daughters contemptuously because they are not sons, and he regards lying about Tariq's death a beneficial maneuver because it secures him Laila's hand in marriage. After both Laila and Mariam's failed attempt to run away to Peshawar, Rasheed brutally beats Mariam and Laila; even Laila's baby, Aziza, is not spared her father's violent abuse. Rasheed locks Mariam in the toolshed and Laila in her room for days without benefit of food or water. This also means that the baby, Aziza, is deprived of nourishment during the forced incarceration. Rasheed is a character who is not above abusing babies and women in order to reinforce his position of authority in his household. In the end, Mariam has to kill Rasheed in self-defense in order to prevent him from killing Laila.

In The Kite Runner, Assef distinguishes himself as a real villain from the beginning of the novel. His rape of the innocent and defenseless Hassan is an atrocious act of violence; in the story, Assef's perverted tendencies follow him to adulthood. As a Taliban commander, he continues to rape young boys; his victims include Sohrab, Hassan's son. This execrable character is also proud of having played a part in decimating a large percentage of the population of Hazaras. In the novel, he boasts about his murderous exploits in the Hazara massacre at Mazar-i-Sharif in 1998, as Amir tries to bargain with him on Sohrab's behalf.

 "You don't know the meaning of the word  'liberating' until you've done that, stood in a  roomful of targets, let the bullets fly, free of  guilt and remorse, knowing you are virtuous,  good, and decent. Knowing you're doing God's  work. It's breathtaking."

Assef describes his participation in the pogroms in religious language; to him, it is a divine calling to assassinate those he considers inferior Muslims. He even relates gleefully that he enjoyed leaving the bodies of dead Hazaras to the dogs. Also, as a Taliban commander, Assef regularly participates in public stonings. When Amir bargains for Sohrab, Assef brutally attacks him with his stainless steel brass-knuckles. It is Sohrab's slingshot which eventually saves Amir from certain death at Assef's hands.

So, how do we decide which character is the greater villain? If you think that participating in massacres against a religious minority (plus exploiting and sexually abusing children) constitute the very height of evil, my best advice would be to pick Assef as the more villainous of the two. If, however, you think that physically abusing women and infants constitutes a greater crime, pick Rasheed. Either way, as long as you provide evidence for your assertions, you will be well on your way to answering this question adequately!

What is whaling?

Whaling is the industry of hunting or fishing for a number of species of whales, primarily for products which can be harvested from their bodies. Historically, whales were a very valuable source of materials. The blubber (a fatty substance which keeps whales warm) was harvested for use in oil lamps, cosmetics, and to make margarine. Whale bones were once commonly used in constructing garments like corsets and hoop skirts. The teeth of whales (also called whale ivory) was used to make decorative ornaments and knick-knacks. Whale meat can be eaten, and has a long history of being one of the primary foods of Pacific Northwest First Nations people. 

Whaling is controversial as the populations of whales in the wild are under stress and losing numbers. Animal activist groups and biologists both attest that whales have social communities, and therefore are feeling beings. We face the ethical question of whether or not whales having feelings means that we should not kill them. The industry of whaling has been outlawed in most countries, but some cultures depend on whales as a staple of their livelihood.

Who invented the bulb?

Thomas Edison is usually credited with the invention of the light bulb in 1879 but historians now believe that this is a myth. In fact, the story of the light bulb begins in 1806 when an English scientist, Humphrey Davy, demonstrated an electric lamp to the Royal Society. Davy called it an 'arc lamp' and created a light by sparking electricity between two charcoal roads. Davy's invention was not well-received because the light was too bright to be used in people's homes. This invention did, however, encourage other scientists to start thinking about how best to design a light bulb. In 1841, for example, a British inventor called Frederick DeMoleyns patented the first glass light bulb and, over the next decade, more and more patents were granted for similar designs. 

Edison's light bulb was, therefore, inspired by these earlier works but Humphrey Davy is, perhaps, the man who should be credited with its invention. 

In Ernest Hemingway’s “In Another Country,” how does the author convey events and emotions?

In order to understand Ernest Hemingway's writing one must know more about his philosophy. Hemingway endeavored to write truthfully and often said he wanted to write "one true sentence." Hemingway also believed in omitting certain events and emotions from his writing. He explains,

"It was a very simple story called “Out of Season” and I had omitted the real end of it which was that the old man hanged himself. This was omitted on my new theory that you could omit anything if you knew that you omitted and the omitted part would strengthen the story and make people feel something more than they understood."

