What is the gist of chapter 3 in Lyddie by Katherine Paterson?

By "gist" I believe that you are asking for a short summary of chapter three.

In chapter three, Lyddie has just arrived at Cutler's Tavern. Lyddie is to be a new serving girl at the tavern. Lyddie's mother sold her off in order to help pay off some family debt.

Lyddie is worked extremely hard by Mrs. Cutler. Lyddie never gives up, though, and proves herself to be a strong worker. Emotionally, Lyddie is miserable. The only comfort that she has comes late at night when she is able to count the money that she received from the sale of the calf.

There is a bit of foreshadowing in this chapter as well. Lyddie encounters an elegant woman who got off of the stagecoach. Lyddie is impressed by her presence and will learn (months later) that the woman is a factory girl who earns way more money than Lyddie is currently earning.

How is Obama represented in Media?

The main thing you need to realize is that there are thousands of different media outlets across the entire world and each of them has its own point of view, although some are more reliable than others.

In most countries outside the United States, including Canada and Mexico, Obama is generally viewed positively. According the the widely respected and non-partisan Pew Research Center, Obama has approval ratings in key policy areas of 60 to over 80 percent across most of the world. He is viewed as attempting to implement sensible and moderate policies, and considered a centrist. Most people across the world see him as struggling against a Republican party that would be considered a extreme in some developed nations. His attempts to improve US health care through the Affordable Care Act and to restrict the out-of-control gun violence in the United States are viewed as sane and moderate policies, and his opponents on these issues seen as to the right of even Europe's neo-Nazis.

Within the United States, Obama is a polarizing figure, with many right wing outlets such as Fox News strongly disapproving of him and left wing outlets generally approving. 

In Night, how long were author Elie Wiesel and his father at Auschwitz, and where did they go after that?

In Elie Wiesel's Night, Elie and his family were first taken to Birkenau, the reception center for Auschwitz, one of the notoriously terrible death camps during the Holocaust. Elie and his father then stayed at Auschwitz for about three weeks before they were marched to another camp with many other prisoners. The next camp in which they were imprisoned was Buna. At Buna, Elie, along with his father and other prisoners, worked at an electrical warehouse during the day and returned to the camp in the evening. Though their supervisor was prone to violent outbursts and often attacked one or more of his charges, this was considered a good unit, so Elie thought himself lucky. Imagine conditions so horrible that working for a crazy man, who might beat him at any minute, made Elie feel "lucky"!  It was a terrible time in our history.

In The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail, how does Thoreau feel about Waldo's wife? How does he choose to live according to his beliefs?

These questions refer to the scene late in Act 1, when Waldo, Lydian, and Henry meet in Waldo’s study. Henry jokes around with Lydian; the two will become friends. Later in the play, he will be annoyed when she delivers a note of regret on behalf of her husband. Here the Emersons hire Henry as a handyman and as a companion to their son, Edward. Waldo insists on paying the man for his services. Henry has different ideas about “payment,” saying that he’s already been compensated in part for being permitted to hear one of Waldo’s inspirational lectures. But he also learns that the Emersons own a parcel of woods. He asks if he could use it someday for an “experiment” – foreshadowing his move to Emerson’s property at the edge of Walden Pond. This permission is seen as a payment of sorts. The land will be valuable in a way to Henry, without him having to own it or to pay for it. As for his choice to live as he sees fit and according to his personal beliefs, Henry says:

Why spend the best part of your life earning money so that you can enjoy a questionable liberty during the least valuable part of it? Why work like a dog so you can pant for a moment or two before you die?

He would rather have “a broad margin” to his life now, and to do as he pleases, than to save up for some future retirement and to not be able to live his days fully in the meantime.

In Their Eyes Were Watching God, Janie watches a band of people leave the Muck. Who are they?

In Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston, Janie and Tea Cake spend a great deal of their life together in the Florida Everglades, or "the Muck." Here they work together, build friendships with those around them (including some Bahaman workers that share a new culture), and have what is perhaps the best life they ever know with one another. However, the Muck is also the place where their life together begins to come apart. 

In Chapter 18, Hurston describes the life that Janie and Tea Cake built in the Muck. They play games and hold dances regularly, enjoying nearly every moment of the time. However, one afternoon a band of Seminoles passes by.  Hurston writes,

The men walking in front and the laden, stolid women following them like burros. She had seen Indians several times in the 'Glades, in twos or threes, but this was a large party. They were headed toward the Palm Beach road and kept moving steadily. About an hour later another party appeared and went the same way. Then another just before sundown.

Janie asks one of the men where they are going. He says they are headed to high ground because a hurricane is coming. This becomes the major conversation of the evening, and continues the next day as more Native Americans travel past, but nobody gets alarmed. Work is good and the evening fun is better, so the characters stay put. The next day, animals such as rabbits, snakes, and even deer start to travel past, and "[a] thousand buzzards held a flying meet and then went above the clouds and stayed," suggesting that the scavengers are going to wait out the storm and then pick over the remains. Finally, some of the Bahaman workers begin to get concerned and head toward higher ground, but Janie, Tea Cake, and a number of other people stay, planning to ride out the storm. This decision sets in motion the major tragedy for Janie and Tea Cake, when Lake Okechobee overflows and floods the Muck and the two are forced to try to escape. 

Why were the hills in the Battle of the Bunker Hill so important?

The location of an area has always been an important factor in fighting a war. In the 1700s and in the 1800s, having control over a hilly area was usually an advantageous position for whoever had that position. In the Battle of Bunker Hill, this was especially true. Bunker Hill is a hill that overlooks the harbor in Boston. The colonists had control of this hill. The British, who were better equipped and supposedly better trained and to fight a war, should have been able to control this area. However, since the colonists had control over this hill, the British found it very difficult to take it. They tried three times to capture Bunker Hill. They failed the first two times. The only reason why they succeeded on the third try was because the colonists ran out of ammunition. The difficulty the British had in taking this hill gave the colonists the confidence they needed to believe they could fight the British. It also showed the importance of controlling strategic locations in war, especially the hills in those days.

Comment on the story "Lamb to the Slaughter" as a story of revenge?

"Lamb to the Slaughter" could be read as a story of revenge because the reason behind the killing of Patrick Maloney was that his wife, Mary, reacted violently to the news that her husband was leaving her.

Keep in mind that Mary's reaction is also a result of shock. She pushed down her emotions and carried on as usual.

Her first instinct was not to believe any of it, to reject it all. [...] Maybe, if she went about her business and acted as though she hadn't been listening, then later, when she sort of woke up again, she might find none of it had ever happened.

Then, out of nowhere, she smacked her husband over the head with a frozen leg of lamb she had grabbed from the freezer in what could be classified as heat of passion. All happened quite quickly, and shortly after he delivered the news. Regardless, the act of violence was caused by the reaction to those news. 

The rest of the story, after the killing, actually reads more like a tale of  revenge. At this point, Mary is no longer reacting in the heat of passion; she is actively concealing her crime, and trying to get away with it. She is now acting for herself, and it is clear to her now that this will be a struggle for survival for her and her child; the same two individuals that Patrick so callously planned to abandon.

The way Mary acts suggests more that she thinks of Patrick's death, not as a crime committed by her, but as an obstacle to her freedom. As such, she will ensure that he will not get in her way. Now she is actively getting rid of Patrick for a second time.

Mary creates and supports an alibi by going to the market, speaking to Sam there, and making sure that he learns that Patrick is at her house, waiting for his dinner. 

The man turned and reached up behind him on the shelf for the peas. "Patrick's decided he's tired and doesn't want to eat out tonight," she told him. [...] "Then how about meat, Mrs. Maloney?" "No, I've got meat, thanks. I got a nice leg of lamb from the freezer."

Then, she plans to get rid of the murder weapon: by feeding it to those who will come and investigate the crime. Third, she will ensure that the whole thing is gone, and so is any suspicion about her. 

The end shows that, to Mary, this has moved from being a sad moment to an interesting one. She giggles as they eat the lamb! She has clearly gotten away with everything, and she is quite pleased with her results. 

How did the founders embed the principles of the Constitution?

The Founding Fathers have embedded the principles of the Constitution. There were ways these principles were firmly put into the document. The concepts of separation of powers and checks and balances are intertwined throughout the Constitution. The Constitution goes to great lengths to specify that each branch of government has a different job to do than the other branches of government. They wanted to prevent any branch from getting too much power.

The Founding Fathers also wanted to be sure that no branch of government had too much power. Besides giving each branch a different job to do, the Founding Fathers gave each branch of government the power to limit the actions of other branches. For example, while Congress passes laws, the President can reject or veto them. Congress, however, can override the veto.

The Founding Fathers wanted it to be clear that the federal government and the federal laws take priority over the state government and the state laws. For example, statement governments can’t pass laws that go against federal laws. They also made it clear that the government gets its power from the people.

What are some examples of oxymorons in "Dulce et Decorum Est"?

One example of oxymoron used in "Dulce et Decorum Est" is found in the poem's pivotal event--the poison gas attack that leads to the death or incapacitation of the narrator's young comrade. As the shell hits, Owen describes an "ecstasy of fumbling" as the men struggle to don their protective gas masks. Another example of oxymoron is the phrase "smothering dreams," used to ask the reader to identify with the horrific scene he has just witnessed. Finally, and perhaps most powerfully, Owen employs the oxymoron "desperate glory." He says that the men who promoted the "old lie" that dying for one's country was "sweet and proper" to young men who wanted "desperate glory" would not feel that way if they had witnessed the scene he witnessed. Nothing in this poem is glorious. The men are miserable, slogging through mud and mire, and surrounded by death on a daily basis. These oxymorons are used to help deliver this point.