Once you understand Hemingway's philosophy it is easier to see how he conveys events and emotions. One thing Hemingway omits from the story "In Another Country" is a direct statement of the pain and emotional toll the war has taken on the men portrayed in the story. Instead, he hints at the death caused by the war in describing the dead animals which hang in the butcher shops and how cold and windy the weather has been.

Similarly he doesn't directly tell us that Nick Adams and the Italian major will probably never be physically the same again. The doctors are employing new machines which promise miracle results but Nick and the major don't believe it. At the end of the story photographs showing good results fail to impress the major who has lost both the strength in his hand and his young wife:

"The photographs did not make much difference to the major because he only looked out the window."

In this "one true sentence" Hemingway expresses the major's emotions. He is lost. His wife is dead and his ability to continue his fencing career is over. He is obviously suffering from a deep depression.

Nick too is not without emotional scars. Hemingway omits the deep shame and sense of cowardice that Nick must have felt when he showed the citations for his medals to the three Italian soldiers who had been wounded in battle:

"I showed them the papers, which were written in very beautiful language and full of fratellanza and abnegazione, but which really said, with the adjectives removed, that I had been given the medals because I was an American. After that their manner changed a little toward me, although I was their friend against outsiders. I was a friend, but I was never really one of them after they had read the citations, because it had been different with them and they had done very different things to get their medals. I had been wounded, it was true; but we all knew that being wounded, after all, was really an accident."

Nick leaves unstated the reason he got the medals other than that he was wounded. Hemingway himself was wounded on the Italian front by mortar fire while procuring chocolate and cigarettes for the men on the front line. For both Nick and Hemingway it must have been terribly disconcerting to have not actually been wounded in the line of battle like the Italian soldiers. He describes one of the soldiers:

"The tall boy with a very pale face who was to be a lawyer had been a lieutenant of Arditi and had three medals of the sort we each had only one of. He lived a very long time with death and was a little detached.

Eventually Nick stops hanging out with the three soldiers. He explains,

"The three with the medals were like hunting-hawks; and I was not a hawk, although I might seem a hawk to those who had never hunted; they, the three, knew better and so we drifted apart."

Nick never offers a direct admission of guilt over feeling like a coward but nevertheless we feel that he thinks less of himself in the presence of the soldiers.

Hemingway employs his philosophy of omission in several of his works, most notably in The Sun Also Rises where Jake Barnes has been basically castrated in World War I. Instead Hemingway inadvertently shows us Jake's injuries through veiled dialogue and the use of the steers in the Pamplona bullfighting scenes. 

When did the revolution in France begin?

The French Revolution took place in the late 1700s.  Discontentment among the poor regarding the inequalities between the wealthy and those living in poverty was one of the main causes of the unrest that led to the revolution.  Other causes were agricultural problems in France and the newly embraced Enlightenment ideas.

It was in the year 1789 that the French Revolution began.  On July 14th, 1789, mobs of discontented French citizens stormed the Bastille.  Inside of the Bastille were ammunition and weaponry.  The Bastille was also a symbol of the disconnected royalty.  Today, July 14th is celebrated each year in France.  The holiday is called Bastille Day.

The French Revolution lasted throughout the 1790s.  The war finally ended in the year 1799, though there is some debate about this date.

When and how do readers know that Mrs. Sappleton's niece has been lying? Once it is revealed that she has been lying, can anything be found...

The readers do not know that Vera was lying until Framton Nuttel has fled from the house and is running down the road in flight from the three figures he took to be ghosts. Then Mr. Sappleton reveals that they are not ghosts but only three hunters returning for tea from a day's shooting.

"Here we are, my dear," said the bearer of the white mackintosh, coming in through the window, "fairly muddy, but most of it's dry. Who was that who bolted out as we came up?"

A few faint clues that Vera was lying can be found after the readers realize that her story was a practical joke. For one thing, Vera asks Framton Nuttel two questions to find out how much he knows about her family and about the locale. These questions are:

"Do you know many of the people round here?"

"Then you know practically nothing about my aunt?"

Readers might assume that the girl is just making polite conversation, but in retrospect they will realize that Vera needed to be sure Framton Nuttel knew nothing about her aunt or about local history before she could proceed to tell him her ghost story.