What are important objects in Gathering Blue?

Lowry describes five significant objects in Gathering Blue. These objects are described in detail and/or are referenced multiple times. Each of them has a symbolic meaning as well as being important to the plot and characterization in the novel.

Kira's walking stick appears early in the story. Because of Kira's congenital disability, she cannot walk without the aid of the stick she leans on. This object represents Kira's disability and her "otherness." She barely escaped infanticide--the normal consequence of disability in her culture. Yet her mother taught her that her pain made her strong, so ironically, the stick represents Kira's strength as well.

Kira's scrap of cloth that speaks to her and reflects her mood and warns her of danger is another important object. This little stitched square represents Kira's unique talent as an artist. It also shows her intuitive nature.

Kira's mother's pendant that Kira now wears around her neck anchors Kira to those who once loved her and protected her. Unlike most people in the village, Kira's parents seemed to truly love each other, and Kira's mother and grandfather protected Kira, not allowing the community to euthanize her as a baby. When Kira's father appears, wearing the matching necklace, Kira is able to identify him immediately. Though they have never met, they bond instantly, as represented by the matching pendants.

The singer's robe and the singer's staff are the other two important objects in the story. They are the reasons Kira and Thomas have been taken by the Council to live and work in the Edifice. They represent the life of the community, with its good qualities and bad qualities. They also represent the future since each has a blank portion which Kira and Thomas will fill when the time comes. 

These five objects further the plot and characterization of the story while acting as important symbols that reinforce the novel's themes.

What velocity is necessary to place a T.A.R.D.I.S. in a stable orbit 30,000 km above the surface of the Earth? (Considering gravitation) If the...

Since your question contains multiple parts, I will provide a detailed answer to part A and some guidance for parts B and C.

A)When the satellite is in a stable orbit, its speed is constant. The centripetal acceleration is equal `v^2/R` , where R is the radius of the orbit, and is provided by the gravitational force between the satellite and the Earth: `(GMm)/R^2` , where M and m are the masses of the Earth and the satellite, respectively, and G is the gravitational constant.

According to the second Newton's Law

`(GMm)/R^2 = m v^2/R`

From here, the speed of the satellite is

`v = sqrt((GM)/R)`

The values of G and M are given, and the radius of the orbit is the sum of the radius of the Earth and the altitude of the satellite:

`R = 6.371*10^6 + 3*10^7 = 36.371*10^6` m, or approximately `3.6*10^7` m.

So the speed needed to launch the satellite in the orbit with this radius is

`v = sqrt((6.674*10^(-11)*(5.972*10^24))/(3.6*10^7)) = 3.33*10^3 m/s`

B) The work that the engines of the satellite must exert in order to increase the altitude can be calculated as the difference of the values of the potential energy of the satellite at these altitude:

`W = U_1 - U_2 = (GMm)/R_1 - (GMm)/R_2` . Here, `R_1` is the radius of the original orbit calculated in part A, and `R_2` is the radius of the new orbit that can be calculated the same way, by adding the radius of the Earth to the new altitude.

C) The velocity of the satellite at the new altitude can be calculated using the same result as in part A, but for the radius of the new orbit:

`v = sqrt((GM)/R_2)` .

Hope this helps :)

What are the commonalities among these novels in relation to Nature, Realism and the Victorian Age. The novels are Wuthering Heights, Oliver Twist,...

The first thing to consider is that the Queen Victoria reigned from 1837 to 1901, in the second longest reign in English history, only recently surpassed by Queen Elizabeth II. This was a period of rapid social and technological change and the three novels you are investigating respond to rather different circumstances. The dates of publication of these novels are:

• 
  Oliver Twist 1837


• 
  Wuthering Heights 1847


• The Return of the Native 1878

In Oliver Twist, Dickens is writing about the life of an impoverished orphan (who actually turn out to a gentleman by birth). The novel was written as a critique of the Poor Laws and explores a theme common to many of the works of Dickens, namely urban poverty. This is classically mid-Victorian in its focus on the aftermath of the Industrial Revolution. Earlier forms of social welfare had been concentrated in the parish system, which was based on a rural agricultural economy and was simply overwhelmed by the rapid growth of the great industrial towns such as Manchester and Birmingham. In this novel, Dickens critiques the new system of workhouses. Even though its plot is melodramatic and filled with improbable coincidences, the minute descriptions of urban poverty add some elements of realism into the novel.

Wuthering Heights is not a realistic novel. In many ways, despite being written later than Oliver Twist, it is closer to the Gothic, with its dramatic use of nature and focus on romance and atmosphere; it is closer to the work of Radcliffe than of Dickens. It has a rural rather than urban setting and the protagonists are mainly members of the upper classes. The wildness of nature nature in the Yorkshire moors is used to introduce the theme of nature versus convention in human relationships. 

The Return of the Native, like Wuthering Heights, is set in a rural environment and focuses on romantic relationships. It also uses nature as an important theme, but is post-Darwinian and Naturalistic, seeing nature as determining the lives of humans, who no matter how much they may struggle against it, can never escape its harsh laws. It is classically Victorian in its theme of the "fallen woman". 

Lord of the Flies Why does Jack suddenly feel empowered to openly challenge Ralph and "the rules" (chapter 5)? Make sure to cite evidence from the...

When Ralph calls an assembly in chapter 5, he wants to get various issues of order resolved, especially keeping the fire going, but also issues of sanitation and work duties. Unfortunately, he calls the meeting late in the day, and in the darkness, his authority is less visible, so less respected.

Jack, fresh off the successful pig hunt, is feeling empowered. When the meeting starts to break down by discussing the fears of the littluns, Jack uses the confusion and chaos to step in and offer himself as a strong leader. He assures the boys that, as a hunter, he has been all around the island and has not seen a beast. He tells the children, "Of course we're frightened sometimes, but we put up with being frightened." When Jack thinks Ralph is favoring Piggy, his jealousy prompts him to lash out at Ralph and say, "Who are you, anyway? Sitting there telling people what to do. You can't hunt..." After Ralph reminds him of rules, he shouts, "Bullocks to the rules! We're strong--we hunt!" A combination of his success with hunting, the chaos caused by the littluns' fear, and his jealousy inspires Jack to rebel and challenge Ralph's leadership.

As to whether Jack really experiences fear, yes, he does. In chapter 3, Jack confesses to Ralph and Simon that sometimes when he is hunting, "you can feel as if you're not hunting but--being hunted, as if something's behind you all the time in the jungle." So although he may not have considered a beast from the ocean before this, nevertheless he actually is afraid himself. It appears that he was not as much using the littluns' fears as strategic manipulation but simply capitalized on them in the moment to advance himself. In addition, by promising to protect the rest of the boys from the "beast," he was bolstering his own courage with his bravado. 

There are several deaths in the novella. Which is most revealing and why? What death (including the mouse's) shows us about life back in the 1930's?

In Of Mice and Men, I think that the death of Candy's dog illustrates a great deal about the 1930s. 

The struggle to find work is significant to the time period in which Of Mice and Men takes place. The time period was filled with people who needed work and would move from place to place, searching for it.  People had to be "of use" in order to find such work.  If individuals were not of use, they were simply discarded.  The economic hardship that defined the time period rooted out those who were not useful, relegating them off to the margins to be forgotten.

Candy's dog used to be productive.  Candy describes him as the "best damn sheep dog."  There was a time when the dog used to contribute in an active and productive manner.  However, age has taken its toll on the dog and he now is a shell of what he once used to be.  Carlson is the most active in pointing out the uselessness of the dog.  He says the dog "don't enjoy nothin'" and how "He ain’t no good to you, Candy. An’ he ain’t no good to himself."  Even Slim says that Candy's dog lacks a utilitarian purpose:  "Carl’s right, Candy. That dog ain’t no good to himself. I wisht somebody’d shoot me if I get old an’ a cripple.”  In the world of the 1930s, when one loses their productivity and ability to work, they are of no use to anyone.

Candy's dog is taken outside and shot. His death is away from everyone else. Candy is the only one who remembers him.  Steinbeck writes of "the silence" that everyone in the bunkhouse experiences, but that only Candy feels. When Candy's dog is shot, it reminds us that the 1930s defined a person's ability to work as the most important reason for being in the world.  As seen with Candy's dog, when they lose this ability, they become expendable.   

What does Piggy symbolize? What does Simon symbolize?

The character of Piggy symbolizes intellect, science, innovation, rationality, and civility throughout the novel Lord of the Flies. Despite Piggy's physical weaknesses, he is by far the most intelligent boy on the island. He is the first to identify the conch and attempts to gather the names of all the boys. He is Ralph's advisor and is continually reminding Ralph about the importance of maintaining the signal fire and being rescued. He is also the voice of reason throughout the novel. Piggy is continually arguing against Jack's tyrannical ideas and offers unyielding support for Ralph despite his unpopularity. Piggy attempts to build a sundial and makes the suggestion to build the fire on the lower platform. These two innovations represent aspects of civilization, which Piggy clearly favors. Piggy attempts to deal with the identity of the beast pragmatically by searching for a scientific explanation. He concludes that the only thing the boys should fear is each other. Despite Piggy's support for civility, he becomes a victim of the savage nature of the boys when he is brutally murdered.