Readers will also see that Vera was intentionally planting a suggestion in the visitor's mind when she says:

Do you know, sometimes on still, quiet evenings like this, I almost get a creepy feeling that they will all walk in through that   window--" 

Note that the girl is not trying to plant a suggestion in the readers' minds, because she isn't aware of the existence of any readers; but the author is very deliberately planting that suggestion in the minds of his readers. When the three figures appear outside walking towards the open window, they will be doing exactly what Vera foreshadowed. Obviously it is Saki's intention to frighten the readers of his story. They will be identified with Framton Nuttel because the story is told through his point of view, and they will suddenly be afraid they are going to be witnessing a horrible scene in which a trio of decaying walking dead men will enter the living room all carrying shotguns. 

This little scare only lasts a few moments before the readers realize that these are just ordinary mortals and that Vera had cast them all, along with her aunt and herself, in an elaborate play intended to frighten poor Framton Nuttel out of his wits. Vera may not have expected Framton to react so strongly. She did not know he was suffering from a nervous disorder until she heard him talking about it to her aunt. He hadn't said anything about his "nerve cure" to the girl because it would not have been appropriate. But once the cat was out of the bag, so to speak, there was nothing Vera could do but wait and see what would happen when the three men returned for tea.

Framton would have had no time to say anything to Vera about his nerves or his nerve cure anyway. As soon as the girl finishes her story and tells him in a spooky manner that she sometimes gets the creepy feeling that the men will return from the dead, her aunt arrives and takes over the hostessing.

She broke off with a little shudder. It was a relief to Framton when the aunt bustled into the room with a whirl of apologies for being late in making her appearance.

Is there a work of literature, similar to Beowulf, where the hero fights a monster to save his kingdom?

Beowulf inspired a number of similar stories, especially Tolkien's--which share several literary and cultural elements--and particularly The Hobbit.

The point of view in The Hobbit is shifted away from the traditional hero's perspective, and is instead told from the least powerful and least aggressive character. Bilbo Baggins is essentially conscripted by a wizard and a group of dwarves to accompany them to their ancestral home, a mountain, which has been taken over by a dragon. After encountering numerous challenges on their way, they arrive at the mountain and encounter the dragon, only to accidentally implicate the nearby town in having helped them. The dragon attacks the town and is killed by the local hero, who then attempts to lay a claim to the dragon's treasure. Corruption poisons the relationships between many characters until a greater threat (orcs, the traditional enemy of all) interrupts them and they manage to unite against this threat, though not without the deaths of several important protagonists. Bilbo returns home a "changed hobbit," no longer the person he was. While Bilbo undergoes the traditional "hero's journey," there isn't really a hero who is central to both the narration and the plot itself, in the way that Beowulf is.

Several generalized plot points, as well as specific details, are shared between The Hobbit and Beowulf, which Tolkien specifically resourced when writing it;

• Bilbo is commonly called the "burglar" of the party, for his small size and ability to move silently, even though he has no practical experience in burgling. This a direct reference to the thief in Beowulf, who is pressed into joining Beowulf's part to lead them to the dragon.


• The dragons in both stories are said to hoard treasure for no obvious reason other than that it's in their nature, to be able to fly, and breathe fire.


• In both stories, the theft of a cup is immediately noticed by the dragon. 


• Bard, the human who actually kills the dragon in The Hobbit, "inherits" several abilities, such as being able to understand the bird who tells him of the dragon's weak spot. This is akin to many of the important genealogical elements of Beowulf, wherein greatness is tied to one's birth.


• Thorin, the leader of the dwarves, dies at the end of the story, reflecting Beowulf's death at the end of his own. Thorin also recants his own greed, recognizing how it brought him nothing but trouble, in the same way that the Beowulf author frequently points to personal flaws and sins as the source of many conflicts.

What does the judicial branch do?

In the United States, the government can be organized into three Branches- the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial. The Judicial Branch has the power and responsibility for interpreting and applying the law, as well as making sure that the laws brought before them are constitutional. The highest authority in the Judicial Branch is the Supreme Court, made up of eight Justices and one Chief Justice. When the Supreme Court makes a ruling in interpreting the law, all inferior courts must act based on their ruling. A person who is unhappy with the ruling of their case at a common or state court may also appeal to the next superior court and ultimately the Supreme Court, in the effort of proving the unconstitutionality of the first ruling. 

On a day to day basis, the judicial branch interprets the law in hearing and deciding on cases. In the broader spectrum, their interpretation of the law creates and recreates the environment of legality and constitutionality in the United States. 

What role did the second great awakening have in forming American Nationalism in the 19th century?