Simon symbolizes existential understanding and the inherent positive qualities humans possess. Simon displays selflessness, courage, and sympathy for others throughout the novel. He cares for the littluns by building them shelters and picking fruit for them. Simon even walks through the forest alone to let them know the status of the boys' expedition because no one else will go. He is the only boy on the island who truly understands the nature of the beast. He realizes that the beast is inside each individual and is the wickedness present in all human beings. Simon transcends rational thinking by concluding that the beast is an inherent quality that cannot be destroyed. He is portrayed as the "Christ-figure" throughout the novel, and his meeting with the Lord of Flies parallels Jesus' temptation in the wilderness. Before he can share the truth about the beast he is brutally beaten to death by the group of boys.

Is George a reasonable person? Why or why not?

George is a reasonable man.  There are a number of examples that show this. 

First, George  knows that Lennie is challenged socially.  So, he tells Lennie several times to say little or nothing.  He anticipates what others might think, and he plans for it.  So, when they go to see the boss, his advice to Lennie is: "Be silent."  This shows that George is aware of Lennie's deficiencies. 

Second, George also knows that something bad might happen.  So, he gives Lennie a plan to meet in a certain location if things do not work out.  Again this contingency plan shows that George is reasonable. 

Third, even when George has a dream of owning land, he has a plan.  He picked out land and started to save.  More importantly, he allows Candy to join them.  He knows that he needs his money to make this dream come true. 

Finally, when George shoots Lennie at the end of the story, this, too, shows that George is reasonable.  He knows that something worse will happen to Lennie, if he men find him first. So, his act was calculated, reasonable, and even filled with compassion. 

I need a quote from the book Of Mice and Men that describes why the American Dream is over.

When I read your question, the first quote that came to my mind is by Crooks.  To place it in context, he is in his little room on the night that all the other men have gone into town except Lennie and Candy and, of course, Curley's wife.  After Lennie accidentally reveals their master plan of getting their own little farm and living "off the fatta the lan'," Crooks denounces the whole idea with one of the saddest statements in the entire novel:

"You’re nuts." Crooks was scornful. "I seen hunderds of men come by on the road an’ on the ranches, with their bindles on their back an’ that same damn thing in their heads. Hunderds of them. They come, an’ they quit an’ go on; an’ every damn one of ‘em’s got a little piece of land in his head/ An’ never a God damn one of ‘em ever gets it. Just like heaven. Ever’body wants a little piece of lan’. I read plenty of books out here. Nobody never gets to heaven, and nobody gets no land. It’s just in their head. They’re all the time talkin’ about it, but it’s jus’ in their head."

What makes Crooks's outlook on George and Lennie's version of the American Dream even more tragic is that, for just a few minutes, he considered that he might possibly be a part of it.  He even offered to be a part of the Dream for free, saying he would work for nothing--a nod to a return to slavery on Crooks's part.  When Curley's wife reminds Crooks of his "place" in this microcosm of society by threatening to have him hanged, he quickly remembers that the hopes of having a place to call home is literally just a dream.

What are some famous quotes that support the theme "Money can't buy happiness?"

The short story The Gift of the Magi shows that money does not buy happiness.  Jim and Della think that money will buy each other's happiness at some level.  They both place great importance on buying a special and valuable gift.  They each make a sacrifice to buy gifts by selling the things most valuable to them.  Della sells her hair and Jim sells his pocket watch.  In the end, they both discover that their gifts cannot be used for each other.  Jim buys Della combs for her hair, which is now too short for them.  Della buys Jim a chain for his watch, which he no longer has.  They realize that their love and sacrifice is what matters most in the end.  It is love and happiness that brings them happiness, rather than the gifts they spent money on.

What is the name of the economic collapse that happened in the 1920's and 1930's and how did it lead to the rise of fascism?

The name for the economic collapse of the 1920's and 1930's was the Great Depression. The Great Depression occurred as overproduction of goods caused prices to fall in the United States. In response, manufacturers laid off workers which ultimately hurt the market for consumer and agricultural goods. The weaknesses in the United States economy came to a head on October 29, 1929, when the stock market crashed and the economy headed into deep recession.

Germany was crippled by the sanctions leveled against it by the Treaty of Versailles. World War I had plunged Germany into massive debt and the reparations from the treaty further harmed its economy. In response, they tried to solve their problems by printing more money. This effort resulted in massive inflation and rendered the German currency useless. American banks helped the Germans temporarily fix their economy with loans, but were no longer able to assist after the stock market crash. This caused further inflation and unemployment in Germany that the democratic government was unable to fix.

As a result of the economic despair that existed in Germany after World War I the people lost complete confidence in their new democracy. They looked for a strong leader with a plan for recovery. That leader was Adolf Hitler, a man that presented a brand of fascism known as Nazism. His oratory and organization skills convinced the German people that fascism would make Germany great again. Fascism in Germany and Italy developed as a response to the economic woes that existed in their respective nations.

If the island in Lord of the Flies is considered a character, what traits does the island possess?

There are many ways one could view the island in Lord of the Flies if it were to be considered a character. Two of those are that the island would be another littlun or that the island would be a permissive parent. 

The island and the littluns have much in common. Both are natural and operate on an instinctive level, without much or any rational thought. We might say that both start out with pure and innocent hearts. The littluns have no malice for anyone; they are content to eat and play. Simon finds a peaceful hideaway in the jungle that could be compared to the island's heart; it is a contented and sweet-smelling place representing the untouched innocence of nature. The island, just like each of the littluns, deserves to be appreciated just because it is a unique creation. When the Ralph, Jack, and Simon explore the island in chapter 1, they find a bushes with "candle buds." Ralph and Jack disparage the buds because they have no utilitarian value. "You could't light them," Ralph says, and "We can't eat them," says Jack. Yet Simon realizes they are special just because they are, and he names them. In the same way, the older boys tend to ignore the littluns and don't even learn their names because they don't contribute to the society. As the novel progresses, both the littluns and the island suffer at the hands of the older boys as they descend into savagery. At least one littlun is killed, and the others are taken over by Jack when he creates his own tribe. Similarly, the heart of the island, Simon's getaway, becomes corrupted by the boys when they place the pig's head on a stick next to it. Eventually, the boys use the island to carry out the murder of Piggy by rolling down a big rock on him. And at the end of the book, the island is in danger of being destroyed by fire from the boys. Although both the littluns and the island begin in innocence, they are sucked in and contaminated by the savagery of the older boys.

Another way of viewing the island as a character is to think of it as a permissive parent. It provides everything the boys need for their physical lives, but it provides no instruction or guidance to them with regard to their social or spiritual development. This absence of moral training creates a vacuum which can be filled by darkness and evil. Golding shows that children who are left to their own devices without moral guidance will descend into savagery. Parents who provide for a child's physical needs and ignore their moral training may find that moral depravity will eventually lead to the child's destruction. 

Depending on one's preference, the island could be a littlun or a permissive parent.

How does the narrator set the mood of the story in the first page of "A Christmas Memory?"

From the very beginning the mood is nostalgic, comforting, and even happy.

Nostalgic: we know this is a memory. The narrator says, :"Imagine a morning..." and "The person to whom she is speaking is me. I am seven years old..." and "we are each others' best friend." All of these tell us this is not only a remembrance, but a fond one. He is looking back on this memory with love.

Comforting: the story begins in a kitchen which features a large stove, two rocking chairs, and a roaring fire. This sounds cozy and comfortable. Much of the story takes place here and the mood of the story is comforting. 

Happy: His friend proclaims that it is "fruitcake weather!" and we instantly feels as though we have something to look forward to, just as the characters do. The characters of Buddy and his friend are generally happy and this mood is set from the beginning.

There's a question in my homework on That Was Then, This is Now that asks how has Bryon's feelings toward Cathy changed? And why? I answered he...

I think that Bryon's change towards Cathy reflects the challenges of growing up in That Was Then, It Was Now.

Let's start off by tracing what might be Bryon's feelings towards Cathy.  We know that he does have strong feelings for Cathy.  These feelings cause him to become different than Mark.  One way he is different than Mark is because he develops empathy.  An example of this would be how he feels bad for M&M, something Mark does not feel.  The feelings that Bryon feels for Cathy play a large part in his separation from Mark.  

When Bryon has to call the police on Mark, it represents one of the most difficult things he has to do.  He is filled with guilt over what he has done.  As a result, he is not entirely certain that he has done the right thing.   When he testifies against Mark, it cuts the bond between them and Mark will never be able to forgive Bryon.  

Bryon's feelings towards Cathy have helped him develop an emotional identity that he did not have before.  However, as a result of these feelings, he has broken off from the life he once knew.  In many ways, Bryon breaks up with Cathy "to get even for Mark."  Perhaps, we can make the argument that he breaks up with Cathy as a way to show some loyalty to Mark, while he struggles with the fact that he committed the greatest act of disloyalty by turning him in.  

As you can see, little is clear here. Growing up is shown in a very complex manner.  I would say that Bryon still has feelings for Cathy, but he cannot bring himself to loving her because of the pain he harbors for what he has done to his brother.  In this case, hurt is stronger than love.  The emotions he felt for Cathy played a major role in why he did what he did to Mark, so continuing to feel love for her is like a further act of betrayal against Mark.  Feelings like happiness and joy are in the past for Bryon, representative of the "that was then, this is now" idea in his life.

How is the theme of discovery developed in Poe's "The Tell Tale Heart"?

Poe's story is about secrets -- secret feelings, and secret deeds. So, if we think about discovery as "finding" something, in a way the story is about the fear of being "found out" or discovered. There are many examples of this in the story. From the beginning, we as readers are put in the position of having already "found out" something about the narrator -- the narrator is addressing us, and the story begins in mid-conversation, as if we already have discovered his madness: "Why do you say that I am mad?" In the part of the story where he looks in on the old man in the night, the narrator is specifically trying to avoid detection or discovery -- "He could not guess that every night, just at twelve, I looked in at him as he slept." But it is the night that he is detected in the dark, looking down at the old man, and his "discovery" in the faint gleam of the lamp of the old man's "vulture eye" -- that actually causes th narrator to murder him. The secret of of the murder must be concealed -- the body of the old man is hacked up and hidden under the floorboards -- but the secret cannot be concealed from the police for long. It is the narrator himself who makes the discovery of the body for the police -- the hallucinatory sound of the beating heart driving him to do it. Perhaps the particular nature of the narrator's madness is a morbid need to reveal all his secrets -- the deeper the secret, the greater the need for discovery.

How does the beginning of "The Pit and the Pendulum" contribute to the meaning of the story?

The opening scene of Poe's "The Pit and the Pendulum" unfolds in a surreal fever dream. The masterful first sentence tells the reader a great deal of back-story with great economy.

"I was sick - sick unto death with that long agony; and when they at length unbound me, and I was permitted to sit, I felt that my senses were leaving me."

The unnamed narrator had been tortured to the point of being disassociated from himself - as if he sees himself within a vivid and horrible movie. His description of the black robed judges, their thin white lips speaking yet he hears nothing, the tall flickering candles at first seeming like angels to him, confirm that he is on the edge of madness.

This opening scene emotionally sets the reader up for the tone of greater horror and torture that will follow. It is as if the reader descends into the pit along with the narrator of the story - and feels the overwhelming hopelessness there. With this technique of creating the mood at the beginning, then drawing the reader deeper into it, Poe makes the horror palpable to the reader, who shares in the narrator's torture, and doesn't just observe it happening.

Despite his own adversity, Ponyboy's life was still preferable to many of the other characters' lives. Do you agree? This is an essay prompt.

Your first step on this essay is to have an opinion on Ponyboy's life.  If you agree, write about that.  If you disagree that his life is better, then write about that.  If you really, truly have no opinion on Ponyboy's life, you can still answer the question.  If that is the case, then choose whichever option you think will be easier to defend.  You don't have to agree or disagree with what you write as long as you can defend it.  It helps if you believe what you are writing in, but it is not necessary.  

I recommend defending that his life is better than other characters' lives.  He is the main "hero" character, so it is easier to see him as a positive character rather than a negative character.  You could easily make the case that Pony's life is better than Johnny's life.  Granted, Ponyboy's parents are dead, but Johnny's parents are abusive dead beats.  At least Ponyboy's brothers clearly love him.  Additionally, Johnny is a walking, talking case of post traumatic stress disorder.  If somebody claps too loud, Johnny is reaching for a knife.  The Socs beat him and scared him badly, and Johnny hasn't been the same since.  

You could also argue that Ponyboy's life is better than Darry's life too.  They are brothers, so their quality of life isn't that much different, but the pressures of life are so much greater for Darry.  Because the Curtis brothers' parents are dead, raising the family has fallen on Darry.  That's a huge responsibility for somebody of his age.  He's barely keeping it all together.  Ponyboy has none of those pressures.  

What happens when the church sends a delegation to talk to Mr. Hooper?

When the church sends a delegation to talk to Mr. Hooper, the 'deputation' are so intimidated by the awe-inspiring spectacle of their preacher in a black veil, that nothing of any substance is accomplished. None of the church members dare to bring up the subject of their minister's veil when they come before him. The minister knows why they are there but does not venture to make the task easier for his constituents; he neither prompts them nor invites them to confide their concerns to him. The delegation members think that it would have been far easier to address the issue if the minister had not been wearing the veil. As far as they can see, his veil symbolizes an impediment to honest discourse.

They find their courage shrinking as they sit before him in a confused daze. The veil seems to speak of a chasm between their minister's heart and theirs. With a healthy amount of superstitious dread, they eventually decide that it would be far better to send higher church officials to deal with the minister himself. Accordingly, they return to the congregation and pronounce the matter beyond their power to remedy.

In the novel Monster by Walter Dean Myers, how is Steve Harmon considered the protagonist and antagonist of the story?

In literature, the protagonist is considered the central figure of the story and is also the character which moves the narrative forward. The antagonist is the character that opposes the protagonist and causes conflict throughout the story. In the novel Monster by Walter Dean Myers, Steve Harmon could be considered both the protagonist and antagonist. The novel is told through Steve Harmon's perspective, and he tells the story of his trial for felony murder. Since Steve is the main character, he is the novel's protagonist. However, Steve Harmon puts himself in a compromising position in the novel by agreeing to participate in the robbery of a drugstore. Steve made a conscience decision to participate in a crime which landed him in jail, where he is on trial for his life. Since Steve made a decision that essentially harmed himself, he could be considered an antagonist. Steve also struggles to make sense of his morals and decisions throughout the novel. Steve is his own enemy because it was his decision to associate with thugs and agree to help in the robbery. 

How are the men alerted that a gas attack is coming in Chapter 4 of All Quiet on the Western Front?

In Chapter 4 of All Quiet on the Western Front, the men fall into several attacks, and by the time gas is used, the men are in a graveyard.  All along, Kat has been having premonitions about oncoming attacks, and he does so again.  Paul has collided with a dead body from one of the bombed graves, and then Kat shakes him and yells that gas is being used so that Paul can put on his mask.  The men then signal by mouth to each other that gas is being used in the attack.  Eventually, a bell sounds amid the noise of shellfire, indicating the use of gas so that everyone can put on his mask: 

A bell sounds between the explosions, gongs, and metal clappers warning everyone--Gas--Gas--Gas.

The gas from the shells covers the ground, forcing the men who have gone underground to come back to the surface.  Paul notes that the first few minutes with the mask could be the difference between life and death, so the bell indicating the attack is crucial.

In what ways are hips "scientific" in The House on Mango Street?

Esperanza feels like she woke up one morning and all of a sudden had hips. When discussing this with her friends Rachel and Lucy, they tell her hips are good for holding babies while cooking and "turning the jump rope a little quicker" (49). Lucy says hips are for dancing. But Esperanza, the brain, would rather have a more scientific explanation for what is happening to her body. She asks the college girl, Alicia, for her opinion.

Esperanza learns from Alicia that the bones "let you know which skeleton was a man's when it was a man and which a woman's" (50). In addition, Esperanza claims that hips "bloom like roses" because the bones just happen to open up one day so a girl can have babies. It makes sense because babies need room to grow inside of their mothers. Rachel reminds Esperanza not to have too many babies "or your behind will spread," which is evident in most of the women who have had babies on Mango Street--especially her own mother.

Granted, these little girls have limited resources when discussing the science behind the changes that are going on in their bodies; but, at least this shows how Esperanza seeks education and knowledge rather than limiting herself only to old wives tales.

Why did Prospero choose one thousand people from his court not the rest of the people in his kingdom in "The Masque of Red Death"?

Prospero chose courtiers instead of ordinary citizens to go into seclusion with him because he was selfish and arrogant.

When the Red Death attacked his kingdom, Prospero did not do anything.  He waited until half of his people were dead, and then went into seclusion with one thousand of his closest friends.

When his dominions were half depopulated, he summoned to his presence a thousand hale and light-hearted friends from among the knights and dames of his court, and with these retired to the deep seclusion of one of his castellated abbeys. 

Prospero was “sagacious” but also selfish.  He wanted to have a big party. He invited his courtiers, or the wealthy and important people of the kingdom, because he deemed them worthy.  He really did not care about the rest of the people in his kingdom.  He did nothing to prevent them from dying.

The abbey was amply provisioned. With such precautions the courtiers might bid defiance to contagion. The external world could take care of itself. In the meantime it was folly to grieve, or to think. The prince had provided all the appliances of pleasure. 

The Red Death killed incredibly quickly.  It was a terrible death, but fortunately a quick one.  Still, people were contagious and the disease spread fast.  The people locked up in the castle could not escape it.  Eventually, death comes even to the rich.  Prospero and his friends found that out the hard way.

Prospero cared nothing for the ordinary people in his kingdom.  If he was a good ruler, he would have done everything he could to stop the spread of the disease.  He also should have helped the suffering.  Instead, he put himself above them, and did not care a bit about their deaths.  He paid for his arrogance and so did those who followed him in his folly.  The abbey was nothing but a delusion and an illusion of safety.

What were the perspectives of the war to the merchants of Halifax?