The Second Great Awakening was a period of increased religious and social activities during the 19th century in America. This period saw the emergence of new denominations and fervent activities in existing ones. It was a period of revival with people gathering in camp meetings to hear sermons by the evangelists. Apart from preaching the gospels the evangelists, passionately preached about the need for a strong work ethic, economical living, and self-control among the growing middle class.

They also preached about the need to alleviate suffering and advocated for issues such as the end of slavery, prison reforms, and suffrage among other socially pressing issues.

These issues formed the rallying point for Americans and evolved into strong social activism groups. Participation in advocacy and religious revival enhanced the peoples’ sense of nationalism and unity. This helped achieve major social reforms and democratization of the nation because the process was people driven for the well-being of the country.

The noise was like the roar of Niagara. The vast sea of human beings seemed to be agitated as if by a storm. I counted seven ministers, all preaching at one time, some on stumps, others on wagons ... Some of the people were singing, others praying, some crying for mercy. A peculiarly strange sensation came over me. My heart beat tumultuously, my knees trembled, my lips quivered, and I felt as though I must fall to the ground. (Description of a camp meeting by a young man in attendance, Kentucky 1802)

What's the difference between God and Jesus?

Christianity holds that God and Jesus are made of the same divine substance. This can be a little confusing, especially when we talk about the risen Christ who ascends to heaven.

In Christian tradition, the Holy Trinity is made up of three forms or incarnations of the divine- the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost. All three of these are made of the same "substance," God. Imagine if you were to take a ball of clay, and form it into different shapes. You can make the clay into a cup, a human figure, even a tool. Just like that one ball of clay can take different forms, Christians believe that God can take on different forms with distinct qualities. The form God may take is dependent upon what is needed of him.

Jesus is an incarnation of God- his divine substance existed before the physical form was born, and returned to Heaven after his death. Jesus represents the form of God the Son. 

Perhaps the one major difference between "God" and "Jesus," is that Jesus was the physical form of God the Son on Earth. God on its own does not have a physical form, it is just the divine energy. Though Jesus had a human form, Christians believe his spirit was the same as that of God, and therefore he was divine.

Why do people move from rural areas to cities?

People may choose to move from rural areas to cities for a number of reasons, but the root motivation behind many of these causes has to do with the opportunities available in one's life. Here I will discuss a few different aspects of what might make city life more desirable than rural life for someone.

Work is an important part of life, and cities typically offer a greater variety of jobs and a larger work field in general. Work in rural areas tends to be limited to production of a local specialty (like agriculture or mining) and support for the people who produce it. In cities, there are a greater number of industries to work in. While rent (for comparable living arrangements) tends to be higher in cities, jobs in the city may pay better based on the type of work. 

Without good health, there is not much left in life, so health is often a big factor in why someone may choose to move to a city. Though city air has higher concentrations of pollutants, city water is more closely regulated than rural water for contamination. People in the city also tend to live closer to physicians and have a greater variety of physicians to choose from. In much of the world, specialty care for certain diseases or conditions can only be found in the city. Treatment for or managing an illness may make it more effective in cost and time spent for an individual or their family to live in a city to be nearer their doctor or hospital. For many, just knowing that they live in a city with numerous general, emergency, and specialty care physicians is a benefit.

Many families and young people move to cities to further their education opportunities. Most cities have universities and community colleges where young adults gravitate and they may choose to move to the city permanently to facilitate their education and career. Families with children may seek education opportunities not available in rural areas. This includes general schooling and extracurricular activities like youth sports or science leagues, and exposure to cultural centers like museums and galleries.

Socialization also plays a factor for some people. If someone feels that there aren't enough opportunities for them to meet like-minded individuals, they may move to a city where they are more likely to find activities and socialization that meets their particular interests.

In The Call of the Wild by Jack London, why do the Yeehats consider Buck the Evil Spirit?

In author Jack London's The Call of the Wild, the Yeehat tribe considers Buck the "Evil Spirit" because he killed many of them. When Buck returned from one of his hunts in the forest, he found the Yeehats celebrating in his camp. They had killed the other dogs as well as Pete and Hans and most notably, John Thornton. Realizing this, Buck attacked them with ferocity, ripping out the throat of the chief and causing some of the Yeehats to kill one another, in the chaos of trying to shoot Buck with their arrows. Finally, they ran into the woods with Buck in hot pursuit, destroying as many of them as he could.

After that day, the Yeehats called Buck the Evil Spirit and were afraid and in awe of him. They noticed him leading the pack of wolves--this ghost dog who some had lost their lives to when they killed the one person he loved above all others--John Thornton.

Discuss The Emperor Jones as the protagonist's psychological journey from inhumanity to humanity.

Brutus Jones is the Emperor on a remote Caribbean island. He is a self-styled dictator, crowned ruler only because he manages to convince the trusting natives that he is a magician of sorts. Boasting that he can only be killed by a silver bullet, Brutus plays the part of the invincible strongman to perfection.

On the island, he forgets the heinous treatment he unleashed on his past victims and proceeds to oppress those who now hold him in high esteem. Brutus dresses himself in a flamboyant, military-style uniform and carries a revolver in his holster at all times. Aware that he has taxed and cheated the natives beyond all decency, Brutus cynically carries on his person a silver bullet; he aims to use it in the event of a rebellion.

His inhumanity is apparent when he mocks the natives while conversing with his sidekick, Henry Smithers. Brutus shows no remorse for causing the people to suffer; instead, he laughs at them for their gullible trust in him. He openly boasts that, once he gets wind of a mutiny, he aims to escape with all the money he's exacted from his victims. He also threatens Smithers with physical harm if his sidekick ever reveals his dastardly plans to anyone.

In due time, Smithers gets wind of a revolution in the making when he discovers that the horses have been stolen. He warns Brutus, and the latter loses no time in making his way through the big forest. Brutus's psychological evolution from inhumanity to humanity is apparent as he journeys towards the coast. At each succeeding interval, he is accosted by ghosts from his past, and these apparitions destabilize him emotionally and psychologically.

Despite his bravado, his mounting fear eventually causes him to lose all his composure. Surreal visions of horror descend mercilessly upon Brutus, and he is left questioning his sanity. He sees the former Pullman porter that he murdered in a rage-filled razor duel. Next, he sees himself being whipped by the guard of a chain gang, being put up for sale at a slave auction, and being surrounded by other slaves as he stands in the hold of a slave ship. These unrelenting visions cause Brutus to hyperventilate and panic.

Suddenly, Jones is no longer the oppressor; he has taken the place of the oppressed. He shoots out wildly at the disturbing visions, but they disappear before his very eyes. In the midst of his terror, Brutus can hear the drums of the rebels resounding in rhythmic fervor. Meanwhile, one last vision is revealed to him. Brutus sees a witch doctor signaling to him to offer himself as a sacrifice to placate the evil forces at large. Immediately, a massive crocodile appears to devour him, leaving him in a horrifically helpless position. This isn't the end that he had envisioned for himself. He begs for mercy from God and frantically looks for his silver bullet.

Upon finding it, he loads his gun and fires at the crocodile; the terrifying scene immediately disappears before his eyes. Relieved beyond measure, he lays prostrate with his face to the ground. Eventually, the rebels catch up to him and kill him with a shot to his chest. By the time Smithers sees Brutus's body, he notes there is a "little reddish−purple hole under his left breast." Brutus dies in an agony of fear, but more importantly, he dies repenting of the horror he unleashed upon his past, innocent victims. Brutus's final plea for mercy from God contrasts with his initial cynicism and savagery. Thus, The Emperor Jones highlights the protagonist's psychological journey from inhumanity to humanity.

Why does the size of a particle not affect its porosity?

First off, I will define porosity here as the amount of a solid's volume that is occupied by empty space. As an example of empty space in solid objects and particles, think of the nooks and crannies in a sponge. The reason that the porosity of a particle is not affected by its "size" (total volume) is because in most applications, and especially in all types of engineering, porosity is described by something called the void fraction. In fact, often times scientists and engineers use the terms void fraction and porosity interchangeably. The void fraction (or porosity) of a particle is defined as the total volume of empty space within divided by the total volume of the particle. Void fraction is often represented by the Greek letter phi:

` phi=(V_E_m_p_t_y)/(V_T_o_t_a_l)`

Thus, no matter how big or small a particle gets the porosity is always gauged by the ratio of empty space to total space occupied. This means that so long as the particle remains made of the same material with the same distribution of empty space, its porosity will not change regardless of total volume. In fact, this is how you should think of porosity: a physical property of a given material and the environmental conditions in which is exists that does not change with the system size (much like density). Properties like porosity and density are called intensive properties. The opposite of an intensive property is an extensive property, which does change with system size (e.g. volume, mass, etc.).