Halifax was an important center for shipping during World War II.  As the largest Canadian city on the East Coast of the country, Halifax sent exports and received imports.  Merchants sending and receiving goods were faced with challenges due to the presence of German U-boats in the Atlantic Ocean.  Tensions were high among those in the shipping industry during the War Years.  Due to increased numbers of sunken ships, the Canadian Royal Navy took over merchant ships.  Still, ships were torpedoed at high rates.  In the year 1942, "the Allies lost—on average—one 10,000-ton ship every 10 hours for 31 straight days" in the Atlantic Ocean.  Of these, "fifty-eight Canadian-registered merchant ships were sunk by enemy or probable enemy action."  Severe supply shortages led to rationing.  These shortages made the loss of precious cargo even more dire.  Exports from Canada out of Halifax became increasingly important as the war dragged on and the Allies in Europe suffered.  Exports to the Allies in Europe were important, as "25,343 ships sailed from North America to Britain, carrying more than 180 million tons of military and civilian supplies, and thousands of other voyages occurred elsewhere. A 10,000-ton merchant ship could carry enough food to feed 225,000 people for a week."  

With the Navy takeover of merchant ships, Halifax merchants experienced less control than they had previously had.  Sunken ships also meant lost cargo and therefore profits.  Their perspective on the war was overall a negative one.  Though the merchants were consistently shipping goods, the loss of control and cargo led them to look forward to the end of the war.

How does Bradford's analysis of the events relate to the purpose of the book History of Plymouth Plantation?

To answer this question we need to carefully consider the purpose of William Bradford's History of Plymouth Plantation. This book is generally thought of as a history of life in early colonial New England. Because it is the only work of it's kind to address this time and place, it is usually studied in school as an example of colonial literature and an important historical document. However, we need to keep in mind that students, especially high school students, are typically exposed to only a small portion of the book.

The oft-used high school textbook Elements of Literature—Fifth Course has only excerpts from Chapters 9 and 11 of the book. Entirely omitted is the story of the Puritans in Holland and England prior to their journey to America. This part of the book, which covers about 14 years of Puritan history, details their difficulties in finding a place to worship. By the time the finally reach the New England shore in September, 1620, they have already faced many hardships and deprivations.

Bradford's purpose is not so much to illustrate an important aspect of America's origin and development, but to show how the Puritans are working in accordance with God's will to establish a Godly settlement in which they can live according to their own beliefs.

We see this religious emphasis in Bradford's interpretation of events. When relating the fate of a particularly unlikable non-Puritan sailor, Bradford writes:

But it pleased God before they came half seas over, to smite this young man with a grievous disease, of which he died in a desperate manner.

Bradford attributes the death of the sailor to God's vengeance. In fact, just about everything is attributed to God's will in one way or another. It is entirely natural for Bradford and the Puritans to look at life this way, so we see quite a few similar instances throughout History of Plymouth Plantation. Bradford wants to show the that the Plymouth colony has successfully fulfilled God's plan.  

What more do we learn about Aunt Alexandra after Atticus and Calpurnia leave?

Aunt Alexandra hosts a missionary tea party in chapter 24. During these missionary teas the women discuss how they can help others in the community to behave more like Christians--especially those in the black community. After the business is discussed, it's customary for the hostess to invite her neighbors over for refreshments. This means that everyone is over at the Finch's when Atticus comes home early from work. He goes straight to the kitchen to find Calpurnia because he needs her to accompany him to Helen Robinson's house to inform her of her husband's death.

After Atticus and Calpurnia leave, both Scout and Aunt Alexandra are overwhelmed with the situation. In the next room, the women are talking disrespectfully about the Robinson family and indirectly criticising Atticus for defending Tom in the recent trial. Scout is trembling and Aunt Alexandra says the following:

"I can't say I approve of everything he does, Maudie, but he's my brother, and I just want to know when this will ever end. . . It tears him to pieces. He doesn't show it much, but it tears him to pieces. I've seen him when--what else do they want from him Maudie, what else?" (236).

The above passage helps us to learn that even though Alexandra seems to be this tough and strict woman, she is at her wits end with the stress and strain that the Tom Robinson case has placed on Atticus and the whole family. Miss Maudie gives Aunt Alexandra a pep talk about how Atticus was the only man who could have pulled off that trial the way he did. Then she tells her to pull herself together and get back out there to her guests. Aunt Alexandra does so gracefully and Scout is so impressed that she says the following:

"Aunt Alexandra looked across the room at me and smiled. She looked at a tray of cookies on the table and nodded at them. I carefully picked up the tray and watched myself walk to Mrs. Merriweather. With my best company manners, I asked her if she would have some. After all, if Aunty could be a lady at a time like this, so could I" (237).

Scout learns that Aunt Alexandra is prone to a meltdown once in awhile, but she will also pick herself up quickly and get back out there in the end. Aunt Alexandra has strengths and weaknesses like the rest of them, but she will always choose to be a lady in the end.

What are some descriptions and examples of the innocent youth archetype in literature?

The innocent, or the youth, is typically naïve, honest, and morally upright.  The innocent plays a large role in helping others to maintain their course; they encourage and inspire others when despair kicks in, and their unwavering optimism is their greatest weapon.  This is in contrast to other characters who are weighed down with the burdens of life (consider the difference between a happy child and a cynical adult who has faced loss and other extreme challenges – their outlooks on life will be polarized).

However, the innocent’s naivete is also their greatest curse, and can lead to gullibility; they are easily taken advantage of.  They can be so idealistic as to deny the realities around them, and may rely on others to a damaging extent.  As with all archetypes they have positive and negative qualities, which can be assets, or can get them into trouble, depending on the context and the characters they interact with.

Good examples of the innocent from literature are Dorothy from The Wizard of Oz, Peregrin Took from The Lord of the Rings, and Tiny Tim from A Christmas Carol.  Buddy from the movie Elf is another perfect example, as well as Prim from the Hunger Games series.

Helen Keller is an inspiration for disabled persons. Explain in terms of her autobiography, "The Story of My Life."

The name Helen Keller is synonymous with persistence, determination and an indomitable spirit. In "The Story of My Life," the reader gets a glimpse of the highs and lows of the first twenty-two years of Helen's difficult life, Helen having being left blind and deaf after an illness as a baby. She is an inspiration to many people, whether disabled or not, because she exhibits a strength of character that ensures that everyone who hears or reads about her is moved by the extent of her unwavering belief in potential and the need to "learn from life itself" (chapter 7). The fact that Helen Keller recognizes that she can help others, despite her own immense challenges, is testament to her self-awareness and complete selflessness.  

Disabled people may have more opportunities than they did at the end of the nineteenth and early twentieth century (and Helen Keller contributed to that improved perception of disabled people), but they still struggle for acceptance and for independence. Helen Keller proves that anything is possible and her autobiography also reveals that Helen has disappointments and challenges but her attitude is such that giving up is never an option.

As a child, she has fears and experiences such as the storm, the ocean and The Frost King incident, all of which impact her life. Helen says in chapter 14, "No child ever drank deeper of the cup of bitterness than I did." Yet, Helen maintains that such an experience "may have done me good."

She works hard to get to Radcliffe, and never wains in her appreciation for the dedication of Annie Sullivan in helping Helen achieve her dreams. Helen's "fixed purpose" hopefully inspires disabled people to set goals and then try to achieve them, even if those dreams and ambitions need to be amended along the way. Helen certainly proves, that by being open-minded and having aspirations, anything is possible.

Helen received many awards during her lifetime for her dedication to the upliftment of disabled persons, and using her influence, she tirelessly campaigned for the rights of disabled people, helping to transform the environment into a more engaging and promising one for disabled people.  

What is the equation formed when copper sulphate is added to water?

When copper sulfate (CuSO4) reacts with water (H2O), the product is still copper sulfate. However, it is the hydrated form of the salt and has 5 water molecules. Thus, the product is called copper sulfate pentahydrate. The relevant chemical reaction is:

`CuSO_4 + 5H_2O -> CuSO_4 .5H_2O`

Thus, copper sulfate reacts with water in a 1:5 ratio and the product is copper sulfate pentahydrate. 

The anhydrous Copper sulfate salt is pale green in color, whereas the hydrated salt, copper sulfate pentahydrate is blue in color. Copper sulfate has several applications in industry and research. It is toxic to microorganisms and is commonly used to kill them. For example, rain water harvesting systems are cleaned with a solution of copper sulfate before the first rain, to ensure no biological contamination of water supplies.

Hope this helps. 

What do we study in political theory, and why should we study it?

Political theory is the study of the philosophy and history of political thought. It includes the study of topics such as law, justice, and rights. Political theory is concerned with questions of ethics and legitimacy, such as: how should we govern? How should different social groups relate to each other? What is justice? Political theory is distinct from (but closely related to) political science. Whereas political science is the empirical study of how governments actually operate, political theory is more concern with the question of how governments ought to operate.

We should study political theory because it's important to think about how we ought to govern. Political theory is a way for us to examine the history of political thought, and our current assumptions and ideas. We can learn how these assumptions and ideas arise from an entire history of political thought. By learning about how contemporary political ideas arise, we can critically examine them, and improve upon them.  

Why does the narrator call the lawyer an "unhappy man" in "The Bet"??

There is an omniscient third-person narrator telling the tale, but he does not call the lawyer an "unhappy man." The narrator, who is telling the story through the banker's point of view, has the banker call the lawyer an unhappy man. The omniscient third-person narrator is quoting the banker. The exact words are as follows.

"Think better of it, young man, while there is still time. To me two million is a trifle, but you are losing three or four of the best years of your life. I say three or four, because you won't stay longer. Don't forget either, you unhappy man, that voluntary confinement is a great deal harder to bear than compulsory. The thought that you have the right to step out in liberty at any moment will poison your whole existence in prison. I am sorry for you."