What is the implied meaning of "his bars of rage" in the poem "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings" by Maya Angelou?

In order to determine the meaning of the line “his bars of rage” in Maya Angelou’s poem “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings” it may be helpful to look at the whole stanza of the poem.

But a bird that stalks

down his narrow cage

can seldom see through

his bars of rage

his wings are clipped and  

his feet are tied

so he opens his throat to sing.

The poet is creating the image of a bird held in a barred cage which is in opposition to a bird flying free that she describes in the first stanza. The bird is “stalking” around in that cage which connotes anger and frustration. It is blinded by that “rage” and understands that there is no escape from its bars of incarceration. The bird cannot visualize what the free bird can because it is caged with pent up anger. The “bars of rage” are a metaphor for the feelings of people who are bound by slavery, ignorance, and prejudice. Ms. Angelou goes on to explain that the bird cannot obtain its freedom but it chooses to express itself joyously implying that although it maybe be angry and unable to break those bonds, it will not be silenced.

What jobs were available to women in Shakespeare's time?

William Shakespeare lived and wrote during the Elizabethan Era, a period of time named for the most important woman with a job in England at the time — Queen Elizabeth I. Though she did not "choose" her occupation as the monarch, Elizabeth certainly had far more personal agency and freedom of choice than most English women. The majority of women in Shakespeare's time were limited to the roles of wife and mother. Of course, if a woman married a man who owned a business, she would likely fulfill some of the responsibilities necessary to this business. A fishmonger's wife might help clean and sell fish in addition to running the home. Similarly, a farmer's wife had no choice but to perform farm work because it was her family's livelihood. 

Upper-class women might have received a private education, but were still expected to be obedient wives, dutiful mothers, and efficient ladies of the house. Because women were made to be so dependent upon male family members, people were often suspicious of single women. A single woman might be able to find work as a cook or domestic servant, but outside of these traditionally feminine roles, an unmarried woman was suspected of being a witch or sex worker. Of course, some women did work in the sex industry, and others may very well have sold herbal remedies in addition to midwifery duties. Life for these women would not have been easy.

In the game of "Yes and No" that the guests played at Fred's party, who did the "disagreeable animal" turn out to be?

The guests at Fred's party play several games, including one that resembles modern day tag.  They end with a game of "Yes and No," which is a clue-based guessing game along the lines of Twenty Questions.  Scrooge and the Ghost of Christmas Present watch as Fred describes a truly disagreeable animal.  They come to find out that Fred has been describing Scrooge himself.

It might be tempting for the reader to think this an unkind move on Fred's part, but Fred follows it up by drinking to his uncle's good health.  When the reader further considers that Fred invited Scrooge to the party, the reader can better tolerate what might otherwise be seen as a character flaw on Fred's part.  We see, in the end, that although Scrooge is not present, Fred's game is not intended as malicious.

How is the house described in Henrik Ibsen's A Doll's House? How do the children behave in the play?

Henrik Ibsen provides many details in his stage directions about the house that serves as the setting for his play A Doll's House.

In the opening act, the house is described as "furnished comfortably and tastefully, but not extravagantly," which tells us the Helmers are financially comfortable enough to be able to afford a comfortable and attractive home, but not rich enough to afford an expensively furnished home. The main room of the house, which is the only room on the set visible to the audience, is built with three walls. Along the back wall, a door on stage right — the actor's right facing the audience — opens to the "entrance-hall," whereas a door on stage left opens to Torvald's study. In addition, an upright piano stands propped against the back wall between these two doorways.  

A third door is situated in the middle of the wall on stage left. It must be this third door that gains access to the nursery, for when the nurse returns home with the children in this first act, she is described as entering the "room on the left" while Nora plays with the children. A window is also situated near this third door, and a "round table, arm-chairs and a small sofa" are situated close to this window.

A fourth door is situated on the far end of the third wall on stage right. Near this fourth door stands a small table and a stove; the stove is surrounded by two easy chairs and a rocking-chair. This wall on stage right is also decorated with engravings. Ibsen further describes that the floor is carpeted, and the set is also decorated with a china cabinet and a small bookcase.

When the children enter the scene, they all talk very happily with their mother at once, describing the adventures they had just been engaged in such as sledging, having snowball fights, and being chased by a dog. After Nora removes the children's winter outerwear, she begins to play hide and seek with them. Ibsen describe the children as laughing while "rush[ing] in and out" of the room in search of their mother.