The story was originally written in Russian, and we are reading one of several English translations of Chekhov's story. The Russian word that is translated here as "unhappy" must have had a slightly different meaning. The banker seems to be saying, "You unlucky man," or "You unfortunate man," or even "You misguided man."

The banker himself regrets getting involved in this fantastic bet. He will have to keep the lawyer a prisoner on his own estate and will be aware of his presence and his presumed suffering every day. He wants to get out of the bet, but he is too proud to ask to be let off himself. Instead, he is trying to persuade the lawyer, a younger man, to call the bet off. Obviously the banker is telling him, in so many words, that all he has to do is ask to be released and the banker will immediately forget the bet was ever made.

In calling the lawyer an "unhappy man," the banker is "projecting." He is comparing the lawyer with himself. The banker is an extrovert, as is shown by his holding a big party and by his ostentatious display of his material possessions. He does not realize he is dealing with a different type of character. The lawyer must be an introvert. Once he becomes a prisoner, he immediately sets to work to make himself comfortable in his solitude. He orders a piano and learns to play it. He orders six hundred books over the years and learns a number of foreign languages in order to read them. The banker is the kind of man who would go completely crazy in solitary confinement, which is why he already considers the lawyer an "unhappy man"; but the lawyer adjusts to his imprisonment without any apparent difficulty.

Like anything else, like quitting smoking for example, the first days must be the hardest. But solitude might become natural after a certain term, at least for some types of people. Henry David Thoreau wrote in Walden:

I find it wholesome to be alone the greater part of the time. To be in company, even with the best, is soon wearisome and dissipating. I love to be alone. I never found the companion that was so companionable as solitude. We are for the most part more lonely when we go abroad among men than when we stay in our chambers. A man thinking or working is always alone, let him be where he will.

In the end, ironically, it appears to be the banker who is the unhappy man. The lawyer is not necessarily happy, but he has achieved something like nirvana. He feels spiritually enlightened and content.

What type of communication strategies can be used to address an audience comprising both physically impaired people and healthy people combined...

Physical disabilities can influence people's interests and their abilities to take in information. Communication strategies that address both realities are most effective. 

Physical impairments can strongly influence how someone gains access to information. For example, a person who is hearing impaired may not get much from a lecture while a person who is visually impaired might struggle to understand concepts that are presented in a visual diagram. Fortunately, with technology these issues can be overcome. The concept of Universal Design for Learning (cast.org) helps communicators develop multi-faceted ways of presenting information so that all audience members can access it. 

A live presenter can leverage visual image and sound so that all information is presented in both media. Using a sign interpreter can help with people who understand sign; providing text in the form of notes can help with those who cannot hear a lecture well enough to understand it but do not use sign. Providing audible descriptions of visual images can help people who have visual impairments. The point of Universal Design for Learning is that these accommodations assist audience members with obvious physical disabilities, but they can also benefit people without disabilities through making the information clearer. 

A good communicator knows his or her audience--their interests and their motivations. People with disabilities vary greatly, as do people without disabilities, although having a disability might make certain presentations less attractive to some people. A person who is blind from birth may not be interested in the history of painting and might need some extra reasons why this topic might be important to him or her. Effective communication requires the presenter to build a bridge between the audience and the topic. 

What is the symbolism of the playground ("the slide would not hold him")? in Ender's Game Ch. 7 Salamander

Ender and the other students in battle school are only children. At the very start of the chapter Graff and another commander discuss how the training is impacting the children. Ender's inability to participate in the playground represents his loss of childhood innocence due to the hardships he has been forced to endure for the sake of his training. The children view him with hostility, since those above him have always forced him to be at odds with other kids. Like any other child, Ender craves affection and fun with other children. He is constantly looking for a sense of peace, perhaps for a simpler life after the war is over, but this scene suggests that the changes he has faced through the process might make it impossible for him to ever be a child again. He has been pushed into a violent adulthood. 

What is an example of imagery "The Cask of Amontillado"?

As a literary device, imagery is: "descriptive language that can function as a way for the reader to better imagine the world of the piece of literature and also add symbolism to the work. Imagery draws on the five senses, namely the details of taste, touch, sight, smell, and sound. Using imagery helps the reader develop a more fully realized understanding of the imaginary world that the author has created." (literarydevices.com)

Essentially this means that the author is describing a scene very well, and the reader can visualize it. Edgar Allan Poe does this in two ways in "The Cask of Amontillado." First, he has the narrator himself describe visuals. For instance, the description of Fortunado:

"The man wore motley. He had on a tight-fitting parti-striped dress, and his head was surmounted by the conical cap and bells."

Or the descriptions of the dungeons:

"I took from their sconces two flambeaux, and giving one to Fortunato, bowed him through several suites of rooms to the archway that led into the vaults. I passed down a long and winding staircase, requesting him to be cautious as he followed. We came at length to the foot of the descent, and stood together upon the damp ground of the catacombs of the Montresors."

The second way Poe uses imagery is when he has the characters themselves describe things. For instance, the narrator Montresor tells his enemy how cold and damp the vaults will be, saying: "'The vaults are insufferably damp. They are encrusted with nitre.'"

Later, Montresor continues to describe to Fortunado how the catacombs are infested with damp and mold:

"'It is farther on,' said I; 'but observe the white web-work which gleams from these cavern walls.'"

These are examples of imagery in "The Cask of Amontillado" through both the narrator and the characters' dialogue.

How is the constitution still relevant to my career in business?

The US Constitution sets the legal setting in which all American businesses are based. It is relevant because you know that Congress can levy taxes, regulate interstate commerce, and negotiate treaties such as trade deals. Relevant for business, it also gives the executive branch (president) the power to establish the Treasury Department and other departments. It also establishes an independent judiciary, giving a constitutional justification for any legal disputes a business may find itself in. Finally, it clarifies what role the states have in regulating business and commerce.

Really, any regulation in the US has its legal roots in the Constitution. Whether that be complex banking regulations, anti-trust laws, how to settle copyright disputes, or declaring bankruptcy, any business action that involves the government involves the Constitution on some level.

How does Crooks react to Lennie when he comes to visit?

Crooks' bunk is in the harness room, separate from the bunks of the other men. He is segregated because he is black. This segregation manifests in other ways. Since he feels ostracized, Crooks has developed a justifiably indignant demeanor. If he can not share the same space and activities as the other men, he feels more inclined to be guarded and protective of his own space: 

This room was swept and fairly neat, for Crooks was a proud, aloof man. He kept his distance and demanded that other people keep theirs. 

Given Crooks' perspective on the white/black issue, it is not surprising that when Lennie comes to visit, Crooks wants him to leave immediately. Crooks has no idea that Lennie is simple, honest, and in no way interested in the black/white issue. He simply wants to see a puppy. Lennie asks why Crooks isn't wanted by the other men. Crooks responds: 

’Cause I’m black. They play cards in there, but I can’t play because I’m black. They say I stink. Well, I tell you, you all of you stink to me. 

Despite Crooks' aloof demeanor, Lennie's smile wins Crooks over and he invites Lennie to sit. Crooks toys with Lennie, suggesting the possibility that George might leave him. This seems vindictive but Crooks is actually trying to get Lennie (or just someone) to understand what it is like to be black, segregated, and alone in a different sense. Crooks lets up when Lennie gets scared and is nicer towards him. When Candy joins them, they all find a common hope in the farm, but Curley's wife disrupts this camaraderie when she joins the conversation. 

Why was the killing of Harrison Bergeron so significant? Did Harrison have to die for the sake of the society?

Harrison Bergeron was born strong and beautiful in a world which is defined by weakness, ugliness, and stupidity. In the society's quest for equality, they have chosen to use handicaps and masks to reduce these qualities to the lowest level across the population. This is done to eliminate competition and jealousy.

George presents society's argument in his conversation with Hazel about removing some metal balls from his handicap bag.

If I tried to get away with it, ... then other people'd get away with it-and pretty soon we'd be right back to the dark ages again, with everybody competing against everybody else. You wouldn't like that, would you?

In this light, inequality leads to competition, and society would "fall apart."

Harrison Bergeron questions that idea. By removing his handicaps and those of the ballerina, he attempts to subvert the idea of equality that society proposes. Their beauty and grace suggest that inequality is more than competition. This idea completely undermines society, which is completely built around the idea of forced equality.

Bergeron must die because he cannot and will not be handicapped, and he encourages others to remove their restraints. His rebellion is not only a threat to authority, but also a display of the possible advantages to inequality. If one person is better than everyone else, society is no longer equal. Killing him is essential to ensure that everyone remains equal.

In the novel To Kill A Mockingbird, what does Tom Robinson say during his testimony that contributes to a guilty verdict?

In Chapter 19, Tom Robinson takes the witness stand and describes his background and interactions with Mayella Ewell. Atticus begins by questioning Tom as to why he was convicted of disorderly conduct. Tom explains that he got into a fight with a man and went to jail because he couldn't pay the fine. Then, Atticus asks Tom if he's ever spoken to Mayella before, and Tom admits that he has. He explains that Mayella asked him to help her with many chores and that he frequently offered his assistance when she asked. Tom tells Atticus that he was never paid for his services and refused to take a nickel from her. Later on, Mr. Gilmer cross-examines Tom and asks him why he went out of his way to help Mayella without excepting any type of payment. Tom says, "I felt right sorry for her, she seemed to try more'n the rest of 'em---" (Lee 264) Scout mentions that "the damage was done" and that nobody liked Tom's answer. In 1930s Alabama, a black man feeling sorry for a white person was unthinkable. Tom's answer was taboo, and the jury viewed him with contempt because of it. By telling the prosecutor he felt bad for Mayella, Tom hurt his chances of being acquitted and was eventually found guilty.

In the novel Lord of the Flies, who are three people who lead the boys on the island to destruction?

I feel that the littlun with the mulberry-colored birthmark is responsible for the destruction of the boys because he perpetuates fear amongst them. In Chapter Two, the littlun with the mulberry-colored birthmark asks Ralph what he is going to do about the "snake-thing." The littlun claims that the "beastie" came in the dark and will return that night. Ralph denies the existence of any "beastie" and dismisses it as just a nightmare. However, mentioning the "beastie" initiates fear throughout the group of boys. One of the many themes throughout the novel deals with how irrational fear can result in the collapse of reason, structure, and morality. The boys become plagued by the fear of an unknown beast, and take drastic measures to feel safe. Jack uses this fear to boost the status of his hunters as "protectors," and Simon loses his life after being mistaken for the beast. This fear gradually possesses each of the children and drives the majority of the boys towards savagery.

Jack is obviously instrumental in leading the boys towards destruction. Jack usurps power and persuades the majority of the boys to join his tribe. Jack's tribe encourages violence, savagery, and immorality. Jack is indirectly responsible for the deaths of Simon and Piggy, and attempts to murder Ralph. Jack is a heartless tyrant who has no regard for morals or authority. The boys who follow Jack are brainwashed and become barbarians who value violence and carnal passions.

Samneric are partially responsible for the destruction of the boys on the island. They abandon the fire, which goes out, as a ship passes the island. The ship could have possibly rescued the boys. If the boys were rescued, then Simon and Piggy would still be alive, and they would not have descended into barbarism. They also claim that they saw the beast, which was actually a dead paratrooper, and are indirectly responsible for Simon's death. After they tell the news of the beast's existence, the frenzied boys mistake Simon as the beast coming out of the forest and brutally murder him.

From Lois Lowry's The Giver, what are some examples of man vs. society?

The conflict of man vs. society can also mean the difference between an individual's preferences or choices pitted against the values or traditions of a community or government. A dystopian society usually suppresses the individual's desire to express one's self through passion, choice, or preference--which is is exactly how Jonas's world is run.

From the very beginning, children are deposited with parental units who are not their birth parents. This limits personal bonding to allow caregivers to make objective choices in favor of society's goals rather than the family's. If there is ever a question of loyalty between family and society, for example, it would be easy to tell a child that community is even more important from family simply from the objective structure of the family. 

Additionally, children are brought up to comply to strict rules of social behavior, such as being articulate and accurate with one's wording. Joking around or using sarcasm is frowned upon, as Jonas discovers in the following passage when he jokes around with the community's word for punishment which is "released":

"Even the children were scolded if they used the term lightly at play, jeering at a teammate who missed a catch or stumbled in a race. Jonas had done it once, had shouted at his best friend, 'That's it, Asher! You're released!' when Asher's clumsy error had lost a match for his team. He had been taken aside for a brief and serious talk by the coach, had hung his head with guilt and embarrassment, and apologized to Asher after the game" (3).

Finally, a group of elders decides what type of life a child will lead by the time he or she turns twelve. This practice denies people the satisfaction of making and fulfilling personal goals. Of course the job each person gets is based on each person's aptitude and talents, so there is a chance one might like the job; but, the fact remains that the freedom of choice in this area is ultimately taken away from the individual. The Giver explains to Jonas that the community decided to give up differences in order to be happy. He explains it as follows:

"Our people made that choice, the choice to go to Sameness. Before my time, before the previous time, back and back and back. We relinquished color when we relinquished sunshine and did away with differences. . . We gained control of many things. But we had to let go of other"(95).

The main conflict arises as Jonas's individuality emerges along with his social awareness in a very community-driven society. He has to make a choice whether to go along with a society that tells everyone to take pills to suppress passionate feelings, how much food to eat each day, and what type of life each person should live. 

What is Jerry's mother's parenting style in "Through the Tunnel"?

Jerry's mother attempts to parent her eleven-year-old son by giving him an appropriate amount of freedom and allowing him to grow, but she also wants to keep him close in order to protect him. When he tacitly expresses his desire to go to a beach that seems more "wild" than their typical spot, the narrator says, 

She was thinking, Of course he's old enough to be safe without me. Have I been keeping him too close? He mustn't feel he ought to be with me. I must be careful [....]. She was determined to be neither possessive nor lacking in devotion. She went worrying off to her beach.

Even though she clearly still has concerns about his safety and his ability to make good choices, her anxiety about inadvertently making him feel obligated to her and her desire to give him enough independence overrides these concerns. Her anxiety is warranted, though, because Jerry clearly does feel a sense of obligation to her, possibly the result of his being the "man in the family" since his father has died. In considering whether to leave her alone and go off by himself, he feels "that unfailing impulse of contrition - a sort of chivalry [...], feeling it unbearable that she should go [on] by herself." Moreover, her concern about his safety and ability to make good choices is warranted as well because, one might argue, Jerry's decision to swim through the tunnel is not a sound one. 

In the end, Jerry's mother seems like the typical parent: torn between giving her child the freedom she knows he needs in order to learn how to function in the world, and keeping him close in order to protect him from the world.  Her parenting style reflects this internal conflict.

Does imperialism still exist in modern form and if so, what form does it take?

Imperialism does still exist in the modern world, but it is somewhat different than it was in earlier times.  Imperialism exists in economic and cultural form rather than in political form.  Today, developing countries are exploited for their resources and labor by powerful multinational corporations of the developed nations.  This is a capitalist-driven imperialism with the goal of larger profits and influence in mind. The weaker nation does not have the ability to resist the interference of these capitalist interests.  Banks also seek to dominate world financial markets.  Often times modern imperialism is disguised by the less ominous term of globalization.  It should be noted that there is very little difference in the minds of some social scientists.  

The economic domination of the world by the United States/ the West is closely associated with cultural domination.  A quick example of this is the use of English in many countries around the world. 

Is Francis D Cogliano's “Was the American Revolution Inevitable?” a primary source? If yes, why?

This piece is not a primary source. In history, a primary source is a source from the actual period being studied. In other words, it is written (or otherwise created) by a historical figure from the time. Francis Cogliano is a historian and professor at the University of Edinburgh. Because he is our contemporary, and not a contemporary of the American revolutionaries, this article is good example a secondary source. This is a source that provides commentary on a historical event from a modern (or later) perspective. Generally, secondary sources written by historians use primary sources, as well as the works of other historians, to comment on an event in history. The argument made by Cogliano, namely that American independence was more or less inevitable given the different motives and mutual misunderstandings on both sides in the imperial crisis, draws on the work of many scholars (many of whom do not agree with him). In fact, Cogliano's article is a fairly handy summary of scholarship on the American Revolution.

What passages in Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird describe Calpurnia, Boo, Walter, Scout, Jem, and Atticus, showing their personalities?

In Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, Scout the narrator gives us several fascinating descriptions of Calpurnia. Calpurnia is the Finches' cook but has worked for the family since before Jem and Scout's mother died, and since the death of their mother, she has also taken on the role of surrogate mother. Scout at first is not very fond of Calpurnia, but as she grows older and gets to know Calpurnia better, Scout's feelings change. The reader learns more about Calpurnia as Scout learns more about her.

In the very first chapter, Scout describes Calpurnia as being "something else," meaning unusual, and as being "all angles and bones," meaning very thin. Scout further narrates that she and Calpurnia frequently quarreled because Calpurnia was regularly shooing Scout out of the kitchen, asking her why she "couldn't behave as well as Jem," and telling her to come home when she "wasn't ready to come" (Ch. 1). In other words, Scout was young and felt she disliked Calpurnia because she objected to Calpurnia mothering her around. As Scout further phrases it, "Our battles were always epic and one-sided. Calpurnia always won, mainly because Atticus always took her side" (Ch. 1).

Yet, in the chapter in which Calpurnia brings the children to her church as guests so that she can keep on eye on the children while their father is away, Scout is given an opportunity to spend some time with Calpurnia, which allows Scout to see Calpurnia differently. First, Scout gets to witness Calpurnia being accosted by Lula, a woman from her church with obviously racist beliefs, and being bold enough to defend bringing white children to her church as her company. Then, Scout gets to witness Calpurnia's humility. On the way home from church, Calpurnia, Scout, and Jem start conversing about literacy when Jem notes that Calpurnia speaks proper English as opposed to many African Americans in Calpurnia's society who do not. Yet, the children also note that Calpurnia spoke, as Scout phrases it, "nigger-talk" with the folks in her church. When Scout asks why, Calpurnia's response reveals much about her sense of humility. Calpurnia explains that it would be out of place for her to speak like white people among her own kind and further says that just because you know something, doesn't mean you have to show all you know all the time, or, as Calpurnia phrases it, "It's not necessary to tell all you know. It's not ladylike" (Ch. 12). Furthermore, she explains that showing off what you know won't change other people's actions; they have to want to learn themselves. Calpurnia's awareness that it would not be helpful for her to show off all of her knowledge tells us what a humble, virtuous, and good-natured person she is. At this point in the book, Scout, along with the reader, has begun to see Calpurnia's good characteristics for she next asks Calpurnia permission to spend time with her at her own home.

What inspired Harper Lee to write the novel To Kill a Mockingbird? What were her feelings toward the society she has seen?

Harper Lee has led a very private life since the success of To Kill a Mockingbird. That being the case, we don't have many interviews with her we can use to better understand her source of inspiration for the book and her views on Southern society as she presents it. However, we certainly do have a little knowledge.

One thing we know is that she based the character Atticus Finch off of her own father, Amasa Coleman Lee, who married Frances Cunningham Finch. Like Atticus, A. C. Lee practiced law in Alabama. We have evidence that A. C. both tried and had knowledge of cases that inspired the story of To Kill a Mockingbird. His very first case in 1919 was defending a black man and son of murdering a white storekeeper. Like Atticus, Lee put his all into his defense but was unable to incite the all-white jury to return anything but a "guilty" verdict, resulting in the hanging of both defendants (Talmage Boston, "Who Was Atticus Finch?," State Bar of Texas).

Also during Lee's life, between 1933 and 1934, a black man named Walter Lett was put on trial whose case was very similar to Tom Robinson's. Though Lee did not act as defense attorney for this particular case, he followed the case very closely as the editor and publisher of the Monroe Journal, the town's newspaper. We can speculate that young Nelle Harper Lee learned of the case herself through the newspaper and her father. Just like Tom Robinson, Lett was accused or raping a white woman even though all evidence strongly pointed to his innocence. Also, just like Robinson, Lett was again convicted by the all-white jury and sentenced to death. Finally, just as Atticus had hoped to achieve for Robinson, Lett's case was appealed to the higher court, and his sentence was changed from execution to life imprisonment (Talmage Boston).

Based on these trials, we know that Harper Lee grew up being well-exposed to the social injustices that are a product of racism, and based on the similarities between the cases her father was involved in or had knowledge of, we are able to speculate that these racist, unjust sentences inspired her to write the book.

How does Jackson lull us into thinking that "The Lottery" is just an ordinary story with an ordinary town?

In "The Lottery," Jackson lulls us into thinking that this is an ordinary town through her descriptions in the opening few paragraphs. It is an ordinary summer day, for example, and the townspeople gather in the square as if they are preparing for any ordinary civic event. The children are relaxed and busily playing while the parents gossip and chat, as though it is an ordinary day:

Soon the men began to gather, surveying their own children, speaking of planting and rain, tractors and taxes.

Secondly, Jackson also lulls us into thinking that this is an ordinary story by withholding the climax - in which Tessie Hutchinson is stoned - until the very end of the story. This sudden twist in the plot is thus a great surprise to the reader because until this point, the reader had no reason to suspect that this lottery was any different from any other kind.

How do viruses hijack DNA?

Viruses consist of only a protein coat and either DNA or RNA. There is currently debate as to whether to include them with living things; as of now, they are not, for several reasons. Viruses do not use energy and they are not cells. More pertinent to your question is that they cannot reproduce on their own. Viruses "hijack" the reproductive apparatus of living cells. The protein coat attaches to the outside of a cell and injects its own DNA or RNA into the cell. The viral genetic material "takes over" the cells DNA. Instead of the cell producing all of the things it needs to survive and make copies of itself, the viral DNA/RNA uses the cell to produce multiple new complete viruses. When the cell can no longer contain the new viruses, it lyses (ruptures) or buds, releasing many new viruses to repeat the process.

In The Old Man and the Sea, what kind of relationship does the boy have with the old man?

Manolin and Santiago have a loving, mutually respectful relationship. Manolin, the boy, has fished with Santiago since he was five years old. Santiago taught him everything and more about fishing, and allowed him a level of independence that other fishermen did not give to their younger colleagues. Santiago and Manolin share a mentor-student relationship, with deep elements of friendship. As time goes on, and Santiago becomes more dependent, Manolin helps provide for him by bringing him food and bait for fishing. Most importantly, Manolin is sensitive to Santiago's pride and his need to pretend nothing has changed. For instance, every day they both pretend that Santiago has food, and that things are the way they were before by going through the following routine:

“What do you have to eat?” the boy asked. “A pot of yellow rice with fish. Do you want some?” “No. I will eat at home. Do you want me to make the fire?” “No. I will make it later on. Or I may eat the rice cold.” “May I take the cast net?” “Of course.” There was no cast net and the boy remembered when they had sold it. But they went through this fiction every day. There was no pot of yellow rice and fish and the boy knew this too.

Major elements of their relationship are their love for each other, their mutual interests (fishing and baseball), their mutual support, and shared history.

In Julius Caesar, where is the evidence that the dictators are calculating and ruthless?

You pose a really excellent question and the entire play hinges on the answer. In fact, the conspirators in Julius Caesar do not actually have much evidence that Caesar is a calculating, ruthless dictator. Brutus says specifically that Caesar is a reasonable man (“I have not known when his affections swayed more than his reason”) and his justifications for killing him hinge primarily on what Caesar might do if given the crown and allowed absolute rule (“How that might change his nature, there’s the question”). It's not at all clear that Caesar is a dangerous or dictatorial man, or is at all inclined to become one. Without this sort of evidence, the entire play becomes far more complicated: Is Brutus truly a hero trying to protect Rome from tyranny, or is he a self-righteous man whose violent plot brings civil war and chaos? It's a question that the play leaves open.

Executive agencies in charge of setting foreign policy are A. the least democratic and the least accountable. B. too conservative. C. still too...

I do not believe that C is the right answer.  The US has not been terribly concerned with communism since the end of the Cold War over two decades ago.

The most likely answer to this question is that executive agencies in charge of setting foreign policy are the least democratic and the least accountable.  This is because executive agencies in this area of policy tend to cloak themselves in secrecy due to their connection to issues of national security.

In general, executive agencies are less democratic than the elected branches of government.  Executive agencies are made up of people who were not elected by the voters.  They cannot be easily removed from office.  Therefore, they are less accountable to the people.

Executive agencies having to do with foreign policy are typically less transparent than other agencies. These agencies tend to be more secretive because their work has to do with foreign policy.  This can make it necessary to keep secrets that do not have to be revealed under the Freedom of Information Act.

In "The Tiger in the Tunnel," who is tragic?

Baldeo strikes me as the most tragic figure in Bond's "The Tiger in the Tunnel."

Baldeo is tragic because reality dictates his freedom.  In the story's opening, Baldeo "stretched himself slowly unwinding the heavy shawl that covered him. It was close on midnight and the chill air made him shiver."  He does not choose to wake up at such an odd hour.  He must do so in order to make money and provide for his family:  "Their small rice fields did not provide them with more than a bare living..."  Baldeo is tragic because external reality plays a definitive role in how he lives his life.

His tragic nature is further illuminated when he confronts the tiger.  Bond writes "There was no shelter for Baldeo."  This operates on a literal level of tragedy because he has no choice but to confront the tiger, almost foreshadowing a brutal end for him.  However, this statement also highlights Baldeo's tragic state of being.  There is no sanctuary for him.  He is forlorn, set apart from any force that can save or help him.  

Baldeo is tragic because he does what he has to do, something that leads to his demise.  When seen in this light, Baldeo's existence is filled with sorrow and pain.  There is little in the narrative that points to happiness for Baldeo. 

What was the biggest problem Sam faced with this task?

Sam Gribley was a city kid who ran away from home to go to live on the wild property of his ancestors in the Catskill Mountains. He took only a penknife, a ball of cord, an ax, and $40. With these supplies, he had to cover the basics of life: food and shelter. Since he was in the forest, the trees gave him some slight protection at the beginning. So finding food turned out to be his biggest and on-going challenge. He had already read books about some survival skills, like what kinds of plants are edible in the wild, but he had never done anything like this on his own. He learned how to prepare and eat a variety of wild foods: frogs’ legs, rabbits, violet tubers, cattail roots, and much more. He trained a young falcon to hunt for him, too. He was quite smart and resourceful, in this respect. Some of the notes shared in the book include basic recipe instructions for food that Sam cooked and created.

Why did the Declaration of Independence raise questions about slavery?

The Declaration of Independence raised questions about slavery because of its assertion that "all men are created equal," and that they are entitled by virtue of being human to basic, natural rights. Obviously, this runs counter to the very idea of slavery, which is the ownership of human beings by other human beings. Of course, eighteenth-century assumptions about race prevented many from fully grasping this contradiction at the time, but many Americans, in the wake of the Revolution, did free their slaves, motivated by the rhetoric of equality and rights that was so much a part of the age. This was especially true in the middle and northern states, where slavery was very much on the decline by the late eighteenth century. Even in the South, many slaveowners (most famously George Washington) freed slaves in their wills. But the institution of slavery survived in the South, and was given new life by the emergence of short-staple cotton as a cash crop after the development of the cotton gin. Interestingly, a very direct and uncompromising critique of slavery included in the original draft of the Declaration was removed at the insistence of delegates from South Carolina and Georgia. It placed the blame for the slave trade squarely at the feet of King George, and is worth quoting here at length:

he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it’s most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.

If included, this remarkable indictment of the slave trade and slavery itself would have added a powerful antislavery element to the document, which is exactly why delegates from the Deep South demanded that it be excised. But clearly, the signers of the Declaration, including Thomas Jefferson, the slaveholding Virginian who produced it, were thinking about the contradictions between liberty and slavery.